Contingent Liabilities	6 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingent Liabilities	13. Contingent Liabilities Legal Proceedings The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. In the opinion of Management, the resolution of these legal actions is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations. The Company and its subsidiary, ESSA Bank and Trust (“ESSA B&T”) were named as defendants, among others, in an action commenced on December 8, 2016 by one plaintiff who sought to pursue the suit as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated. The plaintiff alleged that a subsidiary of a bank previously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks in the process of making loans, in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. In an order dated January 29, 2018, the district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. The plaintiff appealed the court’s ruling. In an opinion and order dated April 26, 2019, the appellate court reversed the district court’s order dismissing the plaintiff’s case against the Company and remanded the case to the district court in order to continue the litigation. The litigation is now proceeding before the district court. On December 9, 2019, the court permitted an amendment to the complaint to add two new plaintiffs to the case asserting similar claims. On May 21, 2020, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Fact and expert discovery were completed, but, as explained below, have recently been re-opened. The Company and ESSA B&T filed motions seeking to have the case dismissed (in whole or in part) and/or the class de-certified, as well as for other relief. Plaintiffs opposed the motions. On August 18, 2023 the Court granted the motions to dismiss as to the Company and ESSA B&T, with the result that the only remaining defendant was a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a previously-acquired company. The Court also amended its class certification order, and severed one of the original plaintiffs’ claims from those of the class, ordering a separate trial for that plaintiff. Plaintiffs sought permission to appeal from these and other related rulings, but the Court denied their request. Plaintiffs then filed a motion seeking relief from some of the Court’s prior orders. On November 20, 2024 the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion and vacated the prior orders that had granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants except the now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary alleged to have employed the individuals who allegedly violated RESPA. The Court also allowed Plaintiffs additional discovery. The Company and ESSA B&T will continue to vigorously defend against Plaintiffs’ allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial. On May 29, 2020, the Company and ESSA B&T were named as defendants in a second action commenced by three plaintiffs who also sought to pursue the action as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated. The plaintiffs allege that a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a bankpreviously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks from a different title company than the one involved in the previously discussed litigation in the process of making loans. The original complaint alleged violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Sherman Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). The plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on September 30, 2020 that dropped the RICO claim, but they are continuing to pursue the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Sherman Act claims. The defendants moved to dismiss the Sherman Act claim on October 14, 2020, and that motion was denied on April 2, 2021. On March 13, 2023 the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Discovery is now complete. . The Company and ESSA B&T intend to vigorously defend against plaintiffs’ allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial. On February 21, 2025, the Company and ESSA B&T were named as defendants in an action commenced by a plaintiff who had previously been a member of the class of plaintiffs in the first lawsuit described in this Item. As a result of that Court’s subsequent ruling re-defining that class, the plaintiff in this action no longer met the Court-ordered definition for the class membership. The plaintiff alleges that a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a bank previously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks, and that he was charged an incorrect title insurance premium in connection with the process of making his loan, allegedly violating the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. The plaintiff also seeks to pursue the action as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated to him. The Company has not yet been served with the Complaint. The Company and ESSA B&T intend to vigorously defend against plaintiff’s allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial.

Contingent Liabilities

6 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2025

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

13.

Contingent Liabilities

Legal Proceedings

The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. In the opinion of Management, the resolution of these legal actions is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

The Company and its subsidiary, ESSA Bank and Trust (“ESSA B&T”) were named as defendants, among others, in an action commenced on December 8, 2016 by one plaintiff who sought to pursue the suit as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated. The plaintiff alleged that a subsidiary of a bank previously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks in the process of making loans, in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. In an order dated January 29, 2018, the district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. The plaintiff appealed the court’s ruling. In an opinion and order dated April 26, 2019, the appellate court reversed the district court’s order dismissing the plaintiff’s case against the Company and remanded the case to the district court in order to continue the litigation. The litigation is now proceeding before the district court. On December 9, 2019, the court permitted an amendment to the complaint to add two new plaintiffs to the case asserting similar claims. On May 21, 2020, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Fact and expert discovery were completed, but, as explained below, have recently been re-opened. The Company and ESSA B&T filed motions seeking to have the case dismissed (in whole or in part) and/or the class de-certified, as well as for other relief. Plaintiffs opposed the motions. On August 18, 2023 the Court granted the motions to dismiss as to the Company and ESSA B&T, with the result that the only remaining defendant was a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a previously-acquired company. The Court also amended its class certification order, and severed one of the original plaintiffs’ claims from those of the class, ordering a separate trial for that plaintiff. Plaintiffs sought permission to appeal from these and other related rulings, but the Court denied their request. Plaintiffs then filed a motion seeking relief from some of the Court’s prior orders. On November 20, 2024 the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion and vacated the prior orders that had granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants except the now-dissolved former wholly-owned

subsidiary alleged to have employed the individuals who allegedly violated RESPA. The Court also allowed Plaintiffs additional discovery. The Company and ESSA B&T will continue to vigorously defend against Plaintiffs’ allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial.

On May 29, 2020, the Company and ESSA B&T were named as defendants in a second action commenced by three plaintiffs who also sought to pursue the action as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated. The plaintiffs allege that a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a bankpreviously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks from a different title company than the one involved in the previously discussed litigation in the process of making loans. The original complaint alleged violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Sherman Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). The plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on September 30, 2020 that dropped the RICO claim, but they are continuing to pursue the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Sherman Act claims. The defendants moved to dismiss the Sherman Act claim on October 14, 2020, and that motion was denied on April 2, 2021. On March 13, 2023 the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Discovery is now complete. . The Company and ESSA B&T intend to vigorously defend against plaintiffs’ allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial.

On February 21, 2025, the Company and ESSA B&T were named as defendants in an action commenced by a plaintiff who had previously been a member of the class of plaintiffs in the first lawsuit described in this Item. As a result of that Court’s subsequent ruling re-defining that class, the plaintiff in this action no longer met the Court-ordered definition for the class membership. The plaintiff alleges that a now-dissolved former wholly-owned subsidiary of a bank previously acquired by the Company received unearned fees and kickbacks, and that he was charged an incorrect title insurance premium in connection with the process of making his loan, allegedly violating the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. The plaintiff also seeks to pursue the action as a class action on behalf of the entire class of people similarly situated to him. The Company has not yet been served with the Complaint. The Company and ESSA B&T intend to vigorously defend against plaintiff’s allegations. To the extent that this matter could result in exposure to the Company and/or ESSA B&T, the amount or range of such exposure is not currently estimable but could be substantial.

ESSA Bancorp, Inc. 10-Q