The suit's claims about UWM's broker ecosystem raise tough questions for lenders
UWM faces a class action alleging it should answer for brokers' unsolicited marketing texts — sent, the suit claims, using the lender's own tools.
The lawsuit, filed on March 3, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, was brought by William Mogck, a Texas resident who says he received numerous unwanted text messages from multiple UWM-affiliated brokers pitching VA loan rate reductions — despite having registered his phone number on the National Do Not Call Registry back in October 2022.
But this is not just another telemarketing gripe. The case raises a question that should catch the attention of every wholesale lender and broker in the country: when brokers use a lender's tools, follow its training, and operate almost exclusively within its ecosystem, does the lender own the liability too?
According to the filing, Mogck received a string of texts between September 2025 and March 2026 from brokers signing off as "from UWM" or "from UWM Partner." He alleges he told them to stop — more than once — but the messages kept coming, from different brokers each time, all pushing the same products.
The real sting for the industry lies in the allegations about how tightly UWM allegedly controls its broker channel. The suit describes a five-week training program that includes three days on-site at UWM's Pontiac, Michigan headquarters, weekly sales meetings, and a prohibition on brokers submitting loans to major competitors. A 2023 study referenced in the filing found that a large portion of UWM's brokers were submitting virtually all of their business — 99 percent or more — to the company.
Then there is the technology. The lawsuit points to a suite of proprietary tools UWM provides its brokers, including Lead Pipeline, which allegedly alerts brokers when to text potential leads, Action IQ for task management, and ChatUWMAssist, an AI service that assists with sales. A performance system called PRO points allegedly rewards brokers with better rates, faster underwriting, and greater visibility on UWM's consumer-facing broker directory based on how much business they send and how often they use the company's tools.
The legal theory here leans on FCC rulings that hold companies responsible for telemarketing violations committed on their behalf — even when third parties make the actual calls. The suit argues UWM cannot insulate itself from liability simply because the texts were sent by brokers rather than its own employees.
The case proposes two nationwide classes and seeks statutory damages of $500 per violation, or up to $1,500 for willful violations, along with injunctive relief. No determination on the merits has been made, and the allegations have not been proven in court.
The case is Mogck v. United Wholesale Mortgage, LLC, Case No. 2:26-cv-10733 (E.D. Mich.).
