E Mortgage Capital: Overtime, TCPA, and Regulatory Actions

E Mortgage Capital, a California-based national mortgage brokerage, is currently defending a federal wage-and-hour collective action in Arizona, several Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) telemarketing suits, and a trade-secret lawsuit brought by competitor OneTrust Home Loans. Those active cases sit on top of two recent regulatory resolutions: a $669,000 multistate settlement in September 2025 covering unlicensed origination work in Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, and Texas, and a January 2023 Washington consent order over deceptive advertising that carried a $220,000 fine and a stayed license revocation. Taken together, the E Mortgage Capital lawsuits and enforcement actions since 2020 span employee pay, telemarketing, competitor poaching, and state licensing compliance.

Federal Overtime Collective Action in Arizona

The largest active case is Kasapi et al v. E Mortgage Capital Incorporated, CV-25-02907-PHX-DWL, filed in August 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and assigned to Judge Dominic Lanza.¹ The complaint alleges the company failed to pay overtime to loan officers, processors, and managers in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

On February 11, 2026, Judge Lanza granted conditional certification of the collective, rejecting the company’s arguments against certification, and ordered E Mortgage to compile a list of all covered employees by February 18, 2026. The court also ruled that plaintiffs are excluded from fee liability under the FLSA.² The collective covers employees who worked overtime without compensation during the three years preceding the ruling. Plaintiffs’ counsel estimates the eligible pool at 500 to 1,500 workers, with hundreds likely to opt in based on typical participation rates.

TCPA Telemarketing Lawsuits

E Mortgage Capital has been sued repeatedly under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for allegedly making illegal telemarketing calls and sending unauthorized text messages, part of a broader surge in TCPA filings against mortgage lenders.³

Three cases are on the public docket:

Doughty v. E Mortgage Capital, 8:2024cv02448, filed November 8, 2024, in the Central District of California. The plaintiff filed a notice of settlement in June 2026, the court vacated the trial, and a formal dismissal is expected by late summer 2026.⁴⁵
Smith v. E Mortgage Capital, 2:25-cv-02532, filed March 21, 2025, in the Central District of California. An extension of the class certification motion was denied for lack of good cause. The case has been referred to private mediation with a July 2026 deadline, and a jury trial is scheduled for October 5, 2026.⁶
Galloway v. E Mortgage Capital, filed December 2025, alleging prerecorded voice messages and text messages that included a screenshot of a preapproval letter meant for a different consumer.⁷

A company spokesperson said E Mortgage Capital complies with consumer protection laws, screens marketing outreach against Do Not Call lists, and prohibits loan officers from engaging in marketing that violates those laws or company policy.³

OneTrust Home Loans Trade-Secret Lawsuit

On June 4, 2026, OneTrust Home Loans, a division of CalCon Mutual Mortgage, sued E Mortgage Capital, United Wholesale Mortgage, and 31 former OneTrust employees in U.S. District Court in Arizona.⁸ OneTrust alleges the former employees, while still on its payroll, diverted borrower information and loan opportunities to E Mortgage Capital.

According to the complaint, the group bypassed OneTrust’s authorized systems and used a third-party platform called Floify together with personal email accounts to route leads to E Mortgage Capital, where the loans were then funded by UWM. OneTrust says the scheme diverted at least 79 loans worth more than $31 million as of March 2024, and that the departing employees downloaded trade secrets including pricing models and internal cost data. The causes of action include misappropriation of trade secrets, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment.⁹

E Mortgage Capital said it is “confident in its position and will address the claims through the legal process.” UWM called the allegations “without merit.” The case remains active as of mid-2026.⁸

2025 Multistate Regulatory Settlement

In September 2025, E Mortgage Capital signed a settlement agreement and consent order with regulators in Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, and Texas resolving allegations of unlicensed mortgage activity between 2021 and 2023. The investigation grew out of a multistate examination conducted in October 2023.¹⁰

