#rocket homes

What Does the Rocket RESPA Class Action Allege?How the alleged referral arrangement operated sits at the center of the Michigan federal class action under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.The Jan. 26 filing in the Eastern District of Michigan names three homebuyers as plaintiffs.Plaintiffs say Rocket Homes traded leads and referral priority for steering to Rocket Mortgage and Amrock.The case arrives as commission and referral practices face heightened scrutiny under antitrust laws and evolving transparency expectations.Disruption AllegationsThe alleged timeline runs from 2019 to 2024 under an asserted agreement linking referrals to mortgage placement.Agents allegedly owed a 35 percent referral fee and paid more when borrowers used competing lenders.Consumer Cost ExposureClaimed Steering EffectsHomebuyers were allegedly pressured to use Rocket Mortgage, limiting shopping and producing higher rates and fees.Liability scope is framed as network-wide conduct tied to the referral and fee structure.Plaintiffs allege continuation after the 2025 Redfin acquisition in similar transactions.Who’s Suing Rocket: and Which Entities Are Named?The steering and referral allegations now face named consumers and Rocket-affiliated entities in a Michigan federal case. Similar RESPA kickback allegations elsewhere have heightened scrutiny of referral-based lead programs.Plaintiff ProfilesPlaintiff Profiles identify Barbara Waller as lead class representative, joined by Elizabeth Johnson of North Carolina and Randel Clark of Pennsylvania.Each alleges consumer pressure in the homebuying process and seeks class status in the Eastern District of Michigan.The complaint was filed January 26, 2026.Named Corporate AffiliatesThe defendants list Rocket Companies Inc. as the defendant, alongside Rocket Mortgage LLC, Amrock Holdings LLC, and Rocket Homes Real Estate LLC as corporate affiliates.The case is captioned *Waller v. Rocket Companies, et al.*Plaintiffs are represented by Hagens Berman, which issued the filing and requests damages, disgorgement, and injunctive relief under RESPA.The complaint also points to a 35% referral fee requirement tied to Rocket Homes’ agent network.How Rocket Homes Referral Fees May Have Driven SteeringBecause Rocket Homes’ referral fee is paid only at closing, it can reward agents who keep a transaction on a Rocket Mortgage track through the finish line. With no upfront cost, a 25 percent to 40 percent cut of commission can sharpen agent incentives to favor Rocket financing over competing lenders.How the Economics Can Tilt ChoicesFees reportedly reach 25 percent of commission or 1 percent of sale price, whichever is higher, and may be undisclosed to consumers. Even a promised rebate up to 1 percent can be tied to Rocket use, contributing to market distortion in lender comparison across the purchase timeline.ElementWhat changesPotential effectLead sourcePre approved Rocket clientsReduced shoppingPayment timingClosing onlyPressure to stayHow the CFPB Rocket Case Connects to This LawsuitWhile the CFPB lawsuit filed December 23, 2024, targeted Rocket Homes Real Estate LLC and affiliates for an alleged RESPA Section 8 kickback scheme, the same core conduct now anchors the Michigan class allegations.It frames the class suit around alleged paid steering.Case Linkages Heighten ExposureThe complaints share a 35 percent referral fee theme and incentive tied referrals.This evidence overlap persists even though the CFPB later dropped its case.Shared allegationsReferrals conditioned on routing business to Rocket Mortgage and AmrockIncentives and pressure discouraging non Rocket optionsReports of higher borrower costs inside the networkRegulatory timing matters.The December 2024 filing and long probe supply a public factual blueprint for discovery in Michigan courts.As with the FTC’s antitrust scrutiny of the Zillow-Redfin rentals deal, early enforcement allegations can shape later litigation and discovery strategy.Who May Be Affected: