AICreditRepair,CFPBComplaintFlooding&MortgageUnderwritingRisks:WhyFactualFCRAReadinessWinsin2026

AI credit-repair bots and credit repair organizations flooding the CFPB complaint portal to wash accurate negative tradelines create severe mortgage underwriting roadblocks. When furnishers apply Metro 2 compliance condition codes XB or XC to disputed accounts, Fannie Mae Desktop Underwriter, Freddie Mac Loan Product Advisor, and FHA TOTAL Scorecard routinely downgrade automated approvals to manual review until unresolved non-medical disputes are cleared.

Important Compliance Notice: UQUAL is a loan readiness company. UQUAL is not a credit repair company and does not provide credit repair, debt settlement, legal, or tax guidance, and UQUAL is not a lender. If you need independent housing counseling or budget assistance at no cost, you can connect with a HUD-approved counselor through the CFPB Find a Housing Counselor directory.

Why Are AI Credit Repair Tools and CROs Flooding the CFPB Complaint Portal?

In a landmark policy analysis published on November 4, 2026 by Tallman Johnson, Senior Vice President of Government Relations and Policy at the Consumer Data Industry Association (CDIA), the consumer reporting industry highlighted a critical structural divide entering the 2027 and 2028 Congressional session. Over the past three years, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) complaint portal has experienced an unprecedented surge in automated, template-driven filings generated by credit repair organizations (CROs) and consumer-facing artificial intelligence dispute tools.

Rather than helping consumers identify and document genuine factual errors on their credit reports, these automated AI credit-repair platforms encourage prospective homebuyers to challenge every negative tradeline on their Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion credit files simultaneously. The underlying premise marketed by these apps is simple: flood the nationwide Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs), data furnishers, and the federal CFPB complaint portal with high-volume administrative complaints in the hope that a creditor misses a 30-day response window and temporarily deletes an accurate late payment, charge-off, or collection account.

For prospective mortgage borrowers and the loan officers guiding them, this tactic is not merely ineffective; it is actively destructive to mortgage qualification. Mortgage underwriting is governed by strict federal agency rules from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Automated underwriting systems (AUS) do not evaluate a credit report solely by its surface 3-digit score. Instead, they parse the underlying Metro 2® data fields transmitted on every individual tradeline. When an AI credit-repair tool floods the bureaus with template disputes against accurate accounts, data furnishers respond by embedding compliance condition codes directly into the credit file, halting automated mortgage underwriting in its tracks.

The 2026 CDIA Policy Reality: Factual FCRA Rights vs. "Credit Washing"

To understand why mortgage underwriters and federal policymakers treat AI complaint flooding so seriously, borrowers and loan officers must distinguish between two fundamentally different activities:

1. Legitimate, Free Consumer Disputes Under the FCRA (15 U.S.C. § 1681i): Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, every consumer has the statutory right to dispute factually inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable information directly with Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion at zero cost. As the CDIA's November 2026 policy brief emphasizes, when a consumer submits a legitimate dispute backed by objective documentation (such as a mixed file record, identity theft affidavit, paid-in-full settlement letter, or court-ordered satisfaction), the statutory investigation and e-OSCAR verification process works reliably to correct the record.
2. CRO and AI "Credit Washing" via Portal Flooding: Credit washing occurs when a third-party credit repair organization or AI bot submits repetitive, unsubstantiated disputes claiming that accurate, verifiable derogatory history (such as a legitimate 60-day auto loan delinquency or an unpaid charge-off) is "not mine" or "inaccurately reported" without any factual basis. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(3), consumer reporting agencies are legally permitted to terminate or flag frivolous or irrelevant disputes when a consumer fails to provide sufficient information to investigate the disputed item.

How Do Metro 2 Dispute Codes (XB and XC) Trigger Mortgage Underwriting Downgrades?

Many homebuyers assume that if an online consumer credit monitoring app shows a 20-point jump after submitting an AI dispute batch, their mortgage application is suddenly ready for approval. In reality, that temporary score bump is frequently an illusion caused by how legacy scoring algorithms treat accounts marked with active dispute narratives.