Regulators said unlicensed loan originators originated and earned commissions on 50 transactions across the four states: 7 in Hawaii, 16 in Idaho, 13 in Oregon, and 14 in Texas.¹¹ Idaho and Texas officials identified more than 125 additional instances in which unlicensed loan processors performed prohibited functions, 109 of them in Texas. Texas regulators also alleged 14 instances of “improper and deceptive or dishonest dealings.” All four states cited the company for failing to cooperate with examiners, including refusing to provide requested information and denying access to the company’s Loan Origination System. Oregon flagged 27 instances of inadequate supervision tied to an insufficient remote work-from-home plan.¹⁰

The settlement imposed $669,000 in administrative penalties. Of that, $501,750 was due immediately and $167,250 was held in abeyance for one year at 1% monthly interest, becoming due in full if the company failed to comply. E Mortgage certified that it had ceased all unlicensed origination activity, stopped paying commissions to unlicensed originators, and stopped using unlicensed processors. It entered the settlement without admitting liability, fault, or wrongdoing.¹⁰

2023 Washington Consent Order

Before the multistate action, Washington’s Department of Financial Institutions had already sanctioned E Mortgage Capital and three executives, including president Wesam Hijazin, CEO Joseph Shalaby, and Frank Peter Marino III, under Consent Order C-21-3086-22-CO01, effective January 5, 2023.¹²

The order centered on deceptive advertising. Regulators alleged the company used direct mail that mimicked checks, failed to disclose whether monthly payments included taxes and insurance, advertised interest rates that were contradicted by fine print, and made unsubstantiated online claims such as “Lowest Rates in the Market” and “No Fees Options.” The department also alleged that Marino solicited loan applications without holding a Washington license.¹³

Washington revoked the company’s consumer loan license but stayed the revocation for three years on condition of compliance. The same conditional stay applied to a prohibition barring the respondents from participating in the consumer loan and mortgage broker industries. The company paid $75,000 of a $220,000 fine upfront, with the remaining $145,000 stayed for three years, plus $30,000 toward financial literacy and $7,277 in investigation costs. Ongoing conditions included annual audits of advertising payment records and a compliance examination within two years at the company’s expense.¹³

Consumer Complaint Pattern

The Better Business Bureau has recorded 96 complaints against E Mortgage Capital over the past three years, 42 of them closed in the most recent 12 months. Service issues top the categories, followed by product and order complaints. A recurring theme is unsolicited sales calls at high volume, with some consumers reporting five to ten calls per day that continued after removal requests.¹⁴

The company’s typical response asks the consumer for their phone number so it can be added to an internal Do Not Call list, and requests documentation confirming the contact came from E Mortgage Capital rather than a similarly named firm called “eMortgage Funding.”¹⁴

1
Justia. Kasapi et al v. E Mortgage Capital Incorporated
2
National Mortgage News. Hundreds May Join E Mortgage Capital Wage Lawsuit
3
National Mortgage News. Mortgage TCPA Lawsuits Surge With 11 New Cases
4
Justia. Doughty v. E Mortgage Capital
5
PACER Monitor. Thomas E. Doughty v. E Mortgage Capital
6
PACER Monitor. Cameron Smith v. E Mortgage Capital
7
National Mortgage News. TCPA Class Action Complaints Hit More Mortgage Lenders
8
HousingWire. OneTrust UWM EMC Lawsuit
9
National Mortgage Professional. OneTrust Sues EMC, UWM, Former Employees Over Alleged Loan Diversion Scheme
10
Oregon Division of Financial Regulation. E Mortgage Capital Multistate Settlement Agreement
11
Oregon Division of Financial Regulation. Oregon Joins Interstate E Mortgage Settlement
12
Washington Department of Financial Institutions. E Mortgage Capital Consent Order C-21-3086-22-CO01
13
Washington Department of Financial Institutions. E Mortgage Capital Consent Order C-21-3086-22-CO01
14
Better Business Bureau. E Mortgage Capital Complaints