Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →On January 7, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice and state co-plaintiffs added six large landlord groups to their antitrust case against RealPage. The plaintiffs allege that landlords shared sensitive information and used RealPage pricing software in ways that weakened competition and helped keep rents high. Those remain allegations, not findings of liability. As of October 2, 2026, state officials said dismissal efforts had been denied and litigation continued, while separate settlements and a proposed consent decree affected some defendants.
Who DOJ added to the RealPage case
The amended complaint named six landlord groups: Greystar Real Estate Partners LLC; LivCor LLC, an affiliate of Blackstone; Camden Property Trust; Cushman & Wakefield Inc. and Pinnacle Property Management Services LLC; Willow Bridge Property Company LLC; and Cortland Management LLC. The filing expanded an existing case against RealPage. DOJ’s January 7, 2025 announcement described the action and allegations (DOJ announcement).
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
California Landlord's Law Book, The: Rights & Responsibilities | $34.88 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
The California Landlord's Law Book: Evictions: Evictions | $42.73 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Every Landlord's Legal Guide | $35.41 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
First-Time Landlord: Your Guide to Renting out a Single-Family Home | $21.12 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
California Tenants' Rights | $22.16 | Buy on Amazon |
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
DOJ said the landlord groups collectively operated more than 1.3 million rental units across 43 states and the District of Columbia. Colorado’s same-day announcement gave a different state count: more than 1.3 million units in 44 states and the District. The releases do not explain the discrepancy, so the counts should remain attributed rather than combined. DOJ also said Cortland managed more than 80,000 units in 13 states.
Recommended Free Tools
What the plaintiffs say the landlords and RealPage did
The complaint alleges a system involving both shared data and coordinated use of pricing software—not an algorithm mechanically setting every rent. According to DOJ and state summaries, participating landlords supplied nonpublic information to RealPage’s revenue-management software, which generated rent recommendations. Plaintiffs contend that exchanges among competitors and practices around following those recommendations undermined independent pricing decisions.
#1 Best Overall
Information described in the allegations
- Rental rates, lease terms, occupancy, and discounts.
- Renewal rates, concessions, upcoming vacancies, and pricing strategies.
- Information shared through direct communications, “call arounds,” RealPage-hosted user groups, and discussions about software settings.
DOJ’s account also cites conversations about rents, occupancy, renewal rates, concessions, pricing plans, acceptance of recommendations, and auto-accept settings. The plaintiffs allege these practices reduced competition; the allegations have not, by themselves, established that any defendant violated the law.
The legal claims
The plaintiffs’ legal theory includes claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act alleging that competitors stopped making pricing decisions independently, as well as Section 2 monopolization claims against RealPage and claims under state law. These are the plaintiffs’ claims, not a final ruling on liability.
What has happened since the amended complaint
As of October 2, 2026, California and North Carolina officials said a federal court had rejected efforts by RealPage and landlord defendants to dismiss the case, allowing litigation to continue. A denial of dismissal is a procedural decision; it is not a determination that the allegations are true.
Procedural outcomes differ by defendant and jurisdiction. DOJ’s September 4, 2026 announcement described federal enforcement settlements involving RealPage, Cortland, Greystar, LivCor, and Willow Bridge, and a proposed consent decree for Pinnacle. The decree would restrict certain uses of algorithms and competitor data sharing, among other provisions, but it was proposed and subject to court review in that announcement. A proposed decree is not the same as an approved final judgment.
Rank #3
| Defendant or group | Federal DOJ update, September 4, 2026 | State updates, October 2, 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| RealPage | DOJ reported a settlement. | California said its claims against RealPage remained ongoing. |
| LivCor | DOJ reported a settlement. | California reported a $7 million settlement; North Carolina also described a settlement in its participation. |
| Greystar | DOJ reported a settlement. | California and North Carolina described settlements in their proceedings. |
| Cortland | DOJ reported a settlement. | North Carolina described a settlement in its participation. |
| Willow Bridge | DOJ reported a settlement. | California said claims remained ongoing in its case. |
| Pinnacle | DOJ announced a proposed consent decree, subject to court review. | California said claims remained ongoing in its case. |
| Camden | Not identified as part of the settlements or proposed decree in DOJ’s September 4 announcement. | California said claims remained ongoing in its case. |
The table reflects the cited agencies’ descriptions at those dates; a settlement in one proceeding should not be read as resolving every claim brought by every state. California’s October 2 update said its coalition had settled with LivCor for $7 million and with Greystar, while claims against Camden, Pinnacle, Willow Bridge, and RealPage remained ongoing in its case. North Carolina’s update described settlements with LivCor, Greystar, and Cortland in its participation.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Why the case matters to renters
The case concerns how landlords set prices and whether exchanging competitors’ nonpublic data through a shared pricing system can undermine competition. For a renter, the complaint does not establish that a particular apartment’s rent was raised by RealPage, or that all landlords using pricing software acted unlawfully. The central question for the court is whether the conduct alleged by the plaintiffs violated antitrust law.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
