Zillow Class Action Lawsuit, Marketing Texts Allegedly Continued After Consumers Replied STOP

Zillow Group, Inc. is facing a new proposed nationwide class action alleging it sent promotional text messages to consumers who had registered on the National Do Not Call Registry and continued texting after a consumer replied STOP.

The lawsuit, Peckat v. Zillow Group Inc. d/b/a Zillow Inc., No. 2:26-cv-04258, was filed on November 3, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. It alleges violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and FCC do-not-call rules.

Status as of November 14, 2026: this is a newly filed lawsuit. There is no settlement, no certified class, no claim form and no guaranteed payment. Zillow has not been found liable, and every allegation below is unproven.

If you received Zillow marketing texts after opting out, this case may be relevant to you, but receiving an unwanted text does not automatically mean you qualify for compensation. Read the legal hurdles section below before assuming otherwise.

Quick Facts: Peckat v. Zillow Group Inc.

Detail	Information
Case	Andrew Peckat v. Zillow Group Inc. d/b/a Zillow Inc.
Case number	2:26-cv-04258
Court	U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington (Seattle)
Filed	November 3, 2026
Type	Putative (proposed) nationwide class action
Plaintiff’s counsel	Andrew J. Shamis, Shamis & Gentile P.A.
Main allegation	Marketing texts sent to Do Not Call Registry numbers and after STOP opt-out requests
Federal law	Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC rules, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200
Statutory damages sought	$500 per qualifying violation; up to $1,500 if willful or knowing
Court docket (public record)	dockets.justia.com/docket/washington/wawdce/2%3A2026cv04258/371130
Class certified?	No
Settlement?	No
Official settlement website or claim form?	None exists
Claim deadline?	None
Current status	Complaint filed; litigation pending

What Is Zillow Accused Of?

The central allegation is that Zillow failed to honor a request to stop marketing messages, and failed to maintain the do-not-call procedures federal rules require.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations (as described in the complaint)

Date	Alleged Event
March 2014	Plaintiff’s cellphone number registered on the National Do Not Call Registry
May 5, 2025	Zillow allegedly sends a promotional text; plaintiff replies STOP and allegedly receives confirmation that marketing messages will end
October 28, 2026	Another Zillow promotional text allegedly arrives
November 3, 2026	Complaint filed in federal court

Plaintiff Andrew Peckat is described as a resident of Jefferson County, Kentucky. He alleges the messages invaded his privacy, caused annoyance and wasted his time, and that Zillow had no consent or qualifying business relationship that would justify the marketing texts.

The complaint also alleges that Zillow:

• Failed to maintain or use an effective internal do-not-call list
• Lacked adequate written do-not-call procedures
• Failed to train personnel to honor opt-out requests
• Sent promotional texts after an opt-out had allegedly been acknowledged

Zillow has not been found liable. A later text does not conclusively prove the company had no written policy or training. Those questions would be tested through records and testimony in litigation. Zillow’s own published terms tell recipients they can cancel text messages by replying STOP, which may be relevant to how the court views opt-out requests.

Who Could Be in the Proposed Class?

The plaintiff seeks to represent consumers across the United States, going back roughly four years before the November 3, 2026 filing. Two groups are proposed:

Proposed Group	General Theory
National Do Not Call Registry group	Consumers who received more than one Zillow promotional text within a 12-month period on a residential number registered on the Registry for at least 31 days
Internal do-not-call group	Consumers who received at least two promotional texts within 12 months on a personal number while Zillow allegedly lacked required internal do-not-call procedures or after asking the messages to stop

Zillow, its officers, employees, counsel and the presiding judicial officers, along with people who later opted back in, are proposed exclusions.

These are proposed groups, not court-certified classes. The judge could narrow, change or reject them.

Common Questions About Eligibility

• One unwanted text: The private do-not-call damages provision, 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5), refers to receiving more than one qualifying call within a 12-month period. A single message may not satisfy it. Other TCPA provisions have different elements.
• Never used Zillow: You can still have rights if covered telemarketing was sent to your number without proper authorization. Whether you fit this case depends on the final class definition and proof.
• Registered on the Do Not Call Registry: Registration may help, but it does not by itself prove a violation or class membership. Message type, timing, consent and available remedies all matter.

What Federal Law Requires

Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227

• § 227(b): Restricts certain calls using an automatic telephone dialing system or artificial or prerecorded voice without consent. Private plaintiffs may recover $500 per violation, trebled for willful or knowing violations. In Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (2021), the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of an autodialer.
• § 227(c): Directs the FCC to protect residential subscribers from unwanted telephone solicitations, including through the National Do Not Call Registry and company-specific do-not-call lists. § 227(c)(5) creates a private right of action for a person who has received more than one telephone call within any 12-month period in violation of those regulations, with $500 per violation, trebled for willful or knowing violations, plus possible injunctive relief.
• The Ninth Circuit, where the Zillow case is pending, has held that text messages are “calls” under the TCPA’s autodialer provision (Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, 2009). Whether that reasoning carries over to the § 227(c)(5) do-not-call claim is the question discussed below.