Inside the Metro 2® Reporting Standard

Every month, banks, mortgage servicers, credit card issuers, and collection agencies transmit consumer account updates to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion using the CDIA's standardized Metro 2® format. Field 25 of the Metro 2® base segment is the Compliance Condition Code, which tracks Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) dispute statuses:

• Compliance Condition Code XB: "Account information disputed by consumer under the Fair Credit Reporting Act." This code is applied the moment a consumer, CRO, or AI bot initiates a dispute with a bureau or furnisher while the 30-day investigation is pending.
• Compliance Condition Code XC: "Completed investigation of FCRA dispute - consumer disagrees." When a creditor investigates an AI-generated dispute, verifies that the late payment or balance is 100% accurate, and closes the investigation, the account is often updated to XC or left with an active narrative remark such as "Consumer disputes after resolution" or "Account information disputed by consumer."
• Compliance Condition Code XR: "Removes the most recently reported Compliance Condition Code." Only when a consumer explicitly withdraws an unsubstantiated dispute or the dispute is fully resolved without disagreement does the furnisher transmit XR to strip the dispute flag from the tradeline.

Why Classic FICO and Automated Underwriting Engines Flag Disputed Accounts

In legacy mortgage scoring models (specifically Classic FICO: Equifax Beacon 5.0, Experian Fair Isaac v2, and TransUnion FICO Risk Score 04), when a derogatory revolving or collection tradeline carries an active XB dispute code, certain scoring subroutines temporarily exclude the disputed derogatory weighting from the score calculation while the investigation is open. Credit repair marketers exploit this mechanic to show borrowers a temporary score increase during weeks one through three of a dispute blitz.

However, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and HUD underwriters know this exact mechanic. Because an active XB or XC dispute remark can cause a Classic FICO score to misstate the borrower's true default risk, every major mortgage automated underwriting system is programmed to inspect the raw Metro 2® tradeline remarks and halt automated approval when material non-medical disputes are present.

What Are the Exact Fannie Mae DU, Freddie Mac LPA, and FHA TOTAL Rules on Disputed Accounts?

For mortgage loan officers, branch managers, and borrowers preparing for a 2026 or 2027 home purchase, understanding the exact agency guidelines for disputed credit tradelines is essential to avoiding pipeline fallout and wasted $150 to $400+ tri-merge credit re-pulls.

1. Fannie Mae Desktop Underwriter (DU Selling Guide B3-5.3-09)

Under Fannie Mae Selling Guide Section B3-5.3-09 (Disputed Tradelines):

1. Automated Assessment First: When Desktop Underwriter (DU) runs a borrower's tri-merge credit file, it first checks whether the borrower's credit report contains tradelines marked as disputed (XB or narrative dispute codes).
2. Re-Assessment Excluding Disputed Tradelines: If DU is able to issue an Approve/Eligible recommendation by isolating and evaluating the disputed tradelines under its internal risk tolerances, no further action is required, provided the accuracy of the disputed information is verified.
3. When DU Flags Disputed Tradelines for Underwriter Action: If DU cannot confirm that the disputed derogatory tradelines do not impact the underwriting decision, the lender must investigate whether the disputed account information belongs to the borrower and is accurate:
   • If the disputed information is accurate (the standard outcome of AI credit washing): The borrower can no longer rely on the artificially inflated credit score. The lender must obtain a new credit report with the dispute remarks removed (XR status) and re-submit the loan to DU, or manually underwrite the file if the program permits manual underwriting.
   • If the disputed information is genuinely inaccurate: The lender must obtain objective documentation from the borrower or creditor proving the error (for example, a zero-balance statement or court record) to underwrite the file accurately.

2. Freddie Mac Loan Product Advisor (LPA Guide Section 5202.5)

Under Freddie Mac Single-Family Seller/Servicer Guide Section 5202.5:

• Loan Product Advisor (LPA) evaluates disputed tradelines reported on the merged credit file.
• When LPA returns an Accept risk class, the lender must still review the feedback certificate for specific messages regarding disputed tradelines.
• If the credit report indicates that tradelines are disputed by the borrower, the lender must determine whether the disputed tradelines are the result of identity theft or factual credit reporting errors versus accurate derogatory obligations. If accurate obligations are being disputed to mask recent delinquencies or unpaid balances that affect the borrower's debt-to-income (DTI) ratio or reserve requirements, the underwriter must include the verified monthly payments in the DTI ratio and satisfy all conditions on the LPA Feedback Certificate prior to closing.

