Expedia Antitrust Class Action, Andrews v. Expedia Group Inc. Accuses Expedia of Inflating Hotel Prices

A newly filed class action in Seattle accuses Expedia Group Inc. of using restrictive hotel contracts, pricing rules and search-ranking tools to keep hotel room prices artificially high. The plaintiffs say the effect reached travelers across the whole market, including people who booked directly with a hotel or through a rival site such as Booking.com or Priceline. Expedia has not publicly responded to the allegations, and nothing in the complaint has been proven in court.

There is no settlement, no official settlement website, no claim form and no payout in this case. This is early-stage litigation. This article explains what the lawsuit alleges, which federal laws it relies on, who could be affected, what Expedia is likely to argue, and what to watch next.

Expedia Antitrust Lawsuit: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Case name	Andrews, et al. v. Expedia Group Inc.
Case number	2:26-cv-03743
Court	U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle)
Filed	October 2, 2026
Defendant	Expedia Group Inc.
Named plaintiffs	Ronisha Andrews, Pak Seong Hoi and Lorraine Rocci
Type of case	Putative (proposed) antitrust class action
Laws cited	Sherman Act and Clayton Act
Relief sought	A ruling that Expedia violated federal antitrust law and a court order stopping the challenged practices; the plaintiffs also seek class treatment for consumers who say they overpaid
Proposed class period	Bookings from October 2022 forward
Class certified?	No
Official settlement website	None. No settlement exists.
Claim form	None. Nothing to file.
Claim deadline	None
Jury trial	Plaintiffs’ counsel says they plan to try the case to a jury in Seattle
Current status	Newly filed. Expedia has not answered or moved to dismiss in anything we could verify.

What Does the Expedia Class Action Lawsuit Allege?

The complaint, reported by Courthouse News Service on October 5, 2026, accuses Expedia of using exclusionary contracts and pricing mechanisms to keep hotel prices high. Three consumers filed the case and want to represent others who allegedly overpaid.

Here is the plaintiffs’ theory, step by step:

1. Expedia’s market share. The complaint estimates that Expedia handles almost 80% of the gross booking value in transactions between U.S. consumers and U.S.-based hotels.
2. High commissions. The plaintiffs say that reach lets Expedia charge hotels steep commissions.
3. Higher room rates. Hotels, in turn, raise their prices to cover those commissions and stay profitable.
4. Rules that block cheaper rates. The plaintiffs allege Expedia stops some hotels from advertising lower rates on their own websites. They also claim hotels that offer lower prices through rival booking sites are demoted in Expedia’s search results.
5. Prices rise everywhere. Because of those restrictions, the complaint says hotels must keep prices artificially high even in the direct-booking channel, even though selling directly costs a hotel less than going through an online travel agency.

In short, the plaintiffs argue that one company’s contract terms and ranking rules raised the price of a hotel room for almost everyone, not only Expedia customers.

These are allegations only. The court has not decided whether any of them are true.

How Did Expedia Allegedly Keep Hotel Prices High?

The complaint describes several practices that the plaintiffs say restricted hotel pricing and competition.

1. Contract terms that limit lower prices elsewhere

The plaintiffs challenge contract provisions commonly described as rate-parity or “most-favored-nation” clauses. In general terms, these require a hotel to offer a booking platform rates that are no worse than the rates the hotel offers elsewhere. A hotel that wants to undercut the platform’s commission by offering a cheaper rate on its own website may be blocked or penalized for doing so.

2. Search-ranking penalties and pricing algorithms

The plaintiffs allege that hotels offering lower prices through competing booking sites get demoted in Expedia’s search results. Because visibility on Expedia drives bookings, they say this gives hotels a strong reason to avoid discounting elsewhere. Reporting on the complaint also describes algorithm-based pricing tools as part of the alleged scheme.

3. Prices allegedly rise across every booking channel

The central argument is that these restrictions did not stay inside Expedia. If a hotel cannot safely offer a lower price on its own site or on a rival platform, the plaintiffs say it keeps prices high everywhere. That is why they claim people who never used Expedia were harmed too.

