Greystar Class Action Lawsuit, Multiple Settlements Total $198M as Nation’s Largest Landlord Faces Hidden Fee and Rent Collusion Claims
Greystar, America’s largest apartment manager with nearly 950,000 units, reached settlements totaling over $198 million across multiple class action lawsuits in 2025, resolving allegations of rent price-fixing through algorithmic software and charging hidden junk fees to hundreds of thousands of tenants nationwide. The $50 million RealPage settlement and separate $7 million multistate agreement mark the end of Greystar’s involvement in sweeping antitrust litigation, though the company admits no wrongdoing.
Separately, new California federal litigation filed in April 2025 alleges Greystar violated the state’s Honest Pricing Act by advertising rental rates without disclosing mandatory pest control and trash service fees.
What Is the Greystar Class Action Lawsuit About?
Greystar faces three distinct legal battles that exposed widespread tenant protection violations.
RealPage Antitrust Litigation
A nationwide class of renters sued Greystar and 25 other property managers in 2023, alleging they conspired with RealPage’s algorithmic pricing software to inflate rents by sharing confidential business information about occupancy rates and pricing strategies in violation of antitrust law. Greystar agreed to pay $50 million in October 2025 as part of a $141.8 million settlement involving 26 property management firms.
Hidden Junk Fees Lawsuit
The FTC and Colorado Attorney General sued Greystar in January 2025, claiming the company deceived consumers by advertising low monthly rents but concealing hundreds of millions of dollars in mandatory fees for valet trash, package handling, pest control, utility distribution, and smart home packages since 2019. The complaint states consumers often discovered these fees only after signing leases or moving in, with costs ranging from tens to hundreds of dollars monthly.
California Honest Pricing Act Violation
Plaintiffs Kaidi Wu and Juhyun So filed suit in California federal court on April 29, 2025, alleging Greystar charges separate mandatory fees for pest control and trash services that California’s Honest Pricing Act—effective July 2024—prohibits landlords from excluding from advertised rental prices.
Who Are the Parties in the Greystar Class Action Lawsuits?
Defendants:
- Greystar Real Estate Partners LLC (South Carolina headquarters)
- Greystar Management Services LLC
- Greystar California Inc.
- Multiple Greystar subsidiary entities
Plaintiffs:
RealPage Case: Nationwide class of renters affected by algorithmic pricing
FTC Case: Federal Trade Commission, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, and affected tenants
California Case: Kaidi Wu and Juhyun So, representing California tenants charged unlawful fees
What Evidence Has Emerged in the Greystar Lawsuits?
Algorithmic Pricing Coordination
DOJ filings revealed Greystar’s senior managers directly communicated with competitors about rents and occupancy, with one example showing Greystar supplying Camden Property Trust with information about renewal rates, quarterly pricing approaches, and acceptance rates of RealPage recommendations.
Court documents show Greystar’s revenue management director shared standard “auto-accept” parameters for RealPage’s software with Willow Bridge’s director upon request, including daily and weekly limits and specific days for automated pricing acceptance.
The DOJ alleged that in RealPage-hosted “user groups,” landlords including Greystar, LivCor, and Willow Bridge executives discussed plans for renewal increases, concessions, and acceptance rates of rent recommendations.
Hidden Fee Documentation
The FTC investigation uncovered that Greystar collected over $100 million in hidden fees from renters in just four states over three years. The complaint documents instances where consumers had no way to learn about fees until after filling out inquiry forms with personal information or clicking through small-print hyperlinks.
In some cases, Greystar waited to reveal fees until after consumers paid substantial application fees or holding deposits, then buried the charges deep in 40- to 60-page lease agreements.
What Recent Legal Developments Have Occurred?
November 2025: Multistate Antitrust Settlement
Colorado and eight other states (California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, and Tennessee) announced a proposed $7 million settlement with Greystar on November 19, 2025, requiring the company to abandon rent-setting algorithms that rely on nonpublic competitor data. Colorado will receive more than $1 million from the settlement to support antitrust enforcement and consumer protection work.
October 2025: Private Class Action Settlement
Greystar and 25 other property managers reached preliminary settlements totaling $141.8 million filed October 1, 2025, in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, with Greystar’s $50 million payment representing the largest individual contribution.
August 2025: DOJ Settlement
Greystar reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice on August 8, 2025, resolving federal claims about the company’s use of RealPage’s revenue management software. The proposed consent decree requires Greystar to refrain from using anticompetitive algorithms, accept court-appointed monitoring for third-party pricing tools, and cooperate with DOJ’s monopolization claims against RealPage.
January 2025: FTC Enforcement Action
The FTC and Colorado filed their hidden fees lawsuit on January 16, 2025, in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Case No. 1:25-cv-00165), charging violations of the FTC Act, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and Colorado Consumer Protection Act.
What Is Greystar’s Legal Defense and Response?
Antitrust Cases
Greystar maintains its use of RealPage’s revenue management software complies with all applicable laws and that the settlements contain no admission of wrongdoing. A company spokesperson stated: “The settlements do not include admission of wrongdoing and allow us to move forward and remain focused on serving our residents and clients.”