3. FHA TOTAL Mortgage Scorecard (HUD Handbook 4000.1 II.A.4.b.iii.(J))

The Federal Housing Administration enforces the most rigid quantitative threshold in the mortgage industry regarding disputed derogatory accounts. Under HUD Handbook 4000.1:

• What Counts as a Disputed Derogatory Credit Account: FHA defines a disputed derogatory credit account as any disputed charge-off account, disputed collection account, or disputed account with late payments in the last 24 months.
• The $1,000 Cumulative Downgrade Rule: If the borrower's tri-merge credit report contains disputed derogatory credit accounts with a cumulative balance equal to or greater than $1,000 (across all bureaus), the loan must be downgraded from TOTAL Mortgage Scorecard Approve/Eligible to a Refer, requiring a full Manual Underwrite by a Direct Endorsement (DE) underwriter.
• Mandatory Consequences of an FHA Manual Downgrade: When an FHA file is downgraded to a manual underwrite because of $1,000+ in AI-disputed derogatory accounts, the borrower's maximum permissible debt-to-income (DTI) ratios plummet from the automated 46.99% / 56.99% ceiling down to 31% front-end / 43% back-end (or 37% / 47% to 40% / 40% only with documented, verified compensating factors such as three months of PITI cash reserves or minimal housing payment increase).
• Exemptions Under FHA Rules: Disputed medical collection accounts, disputed derogatory accounts resulting from documented identity theft (supported by a police report or FTC IdentityTheft.gov filing), and disputed accounts with a zero ($0) balance are excluded from the $1,000 cumulative downgrade threshold.

4. VA Home Loan Underwriting (VA Pamphlet 26-7, Chapter 4)

Under Department of Veterans Affairs underwriting standards, automated AUS findings require the SAR (Staff Appraisal Reviewer) or LAPP underwriter to verify the true status of disputed tradelines. If a veteran has hired an AI credit-repair service that placed XB dispute flags on active installment, revolving, or collection accounts, the underwriter must verify the actual monthly payment obligation so that the veteran's Residual Income and DTI calculations reflect reality, and often requires removal of unsubstantiated dispute remarks before issuing a Clear to Close (CTC).

Why Does "More Data, Not Less" Help Borrowers Qualify Under VantageScore 4.0 and FICO 10T?

One of the central policy pillars highlighted in Tallman Johnson's November 4, 2026 CDIA statement is a principle that every mortgage originator and homebuyer should internalize: "More data, not less, helps consumers."

For decades, the credit repair industry has operated on a subtraction mindset, convincing consumers that the only path to a higher credit score is stripping tradelines off a credit report. In the modern 2026 and 2027 mortgage ecosystem, where the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are actively transitioning toward VantageScore 4.0 alongside Classic FICO, subtraction is the exact opposite of what automated scoring models reward.

How Trended Data and Alternative Data Outperform Credit Deletion

As we detailed in our technical analysis of VantageScore 4.0 vs. Classic FICO Mortgage Underwriting and you can model directly inside our interactive VantageScore 4.0 vs. Classic FICO Mortgage Calculator, modern mortgage credit scoring relies on data completeness:

