More objections pour in over settlements involving Compass, Redfin
A total of nine brokerages have settled in the Gibson/Umpa case, but objectors balk at damage amounts and cite concerns over the impact on homebuyer claims.
With the final approval hearing just a few weeks away, objections to the settlements in the Gibson/Umpa commissions case are rolling in.
Who is objecting? Three objections were filed in the Missouri District Court on Oct. 3 by plaintiffs in other commissions cases:
James Mullis, who is a plaintiff in the Batton homebuyer cases, filed a 14-page argument. He previously filed an objection to settlements reached by Anywhere, RE/MAX and Keller Williams in the Sitzer/Burnett case.
Robert Friedman, who is part of a class action lawsuit with the Real Estate Board of New York City, filed a 20-page argument.
The third objection came from plaintiffs involved in the Burton class action lawsuit in South Carolina. Like Mullis, they also objected to the Sitzer/Burnett settlements.
Which case is involved? The various objectors are taking issue with the settlements reached in the Gibson/Umpa case and nine defendants, which include Compass, The Real Brokerage, Realty ONE Group, Douglas Elliman, @properties, Redfin, Engel & Volkers, HomeSmart and United Real Estate.
The final hearing for these settlements, which total around $110 million, is scheduled for Oct. 31.
What are the objections? Several arguments were made in the three separate filings, but they included some common themes, specifically, that the monetary damages are not large enough, and the settlements are preventing many buyers who also sold a home from pursuing their own lawsuits.
Another objection was that the settlement shouldn't cover cases that are significantly different, like the one involving REBNY.
What the objectors are saying: In the Batton-related filing, Mullis seeks to ensure that the settlement has no impact on homebuyer-based claims.
Through his attorneys, Mullis said that if these settlements were to include homebuyers, he "objects to approval of the settlements as providing inadequate representation for homebuyers and for not treating class members equitably relative to each other."
The filing went on to say that if the court clarifies that the settlements do not affect homebuyer claims, Mullis has no objection to the settlement.
The South Carolina objectors argue that the settlement amount appears to have no rational basis, saying the amount provides class members "very small remuneration for the damages which they suffered."
Friedman argues that the alleged REBNY and National Association of Realtors conspiracies are distinct and unrelated.
"Each involves entirely separate real estate associations, listing services, broker rules, and mechanisms through which the conspiracy was formed and maintained," the court filing stated.
Friedman also claims that the REBNY conspiracy was perpetrated at that organization specifically, because it requires individual agents and brokers to agree to its own rules and Code of Ethics. Those rules are meaningfully different from the NAR rules, according to the filing, which alleges that they were significantly more anticompetitive.