In response to being added to the DOJ lawsuit in January 2025, Greystar posted on its website that it was disappointed by the Department’s decision.
Hidden Fees Case
Greystar responded to the FTC complaint by calling it “headline-grabbing litigation in the waning days of the current administration” based on “gross misrepresentations of the facts and fundamentally flawed legal theories.”
The company insisted: “No resident at a Greystar-managed community pays a fee they have not seen and agreed to in their lease.” Greystar claimed it has been an industry leader toward improved fee disclosures and expressed willingness to work with regulators on meaningful consumer improvements.
What Legal Claims Are Being Pursued Against Greystar?
Antitrust Violations
Plaintiffs allege Greystar violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by coordinating with competing landlords through RealPage’s AI Revenue Management software to artificially inflate rents and reduce competition in apartment pricing across 43 states.
Consumer Protection Violations
The FTC charges violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act (deceptive practices), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (privacy rule violations), and the Colorado Consumer Protection Act for misleading consumers about true rental costs.
California Honest Pricing Act
The California lawsuit claims violations of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 (unfair competition) and the state’s Honest Pricing Act, which took effect July 2024.
What Are the Potential Legal Outcomes and Implications?
Financial Compensation
The $50 million RealPage settlement will be distributed among millions of tenants included in the settlement class, though individual payment amounts depend on final court approval and class member participation.
The $7 million multistate settlement will support antitrust enforcement and consumer protection work across nine states.
Industry-Wide Changes
Settling defendants agreed not to provide nonpublic data to RealPage for competitor pricing recommendations and to refrain from using RealPage’s revenue management system that relies on non-public competitor data—changes attorneys called “a fundamental shift in the multifamily housing industry.”
The DOJ settlement requires Greystar to accept a court-appointed monitor if it uses third-party pricing algorithms not certified under the consent decree terms and prohibits attendance at RealPage-hosted competitor meetings.
Ongoing Litigation Risks
The FTC seeks a permanent injunction against Greystar’s fee practices, monetary relief for harmed consumers, and civil penalties for Colorado. The hidden fees case remains pending without resolution.
State attorneys general opposing the RealPage settlements filed objections claiming Greystar played a “central role in advancing the alleged conspiracy” and that proposed fines were minimal compared to tenant damages.
What Is the Current Legal Status of Greystar Lawsuits?
Settled Cases:
- RealPage private class action: Preliminary settlement filed October 2025, awaiting final court approval
- DOJ antitrust case: Proposed consent decree filed August 2025, pending court approval after 60-day comment period
- Nine-state antitrust case: Proposed $7 million settlement filed November 2025, pending court approval
Pending Litigation:
- FTC/Colorado hidden fees lawsuit: Active in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- California junk fees case (Wu v. Greystar): Active in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (Case No. 3:25-cv-01090-AGS-BLM)
- Broader RealPage antitrust litigation continues against RealPage and non-settling landlords including Equity Residential and Brookfield Management
Timeline of Greystar Legal Developments
2019-2024: Greystar allegedly collected hundreds of millions in undisclosed fees from tenants nationwide.
January 2024: Nichole Collins filed proposed Colorado class action over junk fees (Collins v. Greystar).
August 2024: DOJ filed initial antitrust complaint against RealPage after two-year investigation sparked by ProPublica reporting.
January 2025: DOJ amended complaint to add Greystar and five other major landlords (LivCor, Camden, Cushman & Wakefield, Willow Bridge, Cortland) as defendants.
January 16, 2025: FTC and Colorado filed hidden fees lawsuit.
April 29, 2025: Wu and So filed California Honest Pricing Act lawsuit.
August 8, 2025: Greystar announced DOJ settlement and agreement in principle for private class action.
October 1, 2025: Private class action settlements formally filed in Tennessee federal court.
November 19, 2025: Nine states announced proposed $7 million Greystar settlement.
How Might This Case Impact Property Management Practices?
Algorithmic Pricing Restrictions
The settlement defines competitively sensitive information broadly to capture any data determining current or future rental supply, demand, or pricing, including occupancy, executed rental rates, received concessions, and specific settings other landlords use within revenue management systems.
Legal experts identify algorithmic accountability as a key lesson, noting growing scrutiny of algorithms in business practices and the principle that coordination through technology violates antitrust laws equally to traditional price-fixing.
Fee Transparency Requirements
Colorado Attorney General Weiser warned: “To the extent that other corporate landlords are not advertising their all-in pricing and are engaging in similar tactics, they are on notice that such conduct is illegal and will not be tolerated in Colorado.”
The FTC issued a final rule in December 2024 requiring live-event ticketing and short-term lodging industries to include all mandatory fees in advertised pricing, though the multifamily industry was excluded—a gap the FTC enforcement action against Greystar aims to address.
Tenant Rights Protections
The lawsuits contend undisclosed fees limit competition: “Prospective tenants cannot meaningfully compare prices for apartment rentals when significant portions of the monthly rent are disguised as add-on fees.”
