Rocket Mortgage Gets Sued for Steering — The RESPA Violation Every SC Agent Needs to Understand

Rocket Mortgage gets sued for mortgage steering!

Today, I discuss the ethical implications of mortgage steering and RESPA violations in real estate. I will highlight the significant lawsuit against Rocket Mortgage, alleging unethical practices in referral systems that prioritize financial benefits over consumer interests. 

I also delve into the responsibilities of real estate agents to act in the best interest of their clients and the potential legal ramifications of failing to do so. Lastly, I discuss the importance of transparency in referrals and the need for agents to resist pressure from brokerages to prioritize financial incentives.

Don't forget to like us and share us!
Gary

* Gary serves on the South Carolina Real Estate Commission as a Commissioner. The opinions expressed herein are his opinions and are not necessarily the opinions of the SC Real Estate Commission. This podcast is not to be considered legal advice. Please consult an attorney in your area.    

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:01

This is Dish and Dirt with Gary Pickering, South Carolina's only podcast dedicated to the real estate agent craft. And now the host of Dish and Dirt, Gary Picker. Hey, Greens, welcome back, everyone, to another episode of Dish and Dirt. I'm your often opinionated but rarely wrong host, Gary Picker, coming to you from the beautiful downtown Columbia, South Carolina offices of Blair Cato Pickering Castellan, this, the first week of February 2026. Today we're talking about a topic that hits right at the intersection of real estate, mortgage loans, ethics, and consumer protection. The headline that everyone has seen over the last couple of days: rocket companies have been hit with another lawsuit, this one alleging mortgage steering and RESPA violations. I've had a lot of real estate agents reach out to me about this. Several of them said, hey, this sounds exactly what you've been talking about on dish and dirt for the previous couple of years. Myself and several people in this industry believe that the lawsuits of Sitzer Burnett could pell in comparison to a lawsuit like this one here, where real estate agents are steering consumers to certain vendors, mortgage title, home warranties, and others based solely on financial benefits for the brokerage, the brokerage owners, or even themselves. And this is where we see a lot of risk, particularly with builders, where builders are requiring the use of particular lenders, and there's a financial tie between the parties. I want to be very clear as we start our episode today. This episode is not at all about whether Rocket Mortgage is good or bad. I really don't care whether they're good or bad. It has absolutely nothing to do with this lawsuit because this episode talks about something that's much, much bigger, a problem that I believe is massive in South Carolina, and that is selling your business to closing attorneys and mortgage companies so that there's a financial benefit for your broker, your brokerage, or for yourself. It's not only illegal, it's unethical as hell. And so today we're going to talk about when referrals and real estate are based on financial benefits instead of referrals being based on what is in the best interest of the client. And you need to continue to remember that 40-57-10, your real estate law, its purpose is to protect the consumer. And so when we go through these today, we're going to talk about a little background on all of this stuff, and then we'll actually get into the lawsuit. But I want you to think to yourself and be honest. This is like a confessional today. If I'm being honest with myself, and when I'm receiving a financial benefit from a referral, myself, my broker, my brokerage, or the owner of the broker, and they're telling me things like, oh, we can pay for more marketing, we can hire more people if you would just use our closing attorney, if you would just use our lender. You need to support the brokerage. That's a big one they do. Support the brokerage, right? And you ask yourself, why am I doing that? Am I doing it because I believe it is in the best interest of my client, or am I doing it because I'm feeling pressured because I want to do what's right by my company, or am I doing it because there's some fight type of financial benefit? If it's the latter, that's a big problem, not only legally, but ethically. If it's the former, we'll see how that plays out. Because that's where things get unethical, and in some cases, that's where things get very illegal. Now, before we start, we got the real estate summit coming up here February 11th, sold out four and a half days. Not only is it sold out, but we have over 40 people on the waiting list right now. We have tried to refigure the room, we've tried to add more seats, balcony or whatnot. Bottom line is we're not gonna be able to add any more. So we've got 40 people minimum right now that want to get into the success summit to see great speakers like Crystal Michor spend hours talking to you guys about sales. Everybody wants to be in there. It's the hottest ticket in real estate in South Carolina this year. Problem is we're not gonna be able to add anybody. So what I'm gonna ask is if you have a ticket, you've bought purchased a ticket, you've purchased a table. If you're not gonna be able to use the table, the tickets fully, please let us know. Email me at Gary at BlairKato.com. Let me know that you have one, two, three tickets left over that you're not gonna be able to use. What I will do is I'll put somebody on the waiting list in touch with you so that you can sell the ticket to them, so that you can recoup some of your money that you're not gonna be using. Unfortunately, we can't live stream it. The cost of it