Consumer Fraud

Zillow Allegedly Charging Illegal 'Junk' Fee on Online Rent Payments

Zillow Allegedly Charging Illegal 'Junk' Fee on Online Rent Payments — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Case Overview

Sara Nour initiated a class action lawsuit against Zillow Group Inc., alleging that the company imposes an illegal transaction fee when tenants make rent payments via its Zillow Rental Manager service. The complaint states that this fee appears at the final stage of the checkout process and that Zillow fails to provide clear disclosure on how to eliminate this charge, which the plaintiff argues is prohibited by residential leases.

The lawsuit contends that this transaction fee functions as a profit generator with no added value to the consumer. Furthermore, the allegations include that Zillow unjustly enriched itself, committed tortious interference with contracts, and violated several consumer protection statutes, including the Washington Consumer Protection Act and the Washington, D.C., Consumer Protection Procedures Act.

The lawsuit is currently filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Affected consumers who were charged this fee can participate in the class action. The plaintiff is represented by Sophia G. Gold and Jeffrey D. Kaliel of KalielGold PLLC and Melissa S. Weiner and Ryan T. Gott of Pearson Warshaw LLP.

,

Who May Qualify

Consumers who were charged a transaction fee by Zillow when making a rent payment through its online portal.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core allegation in the Zillow class action?

The lawsuit alleges that Zillow charges an illegal 'junk' fee when consumers pay rent through its Zillow Rental Manager service. The plaintiff claims this fee is unexpected and is added at the last step of the checkout process without proper disclosure.

What laws does the lawsuit claim Zillow violated?

The allegations state that Zillow violated the Washington Consumer Protection Act, the Washington, D.C., Consumer Protection Procedures Act, and various state consumer protection statutes, among other claims.

Who is representing the plaintiff in this case?

The plaintiff is represented by Sophia G. Gold and Jeffrey D. Kaliel of KalielGold PLLC, alongside Melissa S. Weiner and Ryan T. Gott of Pearson Warshaw LLP.

Related Cases

Meta Accused of Profiting from Scam Cryptocurrency Ads — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Meta Accused of Profiting from Scam Cryptocurrency Ads

Current
Consumer Fraud
A class action lawsuit alleges that Meta profits from fraudulent cryptocurrency advertisements running on its Facebook and Instagram platforms. The plaintiffs claim Meta is aware of these scams but fails to take adequate action to stop them.
Meta and Luxottica Allegedly Violate Right to Repair Law — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Meta and Luxottica Allegedly Violate Right to Repair Law

Current
Consumer Fraud
A repair shop filed a lawsuit alleging that Meta and Luxottica violated Colorado's right to repair law concerning Meta smart glasses. The plaintiff claims the companies failed to provide necessary repair materials, thereby limiting consumer repair options. The lawsuit seeks court orders for materials and compensation for lost business revenue.
Spectrum Internet and TV Price Increase Investigation — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Spectrum Internet and TV Price Increase Investigation

Current
Consumer Fraud
This investigation concerns allegations that Spectrum, operated by Charter Communications, engaged in deceptive pricing practices regarding Internet and TV services. Customers who experienced unexpected price hikes during fixed-rate promotional periods may be able to seek compensation for these overcharges.