1. 24-Month Trended Credit Data (~20% of VantageScore 4.0 Weight): Rather than looking at a single static snapshot of credit card utilization on the day a credit report is pulled, VantageScore 4.0 evaluates 24 consecutive months of balance-to-limit trajectories (Transactor vs. Revolver behavior). A borrower who steadily pays down revolving balances month after month builds verifiable trended momentum that adds 15 to 40+ points to their score.
2. Automatic Exclusion of Medical Collections and Paid Collections: One of the biggest drivers of unnecessary credit repair fees is consumer panic over old medical bills or small collection accounts. Under VantageScore 4.0, 100% of medical collections (paid or unpaid) and 100% of paid non-medical collections are completely ignored by the scoring model ($0 penalty). Even under Classic FICO and agency guidelines, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion already exclude paid medical debt, medical collections under $500, and medical collections less than one year old. Paying a credit repair company $150 a month to dispute a $350 medical bill or a paid utility collection is pure financial waste.
3. Rent, Utility (NCTUE), and Telecom Payment Inclusion: According to Equifax and VantageScore 4.0 empirical benchmarks, incorporating verified on-time rental, utility, and telecommunications payment data scores approximately 33 million previously unscorable or thin-file U.S. adults, including 10.6 million consumers scoring 620 or higher (4.9 million Black and Hispanic consumers) and up to 5 million prospective homebuyers who can newly qualify for agency mortgages.
4. One-Month Scoring Window: While Classic FICO requires at least one tradeline that has been open and reporting for six consecutive months (6-month minimum history), VantageScore 4.0 can generate a valid mortgage-grade credit score after just 1 month of reported history.

When a consumer uses an AI dispute bot to attack an older account that contains five years of on-time payment history alongside a single 30-day late payment from 22 months ago, and the creditor responds by closing or suppressing the entire tradeline, the borrower loses five years of average age of accounts and 23 months of positive trended payment data. That loss of file thickness frequently drops the borrower's mortgage score far more than the isolated 30-day late payment ever did.

How Does the 2026 to 2028 Divided Government Impact Tri-Merge Credit Reports and Mortgage Costs?

In the wake of the November 2026 midterm elections, Tallman Johnson's CDIA briefing outlines exactly what mortgage lenders, fintech platforms, and consumers should expect from Washington over the next 24 months:

1. Institutional Gridlock Shifts Action to Oversight and Regulatory Agencies

Because a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives (and potentially split Senate dynamics) faces a Republican White House, sweeping legislative rewrites of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) face an uphill climb. Instead of new statutes, the consumer reporting and mortgage industries will see intense Congressional committee oversight hearings, formal inquiry letters, and regulatory tug-of-war involving the CFPB and FHFA.

2. Bipartisan Focus on Preserving the 3-Bureau Tri-Merge Credit Report

For mortgage loan officers and secondary market investors, the single most important policy takeaway in the CDIA's November 2026 statement is the explicit commitment to preserving the tri-merge credit report during the ongoing credit score modernization process. Why does preserving the 3-bureau tri-merge matter so much to mortgage underwriting?

• Incomplete Data Across Single or Bi-Merge Pulls: Not every regional bank, credit union, auto lender, or collection agency reports to all three bureaus simultaneously. Pulling a single bureau or even two bureaus ("bi-merge") risks missing an undisclosed auto loan, a recent delinquency, or a positive rent-reporting tradeline that appears only on the third bureau.
• Risk Pricing and MBS Investor Confidence: Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) investors rely on the tri-merge middle score (or average median score) to price prepayment and default risk accurately. Removing a bureau increases uncertainty, which translates into higher Loan-Level Price Adjustments (LLPAs) and higher interest rates for everyday homebuyers.
• Controlling Re-Pull Fallout Costs: As we documented in our 2026 Mortgage Credit Report Costs & VantageScore 4.0 Loan Officer Guide, with 2026 tri-merge credit report costs ranging from $100 to $400+ per pull and industry pull-through averaging just 28%, the real enemy of lender profitability is unnecessary credit re-pulls caused by unprepared files and disputed tradelines, not the integrity of three-bureau data itself.

3. CFPB Rule 1033 (Open Banking), Data Privacy, and AI Scrutiny

Congressional committees in 2027 will closely examine CFPB Section 1033 (personal financial data rights and open banking data sharing), state-level data privacy preemption, medical debt reporting rules, and the use of artificial intelligence in credit underwriting and consumer dispute automation. Borrowers should be extremely cautious about handing their Social Security numbers, bureau login credentials, and banking passwords to unregulated AI credit-repair scrapers that lack SOC 2 security controls or GLBA (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) privacy compliance.

How Can Consumers Dispute Real Credit Report Errors for Free Under the FCRA?