Why Rival Booking Sites Matter in the Expedia Lawsuit

A second part of the complaint focuses on competition between booking platforms. Normally, a smaller travel site can win business by charging hotels a lower commission and passing some of the savings to travelers as lower room prices.

The plaintiffs say Expedia’s alleged restrictions make that strategy hard to pull off. If a hotel is punished in Expedia’s rankings for giving a rival a better deal, the hotel has little reason to do so. The complaint describes this as raising artificial barriers for existing and would-be competitors.

The lawsuit also claims the lack of competition hurt service quality. According to the complaint, Expedia has kept opaque fees, restrictive refund and cancellation policies and unresponsive customer service because it faces little pressure to improve. The plaintiffs add that the company has had less reason to invest in better booking technology and cheaper ways to distribute hotel rooms.

Which Hotel Brands and Booking Sites Does the Complaint Mention?

The plaintiffs say Expedia’s alleged conduct affected rooms at many of the largest hotel chains in the country. The complaint lists:

• Marriott International
• Hilton Worldwide
• InterContinental
• Wyndham
• Hyatt
• Best Western

The report on the filing also says “others.” Competing online travel agencies named in connection with the case include Booking.com and Priceline.

Important: naming a hotel brand or a rival booking site in the complaint does not mean that company did anything wrong. The only defendant is Expedia Group Inc. The hotels and rival sites appear as examples of businesses allegedly affected by Expedia’s rules.

What Federal Laws Does the Expedia Lawsuit Rely On?

The complaint alleges violations of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. Here is what each law does and why it matters in a case like this.

The Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2)

• Section 1 prohibits contracts, combinations and conspiracies that unreasonably restrain trade. Agreements between a platform and hotels that limit price competition, such as rate-parity clauses, are typically analyzed under this section. Most such vertical agreements are judged under the “rule of reason,” meaning a court weighs the competitive harm against any legitimate business benefits instead of treating the agreement as automatically illegal.
• Section 2 prohibits monopolization and attempted monopolization. It requires market power in a properly defined market plus exclusionary conduct, not just success. The plaintiffs’ claim that Expedia abused monopoly power in the online travel agency market points to this section.

A company’s size or market share alone does not violate the Sherman Act. The plaintiffs must show anticompetitive conduct and resulting harm to competition.

The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and 26)

The Clayton Act gives private parties a way to enforce antitrust law:

• Section 4 (15 U.S.C. § 15) allows a person injured in their business or property by an antitrust violation to sue for damages. If proven, damages are trebled (tripled) and the winning plaintiff can recover attorneys’ fees and costs.
• Section 16 (15 U.S.C. § 26) allows private parties to seek an injunction against threatened antitrust injury. This is the usual route for a court order stopping a practice.

Legal hurdles the plaintiffs will have to clear

• Antitrust standing and the indirect-purchaser rule. Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois (1977), consumers who buy from a middleman generally cannot recover federal antitrust damages for overcharges passed along the supply chain. Courts often treat this as a limit on federal damages claims by indirect purchasers, who may still seek an injunction and may have claims under some state laws. How this applies to travelers who booked directly with hotels will likely be a major issue.
• Pleading standard. Under Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (2007), an antitrust complaint must contain enough facts to make an unlawful agreement or scheme plausible. This is the standard Expedia will rely on in an early motion to dismiss.
• Class certification (Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23). The plaintiffs must show common questions, typical claims, adequate representatives and that a class action is the superior way to resolve the dispute. In antitrust cases, proving that overcharges hit the whole class with common evidence is often the hardest part.
• Statute of limitations. Federal antitrust damages claims generally must be filed within four years after the claim arose (15 U.S.C. § 15b), subject to tolling rules. That is consistent with the proposed class period starting in October 2022.
• State laws. Many states have their own antitrust and consumer protection statutes, and some allow indirect purchasers to recover. Reporting on the complaint describes federal claims. Whether state-law claims are added later is something to watch.

Who Could Be in the Proposed Expedia Classes?

