United Wholesale Mortgage is defending a cluster of lawsuits in 2025 and 2026 that touch nearly every part of its business: an Ohio Attorney General action alleging consumer deception, a nearly $100 million suit by Rocket Mortgage over servicing rights, a borrower class action that produced a contempt finding against the company, broker exclusivity disputes, telemarketing class actions, a trade secret case brought by a competing lender, an ERISA challenge to its 401(k) plan, and employment claims from former staff. The UWM lawsuits below are the ones actively shaping the company’s legal exposure.
Ohio Attorney General’s Consumer Deception Case
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost sued UWM on April 16, 2025, in Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, alleging the company colluded with mortgage brokers to steer borrowers into higher-priced loans while marketing those brokers as independent advisors who would shop multiple lenders.1Ohio Attorney General. Yost Sues Wholesale Mortgage Lender Over Deceptive Practices According to the complaint, brokers held out as independent sent 99% of their loan business back to UWM, letting the company charge above-market rates and fees. Between 2021 and 2023, UWM issued roughly $605 million in mortgages to Ohioans through these brokers, with 50 brokers funneling a combined $215 million to the company in 2023 alone.2Scotsman Guide. Ohio AG Sues United Wholesale Mortgage
The suit alleges violations of Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, the Residential Mortgage Lending Act, and the Corrupt Practices Act. Ohio is seeking consumer restitution, civil penalties of $25,000 per unfair or deceptive act, and injunctive relief.2Scotsman Guide. Ohio AG Sues United Wholesale Mortgage
UWM removed the case to federal court, but Judge Thomas M. Rose remanded it to state court on September 4, 2025, and denied UWM’s request to stay that remand pending appeal.3CourtListener. State of Ohio ex rel. Dave Yost v. United Wholesale Mortgage Back in Montgomery County, UWM moved to dismiss on November 7, 2025, arguing the attorney general lacks authority to pursue private damages for individual consumers. Ohio filed an amended complaint on December 1, 2025, seeking declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and restitution.4The Mortgage Note. State of Ohio’s Deceptive Business Practices Lawsuit Against UWM Continues UWM has called the lawsuit “frivolous” and a “PR stunt.”
Rocket Mortgage’s $100 Million Servicing-Rights Suit
Rocket Mortgage sued UWM on May 14, 2026, in New York Supreme Court’s Commercial Division, alleging UWM deliberately targeted borrowers whose mortgage servicing rights UWM had already sold.5MPA Magazine. Rocket Sues UWM for Nearly $100M Over Alleged Non-Solicitation Pact Violation
Between January and June 2024, Mr. Cooper Group paid $773 million to buy three loan pools from UWM covering roughly 182,000 mortgages with about $65 billion in unpaid principal. The purchase agreements included a non-solicitation covenant barring UWM from targeting those borrowers for refinancing. When Rocket acquired Mr. Cooper in October 2025, it inherited both the portfolio and the contractual protection.6National Mortgage Professional. Rocket Sues UWM Alleging MSR Clawback Campaign Violated Non-Solicitation Agreement
Rocket points to three UWM broker programs it says amounted to a clawback campaign:
- Refi75, announced September 4, 2024, offered brokers a 75-basis-point pricing incentive on certain refinance products to give them a “competitive edge with past clients.”7National Mortgage News. UWM Unveils AI Tool to Notify Customers of Refi Options
- KEEP, launched September 11, 2024, is an AI tool that monitors previously closed loans and emails borrowers when they qualify for a refinance, then routes them back to their original broker.8UWM. KEEP by UWM Press Release
- Refi Shield 100, rolled out after Rocket’s March 2025 acquisition announcement, offered a 100-basis-point incentive; Rocket alleges it specifically targeted borrowers in the Mr. Cooper portfolio, with UWM supplying brokers leads identifying the covered loans.6National Mortgage Professional. Rocket Sues UWM Alleging MSR Clawback Campaign Violated Non-Solicitation Agreement
The complaint cites a March 2025 video in which CEO Mat Ishbia told brokers: “Any loan that we’ve ever done with Mr. Cooper where we’ve sold the servicing, you can go and take advantage of it and go refinance these clients.” Rocket seeks $100 million in damages from accelerated prepayments. UWM called the suit “baseless and opportunistic.”5MPA Magazine. Rocket Sues UWM for Nearly $100M Over Alleged Non-Solicitation Pact Violation
Borrower Class Action and the Ishbia Contempt Order
In Escue et al. v. United Wholesale Mortgage, LLC, filed in April 2024 in the Eastern District of Michigan, borrowers accused UWM, its holding companies, and Ishbia of running a racketeering scheme that overcharged them through captive broker relationships.