If you pull your credit reports before applying for a mortgage and discover a genuine factual inaccuracy, such as an account belonging to someone with a similar name (a mixed file), a balance that was paid in full months ago but still reports a past-due balance, a duplicate collection for the same underlying debt, or fraudulent accounts opened through identity theft, you do not need to pay a credit repair company or an AI subscription app a single dollar to fix it.

Here is the exact, step-by-step Free Consumer FCRA Factual Dispute Protocol that complies with federal law and prepares your file cleanly for a mortgage underwriter:

Step 1: Pull Your Official Three-Bureau Reports for Free

Visit the federally authorized portal at AnnualCreditReport.com to download your complete Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion disclosures at zero cost. Do not rely solely on abbreviated third-party monitoring summaries, because you need to see the exact account numbers, Date of First Delinquency (DOFD), balance histories, and narrative remarks reported to each bureau.

Step 2: Audit for Objective, Factual Inaccuracies Only

Separate your negative tradelines into two distinct buckets:

• Bucket A (Factual Errors Eligible for Free FCRA Dispute):
  • Accounts that do not belong to you (mixed file with a relative or stranger, or identity theft).
  • Accounts reporting a late payment during a month when you have a bank statement or canceled check proving on-time payment prior to the 30-day cutoff.
  • Settled or paid-in-full charge-offs and collections that still display an unpaid balance above $0.
  • Duplicate collection tradelines where both the original debt buyer and a subsequent collection agency report an active balance for the exact same debt.
  • Derogatory tradelines that have exceeded the statutory 7-year FCRA reporting period (15 U.S.C. § 1681c, measured as 7 years plus 180 days from the Date of First Delinquency).
• Bucket B (Accurate Derogatory History Requiring Loan Readiness Strategy, NOT Disputes):
  • Legitimate 30-, 60-, or 90-day late payments that occurred on your accounts.
  • Valid unpaid collection accounts or charge-offs within the 7-year reporting window.
  • High credit card balances (30%+ revolving utilization) that are depressing your score.

Step 3: Assemble Concrete Documentary Evidence for Bucket A Items

The reason legitimate consumer disputes succeed while AI template disputes fail is documentation. When submitting a factual dispute to Equifax, Experian, TransUnion, and the data furnisher (under the FCRA Direct Dispute Rule, 12 C.F.R. § 1022.43), attach clear PDFs or copies of:

• The specific page of your credit report with the erroneous trade line circled.
• Bank statements, canceled checks, or electronic payment confirmation numbers showing the exact date and dollar amount paid.
• Official creditor payoff or settlement-in-full letters on company letterhead.
• If the error stems from identity theft, an official FTC Identity Theft Report from IdentityTheft.gov and a local police report.

Step 4: Submit Directly to the Bureaus and Furnisher (And Verify XR Clean Closure)

Submit your documented dispute online through the official Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion dispute portals or via USPS Certified Mail with Return Receipt Requested. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(1), the bureau generally has 30 days (or 45 days if you submit additional relevant information during the 30-day window) to complete its reinvestigation, correct or delete the inaccurate item, and send you updated written results.

Crucial Mortgage Check: Once the factual error is corrected, verify on your updated credit disclosure that the account reflects the accurate $0 balance or corrected status without a lingering "Consumer disputes after resolution" (XC) narrative remark before your loan officer orders a hard tri-merge mortgage credit report.

How Do You Fix a Mortgage Application Stalled by AI Credit Repair Dispute Flags?

What happens if a borrower comes to a loan officer after spending six months enrolled in an AI credit-repair app, and the initial tri-merge credit pull comes back from Fannie Mae DU or FHA TOTAL with a mandatory dispute flag downgrade?

Loan officers and borrowers can rescue the transaction by executing this 4-Step Dispute Flag Remediation Protocol:

1. Identify Every Tradeline Carrying a Dispute Remark Across All Three Bureaus

Have the loan officer or credit vendor generate a tradeline-by-tradeline audit of the tri-merge credit report. Highlight every account showing:

• "Account information disputed by consumer" (Metro 2® Code XB)
• "Consumer disputes this account information"
• "Consumer disputes after resolution" (Metro 2® Code XC)
• For FHA loans, calculate the exact cumulative balance of all disputed derogatory accounts (excluding medical collections and $0-balance accounts) to see whether removing disputes on one or two specific accounts drops the cumulative total below the $1,000 TOTAL Scorecard threshold.

