DOJ accuses landlords of collusion to raise rents

Lesley • January 13, 2025

DOJ accuses landlords of collusion to raise rents

Landlords are accused of colluding to raise rents. See where.


By Alyssa Fowers, Szu Yu, Chen, Steven Rich, and Rachel Lerman 

January 8, 2025

 

Millions of rents across the United States may now be set using one company’s algorithmic software, according to a federal lawsuit and a Washington Post analysis.


RealPage, a property management software company, uses a trove of data to suggest rental prices to landlords. The software has been widely adopted by property managers — and is now facing strenuous legal pushback.


Over the past three years, the company has been sued by the federal government, which alleged in August that it unlawfully decreases competition among landlords; by several individuals; and by the governments of Arizona and D.C., which have accused RealPage and dozens of property management companies of colluding to raise prices.


On Tuesday, the Justice Department expanded its suit to sue six large landlords, which it says operate in 43 states and D.C.

To assess how widespread use of RealPage’s rent software may be, The Post identified 3.1 million market-rate rental units managed by companies named in the lawsuits. That analysis found 10 counties where more than 1 in 3 multifamily units are managed by a property company allegedly using a rent-setting program from RealPage.


Access to competitors’ rental data is at the center of the legal battles against RealPage. The Justice Department alleges landlords provide private rental data to RealPage, which uses its technology to train the company’s pricing algorithm and make suggestions to landlords on what to charge.


“These recommendations are based on the sensitive information of their rivals,” the suit states.


One landlord using RealPage revenue management technology started increasing rents within a week of using the program, raising prices more than 25 percent in 11 months, according to the suit.


In a video on its site, RealPage said it helps properties “exceed the market” by 2 to 5 percent in revenue. But the company has said that its software — the latest version of which is called AI Revenue Management, or AIRM — does not let clients see competitors’ specific rents and that its “price recommendations are based primarily on the subject property’s own internal supply and demand data.”


RealPage said about 600 customers use its revenue management software for more than 4.5 million residential units. RealPage declined to provide their locations, citing customer confidentiality, and said The Post’s map would be “highly inaccurate” without that confidential data.


Among property management companies named in the lawsuits, some have stopped using the software, RealPage said, while others do not use it at all their properties. In court filings, the defendant property management companies have broadly denied allegations of collusion.


The lawsuits indicate that use of RealPage’s software is widespread: They list more than 50 property management companies, including some of the largest in the country, as customers of at least one of three RealPage rent-recommending programs.

Nationwide, the named companies manage at least 12 percent of all multifamily housing units, a Post analysis found, often concentrated in areas that have seen recent building booms. Of units built since 2020, more than 70 percent are managed by alleged clients of RealPage’s rent-setting software.


In the region around D.C., the first government to file suit against RealPage, about 24 percent of multifamily units are managed by companies alleged to have used RealPage’s rent software.


These buildings are often new high-rises chock-full of amenities. In just one square mile of Washington’s Navy Yard neighborhood, for example, where an onslaught of development has sent rents soaring, 22 buildings are managed by companies named in the suits, according to The Post’s analysis.


Rent prices in D.C. increased 1.6 percent from June 2023 to June 2024, and are up more than 10 percent from their pre-pandemic levels.


In its lawsuit, D.C. alleges that RealPage and property management companies used the software to “inflate rents for tens of thousands of apartments across the District, causing District renters to pay millions of dollars they would not have.”

In one case, the D.C. lawsuit alleges, RealPage sent a monthly report in 2022 to property management company WC Smith, stating the company was able to increase revenue per unit by 4.6 percent.



RealPage has disputed that its technology is designed to raise prices, saying it is intended to adjust prices based on supply and demand, and it recommends both price increases and decreases. RealPage also argued that rent increases have been lower in the areas of Maryland and DC where use of its software is more prevalent.


