Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community, and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

Zillow Rentals is making an upgrade to its platform with EliseAI, an artificial-intelligence-powered chatbot that will answer renters’ questions and schedule tours. Conversations with EliseAI will be saved to the Zillow Renter Hub so users can review previous conversations with Elise throughout their rental search.

EliseAI, which is a third-party platform that provides artificial intelligence solutions for housing and healthcare companies, will be integrated into Zillow Rentals by the end of the third quarter, according to an announcement Tuesday.

“We want to make it even easier for renters on Zillow to get the information they need right when they need it, something no other rental marketplace is doing today,” Zillow Rentals SVP Michael Sherman said. “It’ll be a smarter, faster experience for renters and a more efficient way for property marketers to connect with serious leads.”

For renters, Zillow Rentals said EliseAI will be able to answer key questions about a rental property, including pricing, unit availability, amenities, the application process, and fees, etc. The bot can also schedule tours and send real-time details and reminders to renters.

On the property manager side, EliseAI will answer prospective renters’ questions around the clock and send automatic follow-ups once a renter asks a question or schedules a tour, all of which are managed through the EliseAI portal.

“We’re excited to be working toward a partnership with Zillow that would bring EliseAI’s industry-leading conversational AI to the very place where today’s renters begin their search: the listing itself,” EliseAI Co-Founder and CEO Minna Song said in a prepared statement. “Together we will empower property owners and operators to work more efficiently while giving renters the seamless, on-demand experience they expect.”

Zillow remains bullish on multifamily, with the company saying Zillow Rentals is outpacing its competitors in traffic and listing growth.

During Q1, Zillow’s rentals revenue grew 33 percent year over year to $129 million — an all-time high for that segment.

“We now have the most listings, 2 million active rental listings on Zillow’s rental network,” Zillow CEO Jeremy Wacksman told Inman in May. “And that’s what drives the audience. We actually have the largest rental audience in the country, 37 million unique visitors come to Zillow Rentals. It’s the number one brand preference because it has the most inventory. No one has them all, but we’re trying to get to as many as possible.”

Email Marian McPherson

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community, and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

Amid ongoing challenges in the real estate market, a new report shows that foreclosures ticked down month over month in May, but were up 9 percent compared to the same time last year.

The report, from data firm ATTOM, shows that in May, there were 35,498 properties in the U.S. with foreclosure filings. That amounts to one in every 4,009 housing units with a filing. The report notes that these numbers are down 1 percent compared to April but up 9 percent compared to May of 2024.

Rob Barber, ATTOM’s CEO, described the situation in May as “a mixed picture with fewer starts but a continued rise in completed foreclosures.”

“This suggests that while fewer new defaults are being initiated, lenders may still be working through a backlog of existing cases,” Barber added in the report. “We’ll be watching closely in the months ahead to see how these trends evolve.”

The states with the worst foreclosure rates include Delaware, where one in every 2,313 housing units had a foreclosure filing in May; Florida, at one in every 2,536 housing units; Illinois, at one in every 2,668 housing units; Nevada, at one in every 2,747 housing units; and Indiana, at one in every 2,983 housing units.

The three metro areas with populations over 500,000 and the worst foreclosure rates were all in Florida: Lakeland (one in every 1,506 housing units); Cape Coral (one in every 1,674 housing units); and Jacksonville (one in every 1,888 housing units).

The report also reveals that lenders repossessed 3,844 properties via completed foreclosures in May. That’s up 7 percent compared to April, and up 34 percent relative to the same time last year.

The year-over-year rise in foreclosures comes as the real estate market struggles with years of sluggishness. After a particularly active period during the COVID-19 pandemic, mortgage rates jumped in 2022 and have remained elevated ever since. Higher rates have subsequently translated into slower sales and lower inventory.

However, while foreclosure rates have ticked up during this period of sluggishness and remain elevated compared to the early days of the pandemic, ATTOM data shows that they remain well below rates during the Great Recession.

Email Jim Dalrymple II

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

Over a year after major real estate entities settled antitrust commission litigation, more than 2.5 million people have submitted claims to collect money in the cases.