2. Immediately Terminate Automated AI Dispute Bots and Revoke Portal Access

Before requesting dispute removal from the bureaus, the borrower must cancel any active AI credit-repair software subscriptions and revoke third-party power-of-attorney or automated CFPB portal scripts. Otherwise, the bot may automatically re-file a fresh dispute batch the following week, undoing the lender's remediation work right before closing.

3. Request Formal Dispute Withdrawal (Metro 2® Code XR) from the Bureaus or Furnishers

The borrower must contact Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion (and, where necessary, the reporting creditor's credit bureau dispute department) and state clearly: "I am applying for a mortgage loan. I am no longer disputing account [Account Number], and I request that the dispute remark be removed immediately."

• When the bureau or furnisher processes this withdrawal, the Compliance Condition Code is updated to XR (which strips the prior XB or XC flag).

4. Verify via Credit Supplement or Rapid Rescore Before Re-Running AUS

Once the borrower receives confirmation that the dispute remarks have been removed:

• The mortgage lender orders a Credit Supplement or Rapid Rescore (or a fresh tri-merge re-pull if required by DU Selling Guide B3-5.3-09) to confirm the raw Metro 2® data no longer contains the XB/XC flags.
• The loan officer re-submits the updated credit file to Fannie Mae DU, Freddie Mac LPA, or FHA TOTAL Scorecard so the engine can evaluate the authentic, unmasked credit score and restore an Approve/Eligible or Accept/Eligible finding.

Why Does UQUAL's 4-Pillar Loan Readiness Model Outperform Credit Repair Every Time?

As we examine the CDIA's November 2026 policy warning alongside the daily reality of mortgage underwriting desks across the United States, the distinction between credit repair and loan readiness has never been clearer. For an even deeper comparison of the two models, read our dedicated breakdown on Why Loan Readiness Is Different From Credit Repair and our technical guide on Qualifying for a Mortgage with Collections, Charge-Offs, and Late Payments.

At UQUAL, our methodology is engineered around the 4 Pillars of Mortgage Underwriting Readiness:

Pillar 1: Credit Optimization for 24-Month Trended Data (Not Dispute Washing)

Instead of filing frivolous disputes that trigger Metro 2® XB/XC red flags, UQUAL analyzes how a borrower's revolving utilization and payment patterns interact with both Classic FICO and VantageScore 4.0. By structuring a targeted revolving balance paydown schedule across statement closing dates (bringing aggregate and individual card utilization below the 30%, 10%, and 5% scoring thresholds), borrowers achieve authentic, verifiable score gains that survive every automated underwriting check.

Pillar 2: Debt-to-Income (DTI) Ratio Engineering

A 740 credit score still results in a mortgage denial if the borrower's back-end DTI ratio is 54% on a program capped at 45% or 50%. UQUAL maps out the exact dollar-for-dollar monthly payment reduction strategy, identifying which high-payment installment loans (when paid down to 10 or fewer remaining payments under Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac rules) or revolving minimums yield the largest DTI drop per dollar spent.

Pillar 3: Down Payment & Verified Cash Reserves (PITI Cushion)

Automated underwriting engines (DU, LPA, and TOTAL) treat verified liquid cash reserves (measured in months of Principal, Interest, Taxes, and Insurance, or PITI) as one of the strongest compensating factors in mortgage lending. UQUAL helps borrowers structure and season their down payment and reserve funds in compliant accounts for 60+ days so there are zero unverified large deposits at underwriting.

Pillar 4: Pre-Underwriting Documentation & Letter of Explanation (LOE) Readiness

When a borrower has a legitimate historical hardship, a resolved collection, or a genuine factual reporting error that was properly corrected under the FCRA, UQUAL ensures the borrower's paper trail (settlement letters, zero-balance statements, bank transcripts, and concise Letters of Explanation) is organized before the loan officer ever orders a $300+ hard tri-merge credit pull. Mortgage originators and branch leaders who want to eliminate dead-file credit costs and convert declined leads into closings can explore our Mortgage Partner Program.