By lesley.palmiter June 6, 2025
Is it time to wave goodbye to home inspections as a negotiation tool? New state law says real estate agents can’t discuss such contingencies with buyers, sellers. By Jim Morrison Globe Correspondent, Updated June 6, 2025 For years now, home buyers in this super-competitive real estate market have felt pressured to waive their right to a home inspection when making an offer, knowing at least some competing buyers will likely do the same. A new state law aimed at eliminating that contention has agents and brokers talking. Implementation of the new regulations has been extended to Oct. 15, and includes language barring any contract provisions from frustrating the purpose of the home inspection, including “unreasonably limiting a prospective purchaser’s ability to schedule, receive, and review a home inspection.” If the inspection reveals the need for expensive repairs, the buyer can proceed, renegotiate the contract, or simply walk away from the deal. Without an inspection, the buyer doesn’t know exactly what they’re getting until after they own it and have no other option but to foot the repair bill themselves. Advertisement In recent years, some home buyers who waived their home inspection contingencies have discovered surprising and sometimes expensive repairs after the sale. Morgan Cohen, owner of the home inspection firm MKC Associates based in Watertown, said he’s done post-purchase inspections for homeowners who waived their right to have their house inspected before they bought and later regretted it. “We’ve done post-purchase inspections where we’ve found [dangerous] knob and tube wiring and others with underground oil tanks,” he said. “One of my colleagues inspected a house that was clearly built on a concrete foundation that contained pyrrhotite [which can cause concrete to fail]. A year after the owner purchased the home, he had it inspected and found out the foundation was crumbling and needed to be rebuilt.” Presumably, if those homes had been inspected prior to purchase, an inspector would have flagged them. The buyer could then have withdrawn the offer or negotiated a price that reflected the need for vital, expensive repairs. A contingent from the New England Chapter of the American Society of Home Inspection reached out to state Senator, Michael Moore, of Millbury for help. Moore has seen firsthand what can happen to families who unknowingly buy homes with dangerous and expensive flaws. His Central Mass. district around Worcester is home to a small but still growing number of homes with crumbling concrete foundations that contain pyrrhotite. The concrete looks fine at first, but over decades, cracks and spalls develop and eventually, the foundation becomes unsafe and must be replaced, costing homeowners $100,000 to $250,000 or more. Moore proposed a bill that was folded into the Massachusetts’ Affordable Homes Act that was signed into law in 2024. “The inspectors approached me with concerns that home buyers felt pressure to sacrifice their home inspection, and we talked about the liability that someone could incur by not having the home inspection,” Moore said. “I’m happy that the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities established some regulations that the home inspectors are happy with. This is going to benefit potential homeowners. It will protect their quality of life and their future financial security.” While home buyer advocates applaud the intention of the law — to level the playing field in what has been a years-long seller’s market because of lack of inventory — one concern that came up in every interview for this story was the difficulty to enforce it. A buyer’s agent could find a way to communicate that their client will forgo an inspection if their offer is accepted. As long as nothing is in writing, who would know? “We’ve seen our veteran and first-time home buyer clients get shut out of the market for almost a decade because of inspection contingencies. It’s a huge problem, so I’m all for this change,” said attorney Scott Kriss of Kriss Law / Atlantic Closing and Escrow, which is based in Needham but has offices nationwide. “It always comes down to the policing of the law. It’s going to be very hard to say, ‘You only took this offer because you knew they’d waive the inspection.’ Well, how do you know that? How’s it going to be enforced?” There are consequences for agents found violating the new law. The regulations read, “A violation or failure to comply with the provisions of 760 CMR 74.03 shall constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of trade or commerce under M.G.L. c. 93A, [Section] 2, if undertaken by a Person acting in a business context, such as a Real Estate Salesperson or Real Estate Broker.”  Agents and brokers found violating Chapter 93A can be liable for triple the cost of the actual damages. “At least it’ll put agents in the mindset,” Kriss said. “They can’t lead with, ‘We’re only taking offers with no inspections.’ And whether that will happen or not, they’re going to be in the frame of mind that this is something that they can’t do.”
By Lesley.Palmiter March 26, 2025
Here are several options to do just that.
More Posts