The plaintiffs are asking the court to approve two proposed classes of consumers, both covering bookings from October 2022 forward:

• Direct bookers: consumers who booked certain hotels directly after October 2022.
• Other travel site bookers: consumers who booked a hotel through an online travel agency other than Expedia during the same period.

The exact class definitions, including which hotels count as “certain hotels,” will be fought over later in the case and must be checked against the complaint and any court orders. A proposed class is not a certified class. Until a judge certifies a class, nobody is officially a class member, and you do not need to take any action.

What Is the Lawsuit Asking the Court to Do?

Based on reporting about the complaint, the plaintiffs want:

• A ruling that Expedia violated federal antitrust law.
• A court order stopping the challenged practices.
• Certification of the proposed classes of consumers who say they overpaid.

No damages amount has been established, and the case does not give anyone a confirmed right to payment. Any recovery would depend on the court’s rulings, the evidence and a later judgment or settlement.

Who Represents the Plaintiffs in Andrews v. Expedia?

Three firms are listed as plaintiffs’ counsel:

• Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC: Beth E. Terrell and Blythe H. Chandler
• Berger Montague P.C.: Eric L. Cramer, Dennie Zastrow, Jeremy Gradwohl and Robert E. Litan
• Freedman Normand Friedland LLP: Edward Normand, Kyle Roche, Stephen Lagos and Joseph Lemoine

Cramer told Courthouse News Service that the consumers allege Expedia abused monopoly power in the online travel agent market to inflate hotel prices for millions of consumers, including people who never used Expedia. He said the plaintiffs look forward to presenting their case to a jury in Seattle.

What Is Expedia’s Response?

At the time of the Courthouse News Service report, Expedia had not responded to a request for comment. We could not verify any answer or motion filed by Expedia in this case. Expedia will likely contest the claims, and antitrust cases like this often face an early motion to dismiss.

Courts in the Western District of Washington have handled several hotel pricing antitrust suits in recent years, and some have been dismissed at the pleading stage. In August 2025, a federal judge in that district dismissed a putative class action over luxury hotel pricing and industry benchmarking reports, finding the plaintiffs had not adequately alleged an antitrust violation. That is a different case with a different theory, but it shows these claims face real hurdles. Whether this complaint survives is an open question.

What Happens Next in the Expedia Class Action?

A case like this usually moves through several stages. Dates for the Expedia case have not been announced, and the timeline could shift.

1. Expedia’s response. Expedia will file an answer or ask the court to dismiss some or all of the claims.
2. Discovery. If the case moves forward, both sides exchange documents and data, which in an antitrust case often means commission rates, contract terms and search-ranking practices.
3. Class certification. The plaintiffs must convince the judge that the proposed classes meet the requirements of Rule 23.
4. Summary judgment, trial or settlement. Cases like this can take years. Many end in a settlement before trial, but no settlement has been announced here.

If the case ever settles, the court must give preliminary approval, notice must go to class members, and a final approval hearing follows. Claims in that situation go through an official settlement administrator website named in the court-approved notice.

What Should Travelers Do Right Now?

Nothing is required today. There is no claim form and no deadline. You also do not need to stop using Expedia or any other booking site because of this lawsuit. A few practical steps can still help:

• Keep your booking records. Confirmation emails, receipts and invoices from hotel stays since October 2022 could matter if a class is ever certified or a settlement is reached.
• Note how you booked. Whether you booked directly with a hotel, through Expedia, or through a site like Booking.com or Priceline may determine which proposed class you fall into.
• Compare the full price. When booking future stays, compare the total price including mandatory fees, taxes and cancellation terms.
• Follow the court docket. Public filings show new motions, rulings and any settlement. The federal PACER system may require an account and may charge fees for some records.
• Be careful of look-alike sites and unsolicited offers. There is no verified claim form or settlement administrator for this case. Do not pay anyone who promises guaranteed compensation.

If a settlement or court-approved notice is announced, we will update this article with the official settlement website, claim instructions and deadlines.