Judge Brandy R. McMillion cut the case down sharply in October 2025. She dismissed with prejudice all federal RICO counts, the conspiracy and unjust enrichment claims, consumer protection claims under California, Tennessee, and North Carolina law, and state bribery allegations, finding plaintiffs failed to show UWM’s conduct proximately caused their injuries and that the broker conduct at issue “originated from the brokers, not UWM.” She also dropped UWM Holdings Corp., SFS Holding Corp., and Ishbia individually as defendants.9National Mortgage Professional. Federal Judge Narrows Class Action Against UWM
Two narrow categories survived: Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act claims by Jill Jeffries and Daniel Singh alleging kickbacks or unearned fees, and Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act claims by Jeffries, Singh, and Brian Weatherill. The RESPA counts survived because they do not require deceptive intent. In a December 2025 reply brief, UWM argued the remaining claims cannot proceed on a classwide basis because broker services and borrower interactions vary too much.10HousingWire. UWM Class Action Dismissal Michigan
On June 8, 2026, Judge Terrence G. Berg held UWM in contempt for repeatedly refusing to produce Ishbia for a deposition in a related breach-of-contract matter tied to the “All-In” broker policy. The judge called the conduct a “contumacious stratagem” and noted Ishbia appeared to be the “primary, if not sole decisionmaker” behind the policy. UWM was ordered to pay the opposing party’s attorney fees and to make Ishbia available within 30 days. UWM said it “disagrees with this finding” but would comply.11National Mortgage News. UWM Agrees to Ishbia Deposition After Judge’s Scolding
“All-In” Broker Exclusivity Disputes
Several UWM cases trace back to a March 2021 policy known as the “All-In” initiative, which required broker partners to stop submitting loans to competitors Rocket Mortgage and Fairway Independent Mortgage. Brokers who broke the rule faced liquidated damages of $5,000 per loan or $50,000, whichever was greater.
UWM has sued brokers who defied the policy. In United Wholesale Mortgage v. Atlantic Trust Mortgage Corp., filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, UWM alleged Atlantic Trust submitted at least 71 loans to prohibited lenders between March 2023 and February 2024 and sought at least $350,000 in liquidated damages. Atlantic Trust argued the exclusivity addendum was unenforceable because it was never signed separately. In a March 2025 ruling, Judge Terrence G. Berg disagreed, holding that UWM’s broker agreement allowed unilateral amendments by website posting and that brokers accepted by continuing to submit loans.12MPA Magazine. Court Lets UWM Move Forward With Broker Exclusivity Case Against Atlantic Trust Mortgage Corporation That is the same case in which UWM was later held in contempt over Ishbia’s deposition.11National Mortgage News. UWM Agrees to Ishbia Deposition After Judge’s Scolding
Telemarketing Class Actions
Two class actions accuse UWM of responsibility for unsolicited calls and texts placed by its broker partners.
Colorado resident Bridget Warne sued on February 4, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, alleging she received more than 50 calls in under three months despite being on the National Do Not Call Registry. UWM filed a motion to dismiss and transfer on May 14, 2026. As of mid-June 2026, no ruling had been issued.13Scotsman Guide. UWM Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Telemarketing Violations14PACER Monitor. Warne v. United Wholesale Mortgage, LLC
Texas resident William Mogck filed a separate suit on March 3, 2026, in the Eastern District of Michigan. He alleges he received unsolicited texts between September 2025 and March 2026 about VA loan rate reductions from brokers identifying themselves as “from UWM” or “from UWM Partner,” despite his 2022 Do Not Call registration. The complaint argues UWM is responsible because the brokers used UWM’s proprietary tools, including Lead Pipeline, Action IQ, and ChatUWMAssist. It proposes two nationwide classes and seeks $500 per violation, or $1,500 for willful violations.15MPA Magazine. Class Action Targets UWM Over Brokers’ Unsolicited Text Campaign
OneTrust Trade Secret Case
On June 4, 2026, OneTrust Home Loans (a trade name of CalCon Mutual Mortgage) sued UWM, E Mortgage Capital, and 31 former OneTrust employees in Arizona federal court. The complaint alleges the departing employees took trade secrets, including pricing models, vendor fees, and internal cost data, and used them to divert loan business to EMC, with UWM funding the resulting loans.16HousingWire. OneTrust UWM EMC Lawsuit
The employees allegedly used an unauthorized third-party platform called Floify and personal email accounts to process borrower leads outside OneTrust’s systems. As of March 2024, the group had solicited at least 79 loans totaling more than $31 million, per the complaint. OneTrust claims UWM was “willfully blind” to the fact that the loans came from OneTrust personnel without a proper brokerage relationship. Claims include misappropriation of trade secrets, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment.17National Mortgage Professional. OneTrust Sues EMC, UWM, Former Employees Over Alleged Loan Diversion Scheme UWM said the claims are “without merit.”
ERISA Class Action Over 401(k) Forfeitures
Three former UWM senior account executives filed a class action on April 28, 2025, in the Eastern District of Michigan, Lapko et al. v. United Wholesale Mortgage, LLC. They allege UWM used “forfeitures” (retirement funds left behind by employees who left before fully vesting) to offset its own future employer contributions rather than to pay plan expenses, in violation of ERISA. The plaintiffs estimate cumulative losses of $1.3 million between 2019 and 2023.18HousingWire. UWM Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Misuse of 401(k) Plan Assets UWM called the claim “baseless,” saying its practices are “consistent with decades of regulatory guidance.”19National Mortgage Professional. UWM Accused of Mismanaging 401(k) Assets in Class-Action Lawsuit
Employment Disputes
In January 2026, Brad Rosa, a former corporate attorney at UWM, filed a wrongful termination and retaliation lawsuit. He alleges he was fired after refusing to sign attorney opinion letters in states where he did not hold a law license. UWM adopted the letters in November 2025 as an alternative to traditional title insurance and says the program was “thoroughly researched and approved by legal counsel.”20HousingWire. UWM Title Letter Lawsuit
UWM has also gone after departing employees. In Oakland County, Michigan, it sued Michael Holloway to recover a $30,000 forgivable loan issued under its Forgivable Loan and Restricted Stock Unit Program, which forgave the balance only if the employee stayed three years. Holloway left in May 2024 after roughly 16 months. On April 11, 2025, Judge Victoria A. Valentine granted UWM summary judgment and entered a default judgment of $33,894.52, covering principal, interest, and attorney fees.21Michigan Courts. UWM v. Holloway, Oakland County Business Court