Skip to main content

Wells Fargo Ends Marketing Services Arrangements with Builders

Philip R. Stein & Robert M. Siegel

Concerned about “increasing uncertainty surrounding regulatory oversight of these types of arrangements,” Wells Fargo is ending all of its roughly 200 mortgage marketing services and desk rental agreements with builders and real estate brokers. Such arrangements are pervasive in the mortgage business, an industry marked by intense competition for eligible borrowers.

Under the arrangements that it is now terminating, Wells Fargo would, for example, rent desk space from a homebuilder in an effort to enhance its ability to sell mortgages to home buyers passing through the builder’s sales office.

A bank spokesman said Wells Fargo was responding to broader regulatory scrutiny of such arrangements, which are governed by the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). RESPA’s purpose is to prevent mortgage lenders, real estate brokers, builders and any other party involved in the home buying process from giving or receiving kickbacks in exchange for referrals. The law seeks to protect consumers from being steered into unsuitable loans or insurance contracts, as a consequence of collusion by parties providing different types of services as part of the home purchase cycle. Previously administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, RESPA now falls under the jurisdiction of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

The CFPB was quick to applaud Wells Fargo’s decision as “an important step for the mortgage industry.” This was a far cry from its attitude towards this leading bank in January of this year, when it required Wells Fargo to pay a $24 million fine and an additional $10.8 million to consumers, as part of a consent order with the consumer bureau related to an alleged scheme involving referrals from a title company, the now-defunct Maryland company Genuine Title.

Besides being notable as an insight into Wells Fargo’s reading of the requirements of the current regulatory landscape, this development warrants careful consideration by large national builders with captive mortgage companies and other financial services providers. Will this reinforce their inclinations to provide in-house financial services options (by making one possible alternative—marketing arrangements with outside businesses—less viable), or heighten concerns that their previously-approved, long-standing, valuable in-house divisions will suddenly no longer pass regulatory muster? We see little reason at this point for builders with financial services divisions or affiliates to have substantial concerns of that nature, but the issue is worth monitoring for further developments.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Speaking Engagement July 17, 2025
Tom Mullin serves as a panelist on the Keeping Your Eye on the Ball: Scoping the Appropriate Environmental Due Diligence for the Project panelat the 39th Annual Environmental Permitting Summer School. The panel discusses effective strategies for scoping environmental due diligence, evaluating histor...
Speaking Engagement July 16, 2025
Howard E. Nelson speaks at the 39th Annual Environmental Permitting Summer School as a panelist on Land and Golf Course Redevelopment: Opportunities and Challenges. This panel explores the redevelopment of closed golf courses and former agricultural lands, with a focus on the environmental, regulato...
Blog July 15, 2025
Artificial intelligence is often described in revolutionary terms, yet its most immediate impact in the public sector may be far more practical: empowering inexperienced or under-resourced public servants to navigate complex systems like public-private partnerships (P3’s) with greater confiden...
VIEW MORE