The Zillow Preferred lawsuit is an antitrust case brought by agents, Dupuis v. Zillow, alleging that Zillow ties the buyer leads it sends Preferred (formerly Flex) agents to how many of those buyers get pre-approved with Zillow Home Loans. On September 28, 2026, a federal judge in Seattle refused to dismiss it. Nothing has been proven, and Zillow denies the claims. For a Michigan team on Preferred, the ruling is a prompt to check three things now: how the lender conversation with each buyer is recorded, whether any value moving around that conversation would pass Michigan's Rule 321 and RESPA, and how much of the pipeline depends on one portal.
In short
- Judge James L. Robart denied Zillow's motion to dismiss on September 28, 2026 (Real Estate News, 2026).
- The proposed class: every U.S. agent enrolled in Preferred or Flex since January 16, 2022 (Real Estate News, 2026).
- The complaint alleges Preferred referral fees of up to 40% of the agent's commission, against a typical 25% (HousingWire, 2026).
- A separate consumer RESPA case was dismissed on July 27, 2026, with leave to amend by August 17 (Real Estate News, 2026).
What the court decided on September 28, and what it did not
A motion to dismiss asks whether the complaint, taken as true, states a claim. Judge Robart of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington said it does. According to Real Estate News, the plaintiff, Stephanie Dupuis, alleges "the number and quality of client connections Zillow provides its Preferred (formerly Flex) agents depends on the number of Zillow Home Loans pre-approvals an agent is able to secure," and that Zillow tracks the metric through its Follow Up Boss system. The judge wrote that Zillow's "contention that it is not 'unfair' to expect agents to hit target metrics ignores the direct business harms detailed in the complaint."
That is not a finding that Zillow did anything wrong. Zillow's response: "Buyers on Zillow are always in control of which agent and lender they work with," and it will "vigorously defend ourselves." The case now moves toward discovery.
The class is proposed, not certified. As filed, it covers all U.S. residents who between January 16, 2022 and the filing date "are or were enrolled in Zillow Group's Preferred or Flex Agent programs." A Michigan agent enrolled in that window is inside the definition as written. Nothing is required of a potential class member today.
Two Zillow cases, two different outcomes
The headlines run them together. They are different cases.
| Case | Who sued | Claim | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dupuis v. Zillow | A team leader, for agents | Antitrust: leads tied to Zillow Home Loans pre-approvals | Motion to dismiss denied, September 28, 2026 |
| Taylor (with Armstrong) | Consumers | RESPA and RICO | Dismissed July 27, 2026; leave to amend by August 17 |
In the consumer case, the same judge found the plaintiffs "lack statutory standing" because they "did not directly pay for the contested settlement services," and wrote that "in light of Zillow's explicit disclosures, consumers had notice of the challenged conduct." Real Estate News reported on September 29 that Zillow has asked for dismissal again after the amended complaint.
The point for an agent: a court has not said Zillow's program breaks RESPA. It has said agents may pursue an antitrust claim about it.
The Michigan and federal rules that apply whatever the case decides
RESPA Section 8. Regulation X, 12 CFR 1024.14(b): "No person shall give and no person shall accept any fee, kickback or other thing of value pursuant to any agreement or understanding, oral or otherwise, that business incident to or part of a settlement service involving a federally related mortgage loan shall be referred to any person." Payments under cooperative brokerage and referral arrangements between agents and brokers are exempt. A thing of value from a lender for steering a buyer is not.
Michigan Rule 321. A licensee earning a commission on the sale may not also take a referral fee or other valuable consideration for placing the loan "unless the licensee obtains the prior written consent of the buyer and seller," and the fee is not otherwise barred by RESPA. The second half of the rule applies the same test to title, warranty and other settlement-service providers, with written consent from the party the agent represents.
Neither rule is new. The lawsuit simply puts buyer-lender introductions under a brighter light, and Michigan's written-consent requirement means a missing record is a problem in its own right.
What a Michigan team on Zillow Preferred should check now
- Read your current Preferred agreement and save a copy. Note the referral fee terms, any performance or pre-approval metrics and the date you accepted each version. If you are ever part of the class, or ever asked by a broker, the documents that governed you at the time matter.
- Keep the emails and dashboards that rate you. If your connection volume or rating has moved, keep the record of when and what you were told. Export it; do not rely on the platform keeping it for you.
- Offer every buyer more than one lender, and note it. Give the buyer at least two lender options, in writing, and record which one they chose and when. That note is the plainest evidence that the choice was theirs.
- Check whether anything of value follows a lender introduction. Leads, rating points, co-marketing, gifts. If something of value moves because a buyer used a particular lender, read RESPA Section 8 and Rule 321 with your managing broker before the next deal, not after.
- Get written consent where Rule 321 requires it. If you receive any compensation connected to the loan or another settlement service, the rule needs prior written consent from the buyer and seller, or the party you represent for other services. "They knew" is not written consent.
- Measure how much of your business is rented. Count last year's closings by source. If one portal supplied most of them at a referral fee of up to 40% of commission, as the complaint alleges for Preferred, every change to that program is a change to your income. Your own past clients and your own website are the leads nobody can re-rate.
- Ask your managing broker, or a lawyer, about the class. Whether to stay in a class, opt out or do nothing is a legal decision. It is not one to make from a news article, including this one.
The mistake most teams make at step 3
They assume a pre-approval letter in the file shows the buyer chose. It shows a lender issued a letter. It does not show the buyer was offered another, or that the choice came before the showing schedule depended on it. Record the options offered and the buyer's answer, in the buyer's own words where you can, on the day.
Where we fit
Our real estate work and lead follow-up answer every inquiry from every source in one queue, qualify in conversation and write each step back to your CRM, where a note of the lender options a buyer was offered can sit beside the conversation. It is operational documentation, not a legal determination. For the other side of the buyer's finance this autumn, see what a Fed rate move means for buyers under contract and VantageScore 4.0 on Michigan preapprovals.
The case will take years. The record of each buyer's lender choice takes a minute, and it is yours either way.