For background on a different hotel pricing issue, see our related coverage on the Empire Hotel drip pricing class action: Empire Hotel Class Action Lawsuit 2026, What Guests Need to Know About Hidden Fee Allegations. That case concerns alleged hidden fees and is separate from the Expedia antitrust litigation.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Expedia Antitrust Class Action

Is there an Expedia class action settlement I can claim money from?

No. As of October 10, 2026, Andrews v. Expedia Group Inc. is an active putative class action. There is no settlement, no settlement website, no claim form and no payout.

What is the Expedia class action case number?

The case is Andrews, et al. v. Expedia Group Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-03743, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

When was the Expedia lawsuit filed?

The complaint was filed on October 2, 2026, and was reported by Courthouse News Service on October 5, 2026.

Do I have to have booked through Expedia to be affected?

Not under the plaintiffs’ theory. The proposed classes cover people who booked certain hotels directly and people who booked through online travel agencies other than Expedia, in both cases after October 2022.

Has a judge decided that Expedia violated antitrust law?

No. The claims are allegations only. Expedia has not been found liable, and no class has been certified.

What antitrust laws does the Expedia lawsuit rely on?

The complaint alleges violations of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act, two federal laws that restrict anticompetitive conduct and let private parties sue to enforce them.

Are the hotels named in the complaint being sued?

No. Marriott, Hilton, InterContinental, Wyndham, Hyatt and Best Western are mentioned as examples of hotels allegedly affected. The only defendant is Expedia Group Inc.

Could people who booked directly with a hotel really recover money?

That is uncertain. Federal law limits damages claims by indirect purchasers, and courts will have to decide how that rule applies. Any recovery depends on the court’s rulings, the final class definitions and the outcome of the case.

Do I need to join the Expedia lawsuit or hire a lawyer?

No action is needed at this stage. If a class is certified, people who fit the definition are generally included automatically and may receive a notice with options to stay in, opt out or object. For advice about your own situation, talk to a licensed attorney.

Where can I follow the case?

You can follow the public docket through the court’s PACER system or a free docket tracker. The sources listed at the end of this article include the docket listing.

Bottom Line

Andrews v. Expedia Group Inc. is early-stage litigation with big claims. The plaintiffs say Expedia’s market power, contract terms and ranking rules raised hotel prices across every booking channel, and Expedia has yet to answer. The case faces real legal hurdles, including pleading standards, the indirect-purchaser rule and class certification. For now, the best move for travelers is to keep their records and watch for updates.

Disclaimer: I am a legal content researcher, not a practicing attorney. This article is general information, not legal advice. The allegations described here have not been proven in court, and case status and class definitions may change as the litigation progresses. For advice about your own situation, consult a licensed attorney.

About the Author

Israr Ahmad is the founder and legal content researcher at AllAboutLawyer.com, a legal information site covering consumer class action lawsuits and settlements.

Sources

1. Courthouse News Service, “Expedia hit with antitrust class action over algorithm pricing scheme” (Monique Merrill, October 5, 2026): https://www.courthousenews.com/expedia-hit-with-antitrust-class-action-over-algorithm-pricing-scheme/
2. Federal case docket, Andrews et al. v. Expedia Group Inc., No. 2:26-cv-03743 (W.D. Wash.), via Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washington/wawdce/2%3A2026cv03743/369601
3. PYMNTS / Competition Policy International, “Expedia Faces Antitrust Suit Alleging Hotel Pricing Curbs” (October 6, 2026)
4. King & Spalding, “King & Spalding Secures Dismissal of Antitrust Class Action Against Six Continents Hotels, Inc.” (September 2, 2025)
5. Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-2, U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title15-section1&num=0&edition=prelim
6. Clayton Act private remedies, 15 U.S.C. § 15, U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title15-section15&num=0&edition=prelim
7. Clayton Act injunctive relief, 15 U.S.C. § 26, and statute of limitations, 15 U.S.C. § 15b, U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel
8. Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007); Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23

By Israr Ahmad, Founder and Legal Content Researcher, AllAboutLawyer.com | Last updated: October 10, 2026