Wells Fargo (WFC) has had quite the year. Most notably, the bank had what may be the largest scandal since the financial crisis—and one that is even riper for uprooting customer loyalty and trust.

To recap, the bank created up to 2 million accounts for its customers without their permission. It bears repeating: The country’s third-largest bank by customer assets perpetrated identity theft, found out, and did nothing, potentially hurting its customers’ credit in the process.

Despite its tarnished image, investors in the San Francisco-based bank have made out alright. The company’s stock has jumped 23% since the election—along with the banking sector in general—recouping its 2016 losses. (The KBW Bank Index (BKX), which tracks large US national and regional banks, is up over 20% since Election Day.)

With the stock doing well and a new CEO installed after the dismissal and clawbacks from disgraced John Stumpf, the new year could start out relatively well for the bank. But there are two major things Wells Fargo needs to do if it’s going to succeed in 2017.

Fix that stress test

At the top of Wells Fargo’s list is complying with one simple requirement: Don’t be Too Big To Fail. This week US regulators announced that the bank had failed its “living will,” a test that the largest banks must undergo to prove that if a calamity happened in the financial markets, the bank could handle its bankruptcy and liquidate assets in an orderly way. For the second time this year, Wells Fargo failed this test, and now it has limits on its growth.

Think of its customers for once

Passing stress tests and living will plans might be above any other priorities at Wells Fargo right now, but the bank ought to focus on another priority in the coming year—which is perhaps the only one that will provide it with long-term stability: put customers first.

This month, The New York Times reported that the bank has been asking judges to kill lawsuits regarding the fake account scandals and send them to arbitration instead, a non-public process.

Wells Fargo is arguing that the arbitration agreements customers made with the bank when they signed up for their legit accounts apply to the fake ones that were created without their permission—and those agreements remove the right to sue.

The move shows a new level of customer hostility from the bank. Binding consumers to arbitration for a product they sign up for is different from binding them to arbitration for a product they are given illegally and without their knowledge or consent.

If this represents the post-scandal Wells Fargo, it won’t bode well for the bank’s consumer retention or new accounts. While it’s bad from a customer point of view, common sense shows this is no recipe for keeping deposits and credit cards applications up. Should those numbers deteriorate, the bank would have to resort to other means to keep cash in the coffers. Some of those tactics, like offering generous interest rates on savings accounts, are costly.

Unless it changes its attitude, Wells Fargo could become a study in whether a bank will in fact get bitten in the rear if it scorns customers. Similarly, Wells Fargo’s behavior has harmed some of its relationships with state governments—California suspended ties—and other businesses. Earlier this week, Prudential suspended Wells Fargo from selling its life insurance policies, pending an investigation of problematic sales tactics. With other, more consumer-friendly banks out there—that also offer higher interest rates on deposits—Wells Fargo may simply be giving consumers the kick in the pants they need to leave.

Correction 12/16: 2 million accounts were not confirmed as fradulent; up to 2 million may have been.

Ethan Wolff-Mann is a writer at Yahoo Finance focusing on consumerism, tech, and personal finance. Follow him on Twitter @ewolffmann.

Read more:

What will change for your finances in 2017

The most efficient way to give to charity

GOP introduces plan to massively cut Social Security

Here’s what happens when you give cash to the extremely poor

The real solution to the Carrier jobs fiasco was under Trump’s nose the whole time