Colorado’s investigation revealed tenants face limited recourse—they cannot recoup application fees if withdrawing after discovering true costs, and lease termination fees sometimes total thousands of dollars, effectively locking tenants into higher-than-advertised payments.
Who May Be Eligible for Compensation or Relief?
RealPage Settlement Class
The settlement class potentially includes millions of tenants who rented from Greystar or the 25 other settling property management firms during the period they used RealPage’s algorithmic pricing software. Specific eligibility criteria and claim procedures await final court approval.
Colorado Residents
Greystar manages approximately 45,000 units in Colorado. Tenants affected by hidden fees or algorithmic pricing in Colorado may qualify for relief through the multistate settlement or FTC case.
California Honest Pricing Act Class
The Wu lawsuit seeks to represent a class of consumers charged mandatory fees by Greystar exceeding advertised or contracted rental rates for residential leases in California within the past six years.
Geographic Scope
The original antitrust claims involve landlords operating more than 1.3 million units in 43 states and Washington, D.C. Greystar manages nearly 950,000 rental units across the country.
What Happens Next in the Greystar Legal Process?
Court Approval Process
All three settlements (DOJ, nine-state, and private class action) require final court approval. The DOJ settlement follows the Tunney Act process, requiring publication in the Federal Register and a 60-day public comment period before the court determines if the settlement serves the public interest.
Claims Administration
The class action settlement agreement states “significant” monetary damages will be presented for court approval potentially as early as October 2025. Class notice procedures, claim forms, and distribution plans await court approval.
Ongoing Litigation
RealPage and other property managers including Equity Residential and Brookfield Management remain defendants in the antitrust litigation. Colorado and settling states retain the right to participate in cooperation Greystar provides to DOJ in its case against RealPage.
The FTC hidden fees lawsuit and California Honest Pricing Act case continue toward trial or settlement negotiations.
Monitoring and Compliance
Greystar must accept court-appointed monitors for any third-party pricing algorithms not certified under consent decree terms and implement antitrust compliance officer positions.
Related Class Action Lawsuits and Settlements
Property management and tenant rights litigation extends beyond Greystar:
- TurboTax faces multiple class actions over free filing fraud, data breaches, and privacy violations
- AT&T hit with $177 million class action lawsuit—claim your share before December 18
- Can you sue a bank for identity theft? Legal standards and consumer protection laws
Frequently Asked Questions About the Greystar Class Action Lawsuit
What is the Greystar class action lawsuit about?
Greystar faces multiple class actions alleging the company conspired with competitors using RealPage’s algorithmic pricing software to inflate rents and separately charged hundreds of millions in hidden mandatory fees for services like trash collection and pest control that were not disclosed in advertised rental prices.
Who filed the lawsuit against Greystar?
Multiple plaintiffs filed separate cases: a nationwide class of renters sued over algorithmic pricing, the FTC and Colorado Attorney General filed the hidden fees case, and California tenants Kaidi Wu and Juhyun So filed the Honest Pricing Act lawsuit.
What evidence supports the Greystar lawsuit claims?
DOJ filings documented direct communications between Greystar managers and competitors about pricing strategies, sharing of RealPage software parameters, and participation in user group meetings discussing renewal rates and acceptance of algorithmic recommendations. The FTC investigation found Greystar collected over $100 million in hidden fees across four states in three years.
What is Greystar’s response to the lawsuits?
Greystar firmly believes its use of RealPage’s software complies with all applicable laws and denies wrongdoing in all settlement agreements. The company claims it has been an industry leader in fee disclosure and that all fees appear in lease agreements that residents sign.
What are the potential legal outcomes?
Greystar agreed to pay $50 million in the private class action, $7 million to nine states, and reached a separate DOJ settlement, totaling over $198 million in combined resolutions. Settlements require Greystar to stop sharing nonpublic competitor data and cease using RealPage’s systems that incorporate such information.
What is the current status of the Greystar lawsuits?
Three settlements await court approval (DOJ, multistate, private class action). The FTC/Colorado hidden fees case remains active in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The California Honest Pricing Act lawsuit (Case No. 3:25-cv-01090-AGS-BLM) continues in federal court.
Am I eligible for compensation from the Greystar settlement?
Millions of tenants who rented from Greystar or 25 other settling property managers while they used RealPage’s pricing software may qualify for the settlement class. Specific eligibility requirements, claim procedures, and payment amounts await final court approval and claims administration setup.
What happens next in the legal process?
Settlements enter 60-day public comment periods before courts determine final approval. Class notice will be sent to eligible tenants with instructions for filing claims. Litigation continues against RealPage and non-settling landlords. The FTC and California cases proceed toward trial or potential settlement.
Legal Disclaimer: This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The claims described are allegations made in legal filings and have not been proven in court. All parties are presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Settlement agreements contain no admission of wrongdoing by Greystar. For specific legal guidance regarding your situation, consult a qualified attorney.
Sources: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, Colorado Attorney General, court filings in U.S. District Courts for the Middle District of Tennessee, District of Colorado, and Southern District of California, and reporting from Multifamily Dive, ProPublica, Bisnow, Insurance Journal, Top Class Actions, and Colorado Public Radio.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah