Yes, it is the fee disparity that concerns the examiners. If I recall what started the issue was the fact that some lenders were found to be charging a discounted credit report fee to married, joint applicants, but not giving a similar discount for unmarried joint applicants, charging each for the higher cost of an individual report.

Possibly incorrect - Lenders were charging what credit bureaus were charging them. Since many unmarried joint applicants lived a different addresses, a joint report could not be pulled, so banks had to pull two individual reports. Two individual reports cost more than a joint report (but not much). Despite the fact that the banks were charging only their costs, the regulators were making a case that the unmarried joint borrowers were disadvantaged because they had to pay more. [A common example was a joint report at $18 and individual credit reports at $10 each.]

IMHO, I do not believe that the cites were the intent of the law, however in the current environment, it became the norm.