was just astronomical. Um, and so this is it. You got to be in person to actually see it. So give these people a chance. If you're not gonna use your ticket, let me know. We'll put you together. The summit, we are gonna make a huge announcement. Blair Cato's got another massive announcement. So everybody who's gonna be there in person will get to see what this huge announcement is. Those who aren't will make that announcement, put it on social media as well. But you'll want to be there to hear the really exciting news for Blair Cato as well. Lastly, dish and data, phenomenal podcast. I'm enjoying doing this with Candace Coleman in my office. We are taking uh 15 minutes every Monday morning and going over real AI techniques, platforms, things that you can use in your real estate practice to make yourself a better real estate agent. Get ahead of the curve. AI is happening, whether we like it or not. You're gonna have to learn it. Candace is walking us through starting at the most basic, easy steps in AI and building on that throughout the process. So if you've had a chance to listen to addition data, please keep doing so and we thank you very much. If you have not, we've got two episodes that are already out. Go back and listen to those episodes and catch up to where we are. Let's move over now into the show. As I start the show, I do want to give two quick disclaimers. Number one is this is for educational content only. I'm not providing any legal advice, need information on this lawsuit. Talk to a licensed attorney in your state. These are simply my opinions. Secondly, again, for the 18th time, these are the opinions of myself, Gary Pickering, private citizen. I am a real estate commissioner, but this is not necessarily the position of the real estate commission. They should listen to me because I'm rarely wrong. But this is not taking a position on behalf of the real estate commission. Here's the most uncomfortable truth that you're going to have to deal with here. Most customers, when they hear of you giving them a referral, whether it's a lawyer, a lender, a home warranty company, an inspector, they think to themselves, this is why I hired the real estate agent. Oh, good. My agent has found me the best option. They're telling me, because of their experience of what a good company this is, that will provide me the services that I need and the time that I need at a fair and reasonable price. And hopefully that is the case for the vast majority of you. But sometimes the uncomfortable truth is what that referral really means is that the person that you're referring for the loan is providing you leads. Or the closing attorney or that title company is giving your brokerage marketing dollars, or they're splitting title fees with you, and it's all based on closings coming. Or your brokerage is putting pressure on you, telling you that's who you're required to send them. They might not use the word required, but they're putting that pressure on you to make you feel really bad if you're not supporting the brokerage. Or if you use this person, it helps you, it doesn't help the consumer. And that's where all of this crosses over that line. Because the consumer thinks and has a right to believe that when you are referring a service provider, whether it's title, mortgage, or repair work or whatever, that you are making that referral based on your fiduciary duty to do what's in the best interest of the consumer and not in your best interest. And they believe when you make this referral and say you should use this mortgage company, that you're doing it because that mortgage company is trustworthy, they're competent, they give great service, they give great pricing, whatever it may be, but it's being recommended because you truly believe it is in the best interest of your client or your customer. But the reality of it is the referral might not be based on any of those things today. It doesn't matter that they're the best or most competent, best pricing or services or others have better. But what it might actually be based on is the fact that you, your broker, your brokerage, the owner of your brokerage, is receiving some type of monetary benefit or some other type of benefit for you as a real estate agent to refer that particular service provider to your client. And in real estate, that's not just bad luck, bad look that you just, hey, that's bad, you shouldn't be doing that. It actually is an ethical issue. And in addition, it could be a very big legal problem. And what we're seeing now as a result of this lawsuit, it could be a huge financial problem because Rocket lawsuit, they're trying to make it into a class action. If you go to the lawyer's website, they're asking everybody who's ever bought a property through this particular brokerage and then use Rocket Mortgage to please join their lawsuit. I have been saying for years, as is other people, other lawyers, other commissioners, other industry brains have all been saying the same thing. Sitzer Burnett's going to pell in comparison to the next big lawsuit. These lawyers have smelt blood and they're not going away. And so what is the next big lawsuit? For me, they simply need to go after this. How many times have you referred a lender or a title company because you received financial benefit? The whole basis of the Sitzer Burnett case is based on this. Is it the fact that you put your commissions and the rates of the commissions ahead of the consumer? And that resulted in a multi-billion dollar verdict. It was$1.5 billion verdict. Didn't it settle down for$418 million? But when you add it all together, it's almost a billion dollars in money that was paid out on this very nature of a claim. So how bad is this one going to be if these plaintiffs win, and all they got to do is get a jury to go along with them on it, which, you