That’s according to a new quarterly report from JND Legal Administration, the law firm overseeing administrative tasks related to major settlements in cases such as Gibson, Sitzer | Burnett, and others. Among other things, the report — filed in court Monday — reveals that up through this month JND has sent out 100 million emails and 38 million postcards to notify potential homesellers of the settlements.

Additionally, JND began staffing a contact center last July to handle inquiries about the settlements, and since that time has received “over 25,000 calls and 30,000 emails.”

This flurry of reaching out to, and fielding inquiries from, consumers led to the 2.5 million claims, which were submitted both online and via a paper form.

The report further outlines how much JND is making for this work. In total, between January of last year and May of this year the firm has invoiced $32,777,091.15. Of that sum, $5,919,220.72 remains outstanding.

The report includes a chart showing exactly how much JND charged for specific campaigns. For example, JND carried out a mail campaign related to the Gibson settlement beginning in July 2024. This led to nine different invoices, sent between last July and February, the largest of which was for about $6.3 million. That $6.3 million invoice has been paid, though smaller sums totaling about $7,000 remain unpaid.

Antitrust commission lawsuits dominated the real estate industry in recent years, gaining particular attention after a jury sided with homesellers who claimed the National Association of Realtors and major franchisors conspired to inflate consumer costs. The verdict, in the case known as Sitzer | Burnett, led to a series of similar lawsuits that eventually included virtually every major real estate company.

Settlements began pouring in after the jury verdict, and NAR settled in March 2024. The trade organization’s settlement included an agreement to change some rules, as well as the promise to pay $418 million.

Other major settlements included HomeServices of America, which agreed to pay $250 million, Anywhere, at $83.5 million, Keller Williams, at $70 million, Compass, at $57.5 million, and RE/MAX, at $55 million. These settlements alone, along with NAR’s, total more than $900 million. With various additional settlements, the total amount of money available is more than $1 billion, though how much individual consumers get to collect will depend on the total number of claims, as well as the costs of administering the settlements.

Tanya Monestier — a law professor at the University of Buffalo who has objected to the settlements — has argued that the plaintiffs attorneys in the cases could collect $333 million, but that homesellers themselves may only get $20 or $25.

Read JND’s full report on the settlement administration here: 

Email Jim Dalrymple II

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

A California broker is the latest to take on the National Association of Realtors in court with a challenge alleging one of the trade group’s rules is anticompetitive and illegal.

John Diaz, a broker in Modesto, took aim at NAR’s Variable Dues Formula policy, which imposes dues on brokerages for licensees who aren’t Realtors. NAR sets the policy and the state and local organizations enforce it.

Diaz’s complaint listed the Lodi Association of Realtors, Central Valley Association of Realtors, California Association of Realtors and National Association of Realtors as defendants.

“Under VDF, a broker member of the Realtor associations (or the “designated REALTOR® member”) is required to pay dues not only for themselves and their licensed agents, but also for every non-member licensee in their firm, regardless of whether those agents join the Realtor Associations for their area,” the complaint says.

The complaint states that the three organizations provided a valuable service to real estate professionals in the market, “such as key access to listed properties, fillable forms for contacts and disclosures, etc.” 

“However, Defendants also require brokers to pay dues for their licensees who are not members of Defendant associations,” the complaint said, alleging that “this is anti-competitive and in violation of federal antitrust law.”

Specifically, the complaint notes that failure to pay any dues, including for non-member licensees, would result in loss of access to the multiple listing service and, therefore, the ability to transact business.

The complaint said the rule, which was formally adopted in 1972, also blocks brokers’ ability to hire sales agents who choose not to join state or local Realtor organizations and that it requires dues for commercial leasing agents and visual inspectors.

“These are licensed sales agents, but not Realtors because they do not join the NAR Associations such as Defendant Associations because of the financial burden that results from the fees they charge,” Diaz’s complaint says.

He said the creation and enforcement of the policy amounts to a nationwide scheme that violates federal antitrust law.

In a statement in response to the new lawsuit, NAR said that it “is proud to provide unparalleled value for brokerage firms and individual members.”

“The unified Code of Ethics enhances consumer trust, the best-in-class advocacy improves members’ ability to execute their next transaction, and our resources and professional development ensure members are always on the cutting edge of the industry,” an NAR spokesperson said in a statement. “We will respond to the plaintiff’s claims in court.”