FCC Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200

• Do-not-call requests: Companies making telemarketing calls or texts must keep written do-not-call procedures, train personnel, keep a company-specific do-not-call list and honor requests within a reasonable period, which the rules set at no more than 10 business days for covered requests.
• Five-year duration: Under § 64.1200(d)(6), a company-specific do-not-call request must generally be honored for five years.
• Revocation of consent: FCC rules recognize words such as STOP, QUIT, END, CANCEL, REVOKE and UNSUBSCRIBE as reasonable ways to revoke consent to receive texts.
• National Registry: Under § 64.1200(c)(2), telemarketing to numbers on the Registry is generally prohibited absent an exception such as prior express invitation or permission, or an established business relationship.

Courts and Agency Rules

In McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corp. (2025), the Supreme Court held that district courts hearing TCPA enforcement actions are not bound by the FCC’s interpretation of the statute. Judges decide the statutory meaning themselves, giving the agency’s views appropriate weight. This increases the importance of how each court reads the text of § 227.

Legal Hurdles the Plaintiff May Face

Many short summaries of this lawsuit omit the following issues. Neither has been resolved in the Zillow case.

1. The Two Reported Texts Are More Than 12 Months Apart

The publicly reported examples are dated May 5, 2025 and October 28, 2026, roughly 17 months apart. Section 227(c)(5) refers to more than one call within any 12-month period. The two reported messages alone therefore do not establish that frequency requirement. This does not automatically defeat the case. The complete complaint may allege additional messages, and the plaintiff may amend. But it is a real issue Zillow could raise.

2. Does the Private Do-Not-Call Claim Cover Text Messages?

As reported, on July 14, 2026, the Seventh Circuit decided Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, No. 25-2398, holding that the private right of action in § 227(c)(5) does not extend to unwanted text messages, distinguishing the statute’s reference to a “telephone call” from the broader concept of telephone solicitations.

That decision binds courts in the Seventh Circuit. The Zillow case is in the Ninth Circuit, so it is not controlling there, but Zillow could make a similar statutory argument, and a Washington federal judge would decide the question under Ninth Circuit law. This uncertainty is one reason readers should not assume $500 or $1,500 per text is owed.

3. Other Defenses Commonly Raised in TCPA Cases

• Consent and business relationship: Evidence the consumer signed up, inquired, or had an existing relationship.
• Arbitration and class waivers: Terms of use may require individual arbitration. Whether any apply to this plaintiff has not been established.
• Article III standing: Defendants may argue that unwanted texts do not cause concrete harm. The plaintiff alleges invasion of privacy and wasted time.
• Class certification (Rule 23): Whether consent, opt-out timing and registry status can be proven class-wide or require individual inquiries.
• Personal or business number: The Registry-based claim protects residential subscribers.

How Much Could Someone Recover?

Potential Remedy	Source
$500 per qualifying violation	47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5)(B)
Up to three times that amount (up to $1,500) if the court finds a willful or knowing violation	§ 227(c)(5)
Injunction requiring compliance	§ 227(c)(5)(A)
Actual monetary loss, if greater, where applicable	§ 227(c)(5)(B)

For illustration only, two legally established $500 violations would equal $1,000. That is not a prediction. No damages have been awarded, and no one is entitled to any amount at this stage. If the case ever settles as a class action, individual payments would typically depend on the size of the settlement fund, the number of valid claims and court-approved fees and costs.

Is There a Zillow Text Settlement or Claim Form?

No. As of November 14, 2026 there is no:

• Approved class settlement
• Court-certified class
• Settlement administrator
• Official claim form or settlement website
• Confirmed payment amount
• Filing or opt-out deadline

Be cautious of any website or message advertising a Zillow texting payout. Do not give out personal or financial information. For comparison, other TCPA text settlements with real claims processes exist, but they have no connection to Zillow.

What to Do If You Received Unwanted Zillow Texts

1. Preserve the evidence. Screenshot the full thread: original text, your STOP reply, any confirmation and later messages, with dates and times visible.
2. Keep the message history. Do not delete the thread. Carrier records and device data may matter later.
3. Save the sender’s number or short code.
4. Check your Do Not Call Registry status and save the registration date at donotcall.gov.
5. Use official opt-out channels. Reply STOP to a genuine Zillow message and contact Zillow through its official support channels (its terms list [email protected] for messaging help).
6. Report violations to the FCC through its consumer complaint system. A complaint helps regulators but does not create a private damages claim or individual compensation.
7. Be wary of scams. If a text looks fraudulent, do not click links or share personal information.
8. Talk to a licensed attorney if you want to understand your individual rights.

Deadlines

Federal TCPA claims are generally subject to a four-year limitations period under the federal catch-all statute (28 U.S.C. § 1658(a)). Joining or watching this case does not guarantee that your individual claim is preserved, so consult an attorney about timing rather than assume.

What Happens Next?

A summons was recorded the day after filing. Zillow typically has 21 days after being served to respond, or 60 days if it waives service, unless the court extends the deadline.