know, as I've mentioned multiple times, juries don't like lawyers, they don't like used car salesmen, and they hate real estate agents. Unfortunately, I have a real estate license and I have a law license. But you convince another ignorant jury like the one in Missouri, and now we're back in trying to resolve these things. And this is going to be very bad, I think, particularly for these builders, because what these builders are doing with their tie-ins to their mortgage companies and their title companies and everything else is a huge problem because the buyer thinks they're getting a recommendation. They don't think they're being part of a sales funnel. They don't know that their business is being sold off to lenders and title companies for your financial benefit. And that's where all these lawsuits come in. And I've been saying this for years. You play stupid games, you're going to win stupid prizes. Now, I recognize by doing this podcast today, and I've done it multiple times, that I'm going to piss off some of you. Sorry, but I know it. I know I'm going to piss off some. Maybe it's a brilliant way of getting business. Tell you what you don't want to hear, and then say give us business. And I know the ones that I'm going to piss off, I already know who they are. But it's not the agents who are going to be pissed off. It's going to be the brokerage who's doing this. That's the people who get pissed at me when I do this. It's never the agents that call me up and go, I really wish you wouldn't say that. It's the high-up management, it's the broker in charge, it's the owner of the company who has been doing this, who has these tie-ins with these mortgage companies, who have these financial tie-ins with the title companies and think that it's all just perfectly fine to sell your business. I know I'm running that risk today of making this and doing this and pissing it off. And it doesn't matter whether you like what I'm saying or not. It just matters whether you're going to be part of one of these lawsuits one of these days. You can hate what I'm saying. You can hate the person who brings it to your attention. But the bottom line is, guys, I'm just telling you the truth because this big ass law firm in Michigan just sued the biggest, if not one of the biggest, in the entire country. They're going for a broke on this. And we know from Sister Burnett that once that happens, then they start suing all the smaller ones. And remember, I'm brand agnostic. I don't care about your brands. I don't care about your brokerage. I care about you as a real estate agent. So if your brokerage is doing this, it's nothing against you. I'm not mad at you about it. I'm mad at your brokerage for doing it because I think it's crap. But I'm brand agnostic. All I want to do is make sure that you have the information in front of you so you can make these decisions. You know, I've actually seen the emails that say, hey, we need to send three more mortgages to our mortgage lender here in house by October 31st. So we will quote unquote earn$24 more hundred dollars to help for our Christmas party. Yeah, I saw that email. I know that you've done that. It's pretty amazing when you not only put it in writing, but you create a promophacia case of a RESPA violation, and then you put it in writing to your entire office so that people who aren't in your office can actually see that you are completely violating RESPA and telling all of your agents that they need to refer to the lender, not because it's in your client's best interest, not because they have great rates for your client, not because they give great service to your client, so that you can have an alcohol-fueled Christmas party. Because that's what the jury's gonna hear. What a jury's gonna hear is they push the agents in sending three clients to this lender so that we could get$2,400 for an alcohol-fueled Christmas party. Because I know you had alcohol at the Christmas party, and so that will become the whole story. Real estate agents, alcohol-fueled Christmas party paid for by selling their referrals to mortgage company. The people who do this always say, Well, there's no pressure at our company to do this. Oh, yeah, that seems like pressure to me. Y'all want to have a Christmas party, you want to have alcohol at your Christmas party, refer free to our lender, or there's no Christmas party. That's essentially what it's saying. That is pressure, that is improper. Now, I want to make something also very clear. There's nothing wrong with referrals. We all live on referrals. Referrals are very important. We at Blair Cato refer out a lot of business. We refer to title abstract companies and surveyors, but you know what we don't do? We don't sell that business. We don't tell a uh surveyor, you need to set up a company with us and give you half of your profits. We don't do that. We don't send them enough so that they send us a Christmas party. We don't do that. We use them because they do timely work, they do quality work. So there's nothing wrong with referrals. In fact, referrals are a normal part of real estate. Every single one of you should be referring an inspector, a lender, a closing attorney, a contractor, because that is exactly what your consumer expects. Your client expects you to advise, advocate for them. And if you can't give them a name of an inspector, a closing attorney or a lender that you recommend that does quality work, that has good pricing, then why are they using you as a real estate agent? The problem isn't the who you're referring or the fact that you are referring. The issue is the why. Why are you referring? There's very good reasons, as I said. They answer the phone, they close on time, they always communicate, they don't blow up deals, they're the best in the business. These guys know what they're doing, they got great