In yet another of the seemingly endless legal actions filed within the real estate industry over the past few years, this time it was Homie Technologies on Aug. 22 filing an antitrust lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Utah, claiming the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) and other companies “conspired” to prevent innovation and boycott low-commission listings.
The lawsuit claims that Homie, a Utah-based flat-fee firm that emerged as a “disruptor” in 2015, suffered from “express and tacit boycotts” that involved real estate companies “steering buyers away from” its listings, and used as evidence texts proving its point (below).
Other firms named as defendants in the lawsuit are RE/MAX, Anywhere Real Estate, Keller Williams Realty and HomeServices of America, as well as Utah-based Wasatch Front Regional MLS.
On Homie’s website was this statement concerning the lawsuit:
“Homie was founded on the belief that homeownership should be accessible and fair for everyone and since 2015, Homie has saved consumers $140 million in commissions. Our fight is about so much more than savings – It’s about every homebuyer and seller who’s had to endure a system that puts profits over people. By shining a light on these unjust practices, we’re not just hoping for change—we’re demanding it. We envision a real estate industry where fairness and equity are the standards, not the exceptions. We’re committed to building a future where the real estate market works for everyone, not just a privileged few.”
While Homie began as a flat-fee real estate company, it added mortgage lending to its offering in 2017, and now also offers title insurance and homeowners insurance. In its complaint, Homie states that:
“Homie brings this action to recover the damages it suffered as another victim of the Defendants’ conspiracy—damages suffered as an excluded competitor foreclosed by the Defendants’ conduct from effective competition in the relevant market. Had Homie been allowed to compete with Defendants and their co-conspirators, it would have gained market share at Defendants’ expense while posing a competitive check on Defendants’ ability to charge exorbitant prices for brokerage services to consumers. By excluding Homie and other new entrants, Defendants, in a single stroke, harmed competition, harmed consumers, and caused injury and damages to Homie.”
Homie is the latest plaintiff to take aim at NAR rules surrounding MLS access. Earlier this month, two Michigan brokers and one agent filed a lawsuit in federal court that seeks to certify a class of brokers and agents, and claims that the NAR settlement specifically made REALTOR® membership and MLS access less valuable.
Homie echoes a similar grievance in its complaint, adding that the NAR rules governing MLSs prevent alternative real estate models from competing. “Defendants’ conspiracy involved the creation of a market structure that facilitated boycotts of new entrants, such as Homie, by incumbent real estate brokerages,” reads the filing. “The terms of this conspiracy were contained in NAR rules that govern access to the MLS. NAR allowed brokers representing home sellers and home buyers to use NAR’s MLSs only if those brokers agreed to adhere to and help implement terms that significantly restrain competition. Thus, innovative entrants, seeking to compete on price and other terms of service attractive to home sellers or home buyers, have been stymied by traditional real estate brokers who acted in concert through the MLS to promulgate a web of rules and practices that created substantial barriers to competition.”
Homie, in its filing, also included brokerage texts it found as evidence:
“For example, during the period that the Buyer-Broker Compensation Rule was in effect,” it wrote, “Homie received the following messages in the comment field of WFRMLS, messages which vividly illustrate the exclusionary steering facilitated by NAR’s Exclusionary Rules and Policies:
• “If you up the commission, I will bring my buyers. If not, I will not. It’s a disservice
to your client. Please educate them. Please let them know that. I truly have a buyer
that would possible buy this house. I won’t show it until the commission is
raised.”
• “Put a unit number and better directions on the listing. And. Get a key for the
supra box. And bac at 3%.”
• “I’m sure it would sell if you changed the BAC to 3%.”
• “aise Commission to 3%”
The Homie lawsuit extends beyond NAR, however, alleging that the large real estate firms named in the lawsuit used “their franchise agreements, employee policies and procedures manuals, and their leadership roles in NAR and local realtor associations—to require brokers in local residential real estate markets to adhere to NAR’s rules…and thereby helped implement and enforce the conspiracy. The Corporate Defendants further implemented the conspiracy alleged herein by reviewing and reissuing NAR’s rules, including the rules at issue in this case, at yearly NAR meetings and by serving on the boards and committees of NAR and of NAR’s state and local associations in Utah and across the country, including the Utah Association of Realtors (“UAR”) and local realtor boards throughout Utah, which implement and enforce compliance with NAR’s rules.”
This latest lawsuit filing by Homie harkens back to antitrust claims made by REX against NAR and Zillow, which were dismissed in 2023 by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas S. Zilly after finding that REX did not adequately make its case that both entities conspired to steer buyers away from non-NAR-connected listings on Zillow’s website.
Homie is demanding a jury trial, seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief.
This is a developing story. Stay tuned to RISMedia for updates.