Likely next steps include:

• An answer or a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)
• Possible motion to compel arbitration, if applicable
• Discovery, including SMS gateway logs, vendor records, suppression-list data and written do-not-call policies
• A motion for class certification under Rule 23
• Possible settlement negotiations, which would require court approval under Rule 23(e) and notice to class members

No trial date, class certification hearing or settlement schedule has been verified.

Who Is Handling the Case?

Plaintiff’s counsel, Andrew J. Shamis of Shamis & Gentile P.A., is understood to be working on a contingency basis, meaning the plaintiff pays no hourly fees. The TCPA does not itself shift attorneys’ fees. If a class settlement were reached, class counsel would ask the court to approve fees and costs, commonly set as a percentage of a common fund, subject to judicial review.

Tax Treatment

Statutory damages or settlement payments from a TCPA case are generally treated as taxable income because they do not compensate for physical injury. Reporting rules and thresholds vary, and individual circumstances differ. This is general information, not tax advice. Consult a tax professional.

Does the Lawsuit Affect Zillow Listings, Zestimates or Home Loans?

No. The case concerns marketing text messages and do-not-call rules. It does not challenge Zillow home value estimates, listing prices or mortgage products. Zillow is involved in separate litigation over referrals and home lending under a different federal law, with different plaintiffs and claims. Qualifying for one case does not mean you qualify for another.

Have Other Companies Faced Similar Lawsuits?

Yes. TCPA class actions have been filed against retailers, insurers, healthcare providers and telecommunications companies, including 2026 cases alleging texts sent after opt-out requests. The facts and defenses vary, and none establishes that Zillow violated the TCPA.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Zillow being sued over text messages?

Yes. Andrew Peckat filed a putative federal class action on November 3, 2026, alleging Zillow sent marketing texts despite an opt-out request.

What is the case number?

Peckat v. Zillow Group Inc., No. 2:26-cv-04258, W.D. Wash.

Is there a Zillow text message settlement?

No. There is no settlement, certified class or claim form.

Can I get $500 or $1,500 per text?

Those are potential statutory damages for proven qualifying violations, not an approved payment program. The plaintiff would need to overcome legal and factual hurdles.

What did the plaintiff allegedly do?

He alleges he replied STOP on May 5, 2025, received confirmation, and got another promotional text on October 28, 2026.

Does the Do Not Call Registry guarantee I qualify?

No. It may help, but does not establish a violation or class membership.

What if I received only one text?

The private do-not-call provision refers to more than one call within 12 months. Other provisions may differ. Ask an attorney.

Do text messages count under the TCPA?

The FCC and many courts treat texts as calls for TCPA purposes, but a July 2026 Seventh Circuit decision held the § 227(c)(5) private claim does not reach texts. The Zillow case is in the Ninth Circuit, and the issue is unresolved there.

Has Zillow been found liable?

No. The allegations are unproven.

Is there a deadline to join?

No settlement deadline exists. Consider limitation periods for any individual claim with legal advice.

Does the lawsuit cover the whole country?

The plaintiff proposes nationwide classes. The court has not certified them.

How can I report unwanted texts?

Through the FCC consumer complaint system. You can also verify or add your number at the National Do Not Call Registry.

Bottom Line

Peckat v. Zillow alleges that Zillow kept sending marketing texts after a consumer said STOP and did not maintain required do-not-call procedures. The plaintiff seeks statutory damages and nationwide class treatment. But the case is at its earliest stage, and serious questions remain: the reported texts are more than 12 months apart, the Seventh Circuit has questioned whether the private do-not-call claim covers texts, and class certification is far from certain.

There is no Zillow texting settlement, claim form or payment deadline. Preserve your messages, document opt-outs and watch the court docket.

This article provides general legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created by reading it. The allegations are unproven, and Zillow has not been found liable.

Related Articles

• USA Clinics Group Text Message Settlement: Check If You Qualify
• Zillow RESPA Lawsuit: Were You Affected?
• AT&T, State Farm and CVS Hit With Five TCPA Text Message Class Actions

Sources

1. Federal court docket, Peckat v. Zillow Group Inc., No. 2:26-cv-04258 (W.D. Wash.): https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washington/wawdce/2%3A2026cv04258/371130
2. PACER, Federal Court Records: https://pacer.uscourts.gov/
3. 47 U.S.C. § 227, Telephone Consumer Protection Act: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227
4. 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200, FCC Do-Not-Call and Consent Rules: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/64.1200
5. Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, No. 25-2398 (7th Cir. July 14, 2026): https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/25-2398/25-2398-2026-07-14.html
6. Zillow Terms of Use: https://www.zillow.com/corporate/terms-of-use/
7. FCC, Report Unwanted Calls and Texts: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/115002234203-Unwanted-Calls-Texts-Phone
8. National Do Not Call Registry: https://www.donotcall.gov/
9. Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 592 U.S. 395 (2021); McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. (U.S. 2025); Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009); 28 U.S.C. § 1658(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 and 23

Source limitation: The public docket confirms the filing, parties, attorney and case number. The specific message dates and other factual allegations come from published descriptions of the complaint; the full complaint was not independently inspected.