rates, their fees are competitive, they help buyers understand the process, the process is smooth. You know, all the reasons y'all use Blair Cato, all of that. Very good reasons. But that's because those referrals are based on performance and service. Those aren't based on a financial benefit for you. The bad reasons for referrals are because you get paid. Your brokerage gets paid some type of kickback, because you get marketing credits, you get leads, because someone's funneling you business and expects you to funnel it back to them. Or so you can get$2,400 for an alcohol-fueled Christmas party. That's where referrals become steering. We talked last week about one of the top 10 stories in our marketplace was commission steering. This is the next big lawsuit from commission steering to mortgage steering. And the same reason you steer for commissions is the same reason you steer for mortgages, because you get compensation. That, my friends, is not consumer friendly. And that's where consumers believe they get harmed because they may not be getting the best deal, they may not be getting the best service, and they certainly aren't getting the best fit for the situation because the referral isn't based on any of those reasons. The referral is based on your financial benefit. So here's where we need to talk about RESPA. RESPA is the real estate settlement procedures act. It's probably one of the most misunderstood statutes in real estate. Everybody that doesn't understand something says it's a violation of RESP, but it really has nothing to do with RESPA whenever they're talking about it. I mean, it's amazing. Maybe it's a violation of RESPA. It's like that has nothing to do with RESPA. We don't know what you're talking about. What RESPA is, it's a federal law that covers things like kickbacks. It also covers referral fees, settlement services like the settlement statement, as well as a flow of money around real estate transactions, particularly like with escrow's. It doesn't have anything much more than that, but everybody likes to quote RESPA as, oh, that's a RESPA violation, and like you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Well, the RESPA section we're talking about mostly is section eight. That's the big one. And then under section eight, there's regulation X. And I'm going to read what it says no person shall give and no person shall accept any fee, kickback, or other thing of value, that business shall be referred. And that's straight from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Regulation X. Now, what counts as a thing of value? Well, they didn't pay me any cash. I didn't get any money in my pocket. Well, a thing of value doesn't have to be cash. It can literally be a chance to win. There was a famous RESPA lawsuit, giving somebody lottery tickets is a chance to win money. The chance in and of itself is a value. And the reason it's of value is because people pay for that chance. Leads, marketing dollars, marketing pieces, reduced fees, preferred placement, perks, access, exclusive opportunities, all of that can be, not necessarily is, but can be a thing of value that can be in violation of RESPA. RESPA isn't just, hey, don't take money under the table. It's trading your referrals for benefit, any benefit at all. That's the question you have to ask yourself. Am I giving this referral because of my financial benefit? So let's bring this home to South Carolina. South Carolina real estate licensing law is very clear. It's built around consumer protection laws. And when you're in an agency relationship in South Carolina, you have a duty of loyalty and disclosure. And here's why that matters. If you're an agent and you refer a lender or a settlement service provider, that's fine. But if you're doing it because you, your brokerage, your brokerage owners receive any financial benefit, then you're putting your interest ahead of the clients. And that's where your fiduciary duty gets violated. That's where you have licensing problems. Because fiduciary duty means this: you must act in the best interest of the client, you must disclose material facts, and you must be loyal to your client's interest. Hard stop. That's it. So if the reasoning you're referring someone is because it benefits you financially, that's a problem. And definitely if you're not disclosing it, that's a bigger problem. Now, I argue even with you disclosing it, there's a big issue because I'm sure Rocket had disclosures in this lawsuit. But I guarantee you that the claim will be that those disclosures were ineffective. They're typically handled handed over with a bunch of agency documents, a bunch of listing agreements, all kinds of stuff documents, and it gets lost in those documents and it's never fully explained. And then there's a ton of legalese in all of those documents as well. So the documents you get signed, your disclosure may not be saving you. And I would argue in this Rocket case, I guarantee you they had disclosures, yet they are facing a massive multimillion dollar class action lawsuits. So what are realtors supposed to do? Beyond the law, let's talk about ethics. The Realtor Code of Ethics sets that standard. And the big one that applies is Article 6. It says realtors shall not accept any commission, rebate, or profit on expenditures made for their client without their client's knowledge and consent. This means if you're profiting off of a referral relationship, the client needs to know it. And the question is, do they really understand it by those documents that you're shoving in their face with your agency agreements? And the answer is probably not, because that's certainly what they're alleging in this lawsuit. Article one also is the client first article. And I really like Article I. The client needs to know it. Article one is basically saying this: your obligation