Within the movement to dismiss, Zillow claimed the plaintiffs failed to supply proof of shopper deception, inflated fee prices or that Flex brokers compelled patrons to get Zillow Dwelling Loans.
Zillow has filed a movement to dismiss a class-action lawsuit that claims its Zillow Flex and Zillow Dwelling Loans packages violate state and federal shopper safety legal guidelines.
“In a movement filed February 20 within the U.S. District Courtroom for the Western District of Washington, Zillow argues that, regardless of the plaintiffs’ newest 100‑web page criticism, their claims lack substance and fall in need of the authorized requirements required to maneuver ahead,” the corporate stated in a weblog publish. “That is the Plaintiffs’ fourth iteration of their criticism. Zillow’s movement argues that, even in any case of plaintiffs’ rewrites to amend and refine their claims, they nonetheless don’t sufficiently plead a single declare in opposition to Zillow.”
The preliminary criticism, which was filed in September 2025, centered on the portal’s Flex referral program. The plaintiffs claimed Zillow wasn’t forthcoming with shoppers in regards to the referral course of, which incorporates connecting patrons with Flex brokers, who pay a 40 p.c referral charge. That charge, they stated, is handed all the way down to shoppers via inflated commissions, in violation of the Washington Shopper Safety Act.
The criticism was expanded in November to incorporate Zillow Dwelling Loans, with plaintiffs alleging that the portal forces Flex members to push its mortgage product on homebuyers, which might violate the Actual Property Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). Additionally they added a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) depend to account for brokerages’ participation in Zillow’s alleged scheme to inflate shopper prices.
Nonetheless, Zillow stated the class-action criticism is predicated on a “nonsensical” chain of occasions, together with homebuyers believing they’re being linked with the itemizing agent, regardless of having signed a touring settlement and a purchaser dealer settlement. And if a homebuyer needed to contact the itemizing agent, the portal stated that info is “available” on every itemizing web page. In relation to allegedly inflated commissions, Zillow stated that’s purely hypothetical.
“Plaintiffs speculate that, as a result of their brokers paid a portion of their fee to Zillow, the brokers should have demanded a better fee charge than an unidentified hypothetical agent who didn’t contract with Zillow,” the courtroom paperwork learn. “Primarily based on this assumption, Plaintiffs additional speculate that they should have paid extra for his or her houses than if that they had used brokers who didn’t promote with Zillow.”
“Plaintiffs don’t cite a single reality in help of any of those assumptions,” it added. “For instance, Plaintiffs don’t allege that they even tried to barter their brokers’ fee charges, not to mention any communications exhibiting that the brokers rebuffed their efforts. As a substitute, they fatally allege that the customer’s fee is paid by the vendor and pre-determined earlier than a purchaser’s agent is even concerned within the transaction.”
Concerning Zillow Dwelling Loans, the portal stated pre-approval letters aren’t “settlement providers” beneath RESPA and famous that a number of plaintiffs selected lenders apart from ZHL.
“Solely three different Plaintiffs allege any contact with ZHL, and Plaintiff Armstrong is the one one who obtained a pre-approval letter and a mortgage mortgage from ZHL,” courtroom paperwork learn. “Plaintiff Brucaliere’s agent instructed a ZHL mortgage, however she ‘declined as a result of she needed to make use of USAA.’ And Plaintiff Liao doesn’t allege his agent instructed or inspired him to make use of ZHL, makes no allegations as to why he selected ZHL over different lenders, and used ZHL to finance a purchase order on February 12, 2021, earlier than brokers allegedly started receiving incentives round ZHL pre-approval metrics ‘in or round 2022.’”
Zillow additionally raised statute-of-limitations points for six of the 11 plaintiffs and bit again on the RICO depend added in November, saying the plaintiffs failed to supply “particular allegations relating to use of mails or wires.”
“The claims on this lawsuit are false and essentially mischaracterize how our enterprise operates,” a Zillow spokesperson stated on Friday. “Zillow is constructed round empowering shoppers with info and selection, and our packages mirror that dedication.”
“Via trusted native brokers, clear accountability and instruments, we work with companions to assist patrons perceive what they will afford and ship sturdy outcomes for shoppers whereas making certain they continue to be in management at each step,” they added. “We stand by our enterprise mannequin, and we are going to vigorously defend in opposition to these meritless allegations.”
The portal nonetheless has one other class-action lawsuit filed within the Washington District Courtroom over Zillow Dwelling Loans’ pre-approval quotas for Premier Brokers.
Learn the total submitting beneath:
E-mail Marian McPherson
