The plaintiffs in a case alleging Zillow Flex and Zillow Home Loans programs violated consumer protection laws have asked a judge to move the case forward, saying, in part, that evidence was at risk of disappearing if it wasn’t produced in the discovery process.
In a new legal filing on Monday, attorneys for the plaintiffs objected to Zillow’s attempt to pause discovery in the case. They said the evidence in the case includes short-lived electronic material, along with testimony from confidential witnesses that could be forgotten.
“A stay would only prejudice Plaintiffs by delaying relief while witness memories fade and electronically stored information risks being overwritten,” the plaintiffs wrote.
The plaintiffs said the alleged conduct is spelled out in screenshots, program matrix indices, public materials and “numerous confidential witnesses.”
“Key evidence here is dynamic and ephemeral. Website and app variants, changing auto‑check defaults, program dashboards and ‘green‑yellow‑red’ rankings, compliance notes, and internal messaging regarding quotas and lead reallocation are all at issue,” the plaintiffs wrote. “A stay heightens the risk of spoliation or loss of relevant electronically stored information, and it allows memories to fade.”
The initial complaint, which was filed in September 2025, focused on the portal’s Flex referral program, which has since been rebranded to Zillow Preferred.
The plaintiffs claimed Zillow wasn’t forthcoming with consumers about the referral process, which includes connecting buyers with Flex agents, who pay up to a 40 percent referral, or “success,” fee. That fee, the plaintiffs said, is passed down to consumers through inflated commissions, in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act.
The complaint was expanded in November to include Zillow Home Loans, with plaintiffs alleging that the portal forces Flex members to push its mortgage product on homebuyers, which would violate the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). They also added a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) count to account for brokerages’ participation in Zillow’s alleged scheme to inflate consumer costs.
The complaint, the plaintiffs wrote in the new filing, “extensively details a RICO enterprise…[and] additionally alleges aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty based on Zillow-imposed steering quotas and evidence from multiple witnesses demonstrating that agents were pressured to prioritize Zillow’s interests over the interest of their clients.”
Zillow didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the new filing.
In its own recent filing, Zillow said the class-action complaint is based on a “nonsensical” chain of events, including homebuyers believing they’re being connected with the listing agent, despite having signed a touring agreement and a buyer-broker agreement. And if a homebuyer wanted to contact the listing agent, the portal said that information is “readily available” on each listing page.
Defendants in the case asked the judge to pause the request for discovery and to dismiss the case.