is to protect and promote the interest of your client. So again, self-check here, some reality time. Referrals are fine, but are your referrals transparent? Are they based on client benefit? Are they based on hidden incentives? You have to be honest with yourself. Why are we doing this referral? Like I said, if you're referring because this law firm does the greatest job or this lender has great rates and they always return phone calls and they'll get you to a closing table, that's perfectly fine. But if it's because they're tied to your company and they pay for your Christmas party, that is a huge problem. Let's now look at Rocket's lawsuit. Now our foundation of referrals is in place. And the reason that this case matters is not just because it's Rocket and it's one of the biggest companies in the world that does mortgage lending. I mean, that's kind of important to understand that this lawsuit, they went after the biggest, right? You know, they file a lawsuit saying a referral steering, and then they sue one of the big giants in the industry. Because if Rocket loses this, that's going to trickle down to everybody else. But this is about what happens in a referral network when that network gets so big, so organized, and so financially motivated on the referrals that they put the consumer last, because the consumer's not getting a fair shot at doing what's best for their consumer. The lawsuit is called Waller, W-A-L-L-E-R versus Rocket Companies. Your plaintiffs are Barbara Waller, Elizabeth Johnson, Randall Clark, and the defendants are Rockets Company, Rocket Mortgage, and Rock Holdings in Rocket Home Real Estate. This lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Michigan. What they are alleging is a pay-to-play referral system where Rocket Homes connects home buyers with real estate agents. The agents then pay a referral fee, allegedly around 35%. And in exchange, the agents are expected to steer clients toward Rocket Mortgage. That's the core allegation. Now, not saying it's true, but if it's true, it does create a major conflict because the agent is no longer simply advising the client on what's best for the client. The agent is trying to protect that lead pipeline. Now, the law firm that filed this lawsuit is a massive law firm, Hagens and Berman, and on their website, it states the lawsuit accuses the collective defendants of having exploited the vulnerabilities of home buyers for profit. By steering consumers to use their financing, even though Rocket Mortgage's terms are disadvantaged to the clients, the practice of steering in real estate involves any illegal influence on a client's decision, diverting them away from cheaper loans. Defendants, including Rocket Companies, which owns equity, interest, and co-defendants, Rocket Mortgage AMROC, and Rocket Home Real Estate LLC. They also say that the new lawsuit comes as part of the consumer protection law firm, Hagen Berman's efforts to create a more transparent real estate system following on the heels of similar litigation aimed at Zillow and the firm Blockbuster settlement regarding real estate brokerage fees totaling more than$1 billion. It's dubbed the Realtor's Big Defeat by the New York Times. This firm involved in Sister Burnett coming back for another bite at the Apple. So how is the steering allegedly work? According to the complaint and industry reporting, the allegations are that the agents were pressured to refer mortgages from Rocket Mortgage. They were discouraged from presenting competing lenders, and in some cases, they are allegedly reprimanded and threatened with losing access to leads. And unfortunately, guys, I know that to happen for a fact here in South Carolina. If you're not part of a JV with a title company, Then you are not allowed access to that particular brokerage. And that brokerage pressures those agents to use the one in which they have a title agreement with. And lenders aren't allowed to come in these offices, and you're not allowed to put your marketing for a lender on your particular marketing if that's outside of who your brokerage uses. And so there is a tremendous amount of pressure by these brokerages for you to use their preferred lenders and to use their title companies with their JVs. And anybody who tells you they're not is simply lying because I talk to the agents who tell me how hard they are pressured all the time. Higher management literally will sit down with high-end agents and say, you need to help the company out and use one of our preferred vendors. And this is important because what steering doesn't always look like is you must use this lender. Sometimes it's more innocuous than that. So the lawsuit goes on to explain that Rockett's alleged scheme compels real estate agents to pressure clients to use Rocket Mortgage to finance their purchase. In exchange, the Rocket defendants funnel leads in the form of interested buyers or sellers to real estate agents who in turn steer clients to Rocket's mortgage company in away from providers with cost-saving opportunities in violation of the real estate agent's fiduciary duty of their clients. Pretty important stuff they're saying there. Agents were required to pay 35% referral fee to Rocket Homes according to the lawsuit. In return, agents were required to still steer agents to Rocket Mortgage. They say everyday families rely on laws governing our nation's real estate markets for fairness and transparency. And we believe Rocket has failed to play by the rules. And this is according to Steve W. Berman, who is the managing partner and co-founder of Hagen's Berman. We believe at last, hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands of consumers have been duped by Rocket's tricks, and judging by its year-over-year revenue, its scheme has worked. According to the lawsuit, third quarter revenue for 