The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Tuesday that it has filed an amended complaint in its lawsuit against RealPage, a software company, and six of the nation’s largest landlords, accusing them of engaging in anti-competitive practices through algorithmic pricing schemes that have harmed millions of renters.
The DOJ claims that RealPage and the landlords used pricing algorithms to coordinate rent increases and suppress competition in the housing market. The landlords implicated in the lawsuit include:
- Greystar Real Estate Partners LLC
- Blackstone’s LivCor LLC
- Camden Property Trust
- Cushman & Wakefield Inc.
- Pinnacle Property Management Services LLC
- Willow Bridge Property Company LLC
- Cortland Management LLC
Together, these companies manage more than 1.3 million rental units across 43 states and Washington, D.C.
The complaint alleges that the landlords used RealPage’s pricing algorithms to set rents based on competitors’ sensitive data, thereby reducing competition. The DOJ also outlined other methods of coordination, including:
- Direct communication among senior managers about rents, occupancy, and pricing strategies.
- “Call arounds” where property managers contacted competitors to share sensitive rent and pricing information.
- Participation in RealPage-hosted “user groups” to discuss pricing methodology and strategies.
- The DOJ argues that this alleged collusion inflated rents and limited competition, disproportionately affecting renters across the country.
The DOJ also filed a proposed consent decree with Cortland Management LLC. The decree requires Cortland to:
- Cease using its competitors’ data to set rental prices.
- Stop employing the same pricing algorithm as competitors without a corporate monitor.
- Cooperate fully with the government’s investigation.
The DOJ emphasized that these practices undermine fair market competition, leading to artificially high rents. The amended complaint seeks to hold both RealPage and the landlords accountable for their alleged violations of antitrust laws.
This case underscores the growing scrutiny over the use of algorithms and data-sharing in industries where competition is essential to consumer welfare.
