Furthermore, current regulations such as Regulation E in the U.S. place significant responsibility on consumers once they authorize a third party. Similarly, the EU’s Payment Services Directive (PSD2) requires clear human authorization for payment orders, with no existing mechanism to treat an AI agent as a human payer’s legal equal. The technology is outstripping the legal frameworks intended to govern it.
How common is this, really?
To be clear, we have not yet seen a widespread trend of AI agents calling mortgage servicers to negotiate complex loan modifications. It is not yet a documented industry standard. However, all the signs in adjacent domains point to this being the inevitable next step. Banks and payment networks are already piloting agent-initiated transactions, and regulators are beginning to draft the rules that will govern these interactions.
The lead time for building sound policy in the mortgage industry is measured in months, not years. If the industry waits until an incident occurs—such as an AI agent inadvertently agreeing to terms that harm a borrower, or a servicer’s system being overwhelmed by automated AI "callers"—it will be too late to develop a thoughtful, proactive strategy.
What I’d propose
Given the current lack of reliable ways to authenticate customer-authorized AI agents or monitor their ongoing fitness, mortgage servicers should adopt a stance of deliberate caution. Until industry-wide standards emerge, I propose a "practical bridge" to manage these risks.
First, if a servicing system suspects it is communicating with an AI agent rather than a human customer, the protocol should be to route the conversation to a live human representative. This ensures that mission-critical decisions are overseen by people who can be held accountable.
Second, servicers must begin developing explicit policies for identifying, authenticating, and evaluating AI agents. These rules should be integrated into existing AI, IT, or customer care governance programs. The policies should clearly define what an agent is permitted to do and, more importantly, what it is prohibited from doing.
These measures should not be viewed as a permanent rejection of AI-to-AI interaction. Instead, they serve as a necessary safeguard while the industry works toward stronger, more transparent standards. The goal is to address the risks of agentic AI deliberately and strategically, before a crisis forces the industry to improvise in the dark. By establishing these boundaries now, mortgage servicers can protect both their operations and their customers as we enter this new era of automated finance.