2025 showed a 148% year-over-year growth for a quarter for the quarter of$1.78 billion. By all measures, its steering program has resounding success according to the lawsuit. Buying a home is most likely the largest purchase any individual will make in their lifetime, and housing's a basic need that rockets sought to capitalize on this by pressuring homeowners into bad loans is not only illegal, it's immoral. Okay. Now, the other thing the lawsuit does is it makes an allegation towards steering to rocket-related settlement services, i.e. title services, i.e., closing attorneys. They made the allegation that AMROC is referring or is steering title services, appraisal-related services, and closing services. And again, the theme is the same. If referrals are being made based on a financial benefit, that's a problem. The main points that the plaintiffs want to make in this lawsuit are consumers are being steered, competition is being reduced. We know that is true. If you've taken any basic economics class, when there's less competition, prices go up, which is what point number three is. Borrowers may have to pay higher fees, higher rates because competition is reduced. That's simple economics. The more competition, the lower the fees. The less competition, the higher the fees. So if your brokerage is selling your business to a lender or a title company, those fees will wound up being higher. It's that simple. And all this is tied to a system based on incentives where the leads are given in exchange for referrals, and that's why they're suing under REST by Section 8 and also alleging unjust enrichment. They're seeking damages and they're seeking injunctive leaves. So the question then is what is the harm? Well, the lawsuit brings the claim of the violation of RESP, but which seeks treble damages, single damages, disgorgement, and injunctive release to put an end to Rocket's steering practices, which were brought to light in light of a four-year investigation by the federal government and the Central, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Based on this investigation, consumers were directly harmed by the steering practice because Rocket Mortgage and its predecessor, which was Quick and Loans, offered substandard loan packages that charged higher interest rates and offered fewer cost-saving opportunities for home buyer, the lawsuit says. And as a result of these substandard loans, Rocket Mortgage charged higher rates and fees to consumers who went through Rocket Home Network compared to the consumers who did not go through the network. That's a clear sign of illegal steering. Wow. I mean, that's it. So that's where we're going to see where this lawsuit goes is will these plaintiffs be able to show that people who did not go through their network received better rates? And a lot of my mortgage friends have always said this is that when you have tie-ins to builders and tie-ins to mortgage companies, they can always beat those prices because those people aren't competing for the business. They've bought it. Now, Rocket, to be fair, they have denied these allegations. They categorically disagree and they call it a complete retread of the CFP B case, which they said was dismissed. And this is important to important before we include all this for balance. This lawsuit is nothing more than an allegation. It's not a final ruling. These allegations matter, however, because they are starting to expose, in my opinion, business practices that I have been saying, as many industry leaders have been saying, need to be examined. So what's our takeaways here? Well, our takeaways here are agents and brokers should want to stay ethical and avoid these lawsuits that are going to happen. You should be referring based on key factors: communication, speed, problem solving, transparency, cost, closing rate success. You should be staying away from you receiving benefits such as leads, marketing dollars, referral fees, ownership interests, preferred partnership status, or, Lord forbid, a Christmas party. Avoid putting pressure on your clients to use somebody that's related to your company because you're receiving financial benefit. And it certainly resist the pressure of your brokerages, the higher-ups, the managers, the directors who are telling you you need to use these companies because it benefits you. It doesn't benefit you, it financially benefits them. But the bigger problem is whether it benefits you or not, it doesn't benefit your clients. The reason they're pushing these companies, these brokerages, push you to use their lenders has nothing to do with it benefits your client. They're not coming to you saying you need to use our in-house lawyer because they're the or our in-house mortgage company because they're the absolute best in the business and their rates are the greatest. They are coming to you and pressuring you saying you need to use this because it's good for the brokerage. That, my friends, is a violation of your fiduciary duty. Final thoughts on this: referrals should be based on trust and performance, not hidden incentives. I've been on the high horse about this for years. Don't agree with what I say. That's perfectly fine. But guess what? It's a big ass law firm up in Michigan who just saw sued a big ass nationwide lender. And the question is, who's next? Are you ready to be next? You ready to have your business examined by these people? You want to be writing that big check, so keep that in mind. Not Gary's saying there's lawsuits are happening. There's actual lawsuits happening. And this isn't the first and it won't be the last. We all know that. All right. Hope everybody enjoyed this week's show. And we'll be back again next week for another episode of Edition Dirt. Please like us, share us, and subscribe. And we'll see you again next week. Y'all have a good