CAR said that it offered tools to help all members to succeed, and that much of its work to help the industry went on behind the scenes.

“In addition to resources like the Legal Hotline and transactional products, C.A.R.’s advocacy efforts have played a key role in protecting mortgage interest deductions, opposing point-of-sale mandates and other proposals that could impact property rights,” the group said in a statement. “These efforts have helped reduce potential legal and regulatory costs for members, brokers and consumers. C.A.R. will address the pending lawsuit through the appropriate legal channels.”

Diaz is only the latest broker to take aim at an NAR policy in court, though NAR has had recent success defending itself from some of the claims.

In April, a Pennsylvania judge agreed to partially dismiss a case filed by a broker against NAR over its three-way agreement that requires agents and brokers to join a local, state and national Realtor association in order to qualify for membership in any of those NAR affiliates.

The broker in that case represented himself, and in partially dismissing the case, the judge recommended the broker hire an attorney, likening the matter to hiring a Realtor to transact real estate.

NAR also scored a legal victory on Monday, when a U.S. Magistrate Judge recommended that a court dismiss a case filed by a Texas broker who also challenged the three-way agreement. That broker also represented herself in the case.

Diaz is not representing himself in his antitrust challenge.

Email Taylor Anderson

Bigger. Better. Bolder. Inman Connect is heading to San Diego. Join thousands of real estate pros, connect with the Inman Community and gain insights from hundreds of leading minds shaping the industry. If you’re ready to grow your business and invest in yourself, this is where you need to be. Go BIG in San Diego!

In the wake of the National Association of Realtors’ nationwide antitrust settlement requiring the use of agreements between buyers and their brokers, some have suggested that the concept of procuring cause is dead — or that it should die.

But at last week’s Realtors Legislative Meetings in Washington, D.C., Matt Troiani, NAR’s senior counsel and director of legal affairs, told attendees of the event’s Professional Standards Forum that procuring cause will still be a factor in arbitration determinations regarding who is entitled to buyer broker compensation, “at least in many markets.”

“The rumors of procuring cause’s demise have been greatly exaggerated,” Troiani told at least 200 attendees.

“Frankly, we could not get rid of procuring cause even if we wanted to; it predates the Code of Ethics.”

Procuring cause is a legal concept enshrined in many states’ laws. NAR’s Code of Ethics and Arbitration Manual points to Black’s Law Dictionary’s definition of procuring cause:

“A broker will be regarded as the ‘procuring cause’ of a sale, so as to be entitled to commission, if his efforts are the foundation on which the negotiations resulting in a sale are begun. A cause originating a series of events which, without break in their continuity, result in accomplishment of prime objective of the employment of the broker who is producing a purchaser ready, willing, and able to buy real estate on the owner’s terms.”

Although buyers are now required to decide their agent’s compensation before seeing listings, Troiani stressed that the settlement continues to allow listing brokers and sellers to offer compensation outside of the multiple listing service.

“So in many markets, you will continue to see instances where an offer of compensation is made by a seller or a listing broker and is accepted and memorialized in some kind of agreement with a broker for new buyers,” Troiani said.

According to Troiani, there will continue to be cases where buyer brokerages sign non-exclusive agreements with a buyer, or where a buyer has signed exclusive agreements with multiple brokerages at the same time, and therefore when a sale happens, there may be some dispute as to which brokerage is entitled to that offer of compensation.

“So the extent to which procuring cause comes up in arbitration over time may become fewer, but we do not think that it is going away,” Troiani said.

NAR will continue to provide guidance regarding offers of compensation and procuring cause, Troiani added.

In an op-ed last month, managing broker and Inman contributor Spencer Krull urged NAR to get rid of procuring cause.

“With procuring cause, an agent works with a buyer, and if that buyer ends up using a different agent to write an offer, then the first agent can file a complaint with their local board and go after the second agent’s commission,” Krull wrote.

“Procuring cause is NAR’s equivalent of rewarding the kid who licks the lollipop to make sure no one else will want it.”

Email Andrea V. Brambila.

Like me on Facebook | Follow me on Twitter