Zillow Sued Again as Agent Alleges ZHL Steering Tactics

"Zillow is not satisfied with its monopoly power," a new lawsuit suggests, after a real estate agent sued the company for using monopolistic steering tactics regarding its Zillow Home Loans (ZHL) products.

Real Estate News reported that Stephanie Dupuis, who owns a real estate team in Kitsap County, filed a class action lawsuit alleging that real estate agents are unfairly steered towards ZHL, with their performance graded on the quantity of ZHL pre-approvals they can secure.

The class action lawsuit—whereby the claims and rights of many people are decided in a single case—was filed on 13 January on behalf of any U.S. resident, past or present, enrolled in Zillow's Premier, Preferred, or Flex Agent programs.

The lawsuit highlighted that the firm uses 'Follow Up Boss', a CRM Zillow acquired in 2023, to track agent performance, with low-performing members potentially being cut from their respective programs.

After being threatened with removal from Zillow's Preferred program if her team did not sign up to Follow Up Boss last year, Dupuis' team felt increased pressure to steer clients towards ZHL. When her team refused to do so, Dupuis noted that Follow Up Boss was penalising her team for low ZHL pre-approval rates, while the team's access to Zillow Showcase was terminated in December 2025.

Dupuis' allegation suggests that agents find it "impossible to do business without working with Zillow to at least some degree," with little choice but to abide by Zillow's directives if they want to continue receiving leads and stay enrolled on Premier, Preferred, or Flex.

Dupuis' lawsuit argues that this is in breach of antitrust law and is designed to "extract outsized commissions and steer agents and consumers alike to inferior financial products."

The lawsuit states:

Ms Dupuis, like many other agents, is opposed to steering clients to ZHL. Ms. Dupuis owes a duty to act in her clients' best interest and for that reason she will not pressure clients to choose any particular lender over another. But Zillow designs its Premier and Preferred agent programs such that a failure by agents to steer clients towards ZHL means demotion in rating, fewer connections, and thus, fewer completed sales.

The plaintiffs seek relief through actual damages, treble damages, costs, attorney fees and injunctive relief.

The lawsuit shares several similarities with the Armstrong v. Zillow Group, filed in November, which alleged that Zillow imposes ZHL quotas, monitors calls, uses scripts, and runs leaderboards to induce agents to steer clients to ZHL "in breach [of its fiduciary] duties."

Zillow has already defended itself in a statement, saying:

This complaint tells a one‑sided story that does not reflect how Zillow Preferred partners serve buyers or how we work with real estate agents.

Consumers are always in control of which agent and lender they work with, and Zillow supports agents who deliver strong outcomes for buyers by sharing clear information and helping them understand what they can afford.

Referral fees in the Zillow Preferred program are paid between businesses and are consistent with industry practices. These arrangements do not change the fees consumers can negotiate with their agent. We will defend ourselves against these claims, while we stay focused on delivering a better real estate experience for buyers, sellers, renters and the professionals who serve them.

Zillow was named as a defendant in six lawsuits in the second half of 2025, and less than a month into the new year, the firm's legal team has been called upon once again.