Greystar Agrees To Pay $7M To Resolve 9 States' Rent Collusion Complaints

Greystar, one of the country’s largest apartment operators, reached a settlement with nine states to resolve allegations that it was part of a rent-fixing cartel.

The deal would remove Greystar from a sprawling list of landlords being sued by state attorneys general over their use of software from RealPage, which was also targeted in the case. Greystar would pay a $7M fine as part of the deal and agree to limitations on what information it can use to set rents.

Greystar would continue to deny any wrongdoing and deny any antitrust violations. The deal still needs final court approval.

Greystar, which is based in South Carolina but owns or manages more than 900,000 apartments across the country, previously struck a deal to cooperate with the Department of Justice in the same antitrust suit, being heard in a federal court in North Carolina.  

“We are pleased this matter is resolved and remain focused on serving our residents and clients,” a spokesperson for Greystar said.

The antitrust suit was filed in August 2024 after a more than two-year federal investigation that was spurred by a ProPublica report. 

Prosecutors allege RealPage’s AI Revenue Management software, previously known as YieldStar, enabled and encouraged competing landlords to artificially inflate rents by cooperating on rates. 

The deal covers claims from attorneys general in North Carolina, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee and Massachusetts. The $7M fine would be paid to California, and the states would determine how the cash is split.

In addition to the fine, Greystar would agree to several limitations on the types of data it uses to set rents and would agree to the appointment of an antitrust compliance officer.

A key throughline across all the court complaints is the collection and use of nonpublic, competitively sensitive data to inform the rents suggested by RealPage’s AI Revenue Management platform. In the latest deal, Greystar would refrain from using, sharing or soliciting any nonpublic data to help set rents. 

The landlord would still be able to use public data to inform its pricing, and the settlement wrestles with defining the difference, an issue that befuddled brokers when the antitrust allegations were first lodged. 

The settlement defines competitively sensitive information broadly to capture any data that could be used to determine current or future rental supply, demand or pricing, including occupancy, executed rental rates or received concessions. It also includes the specific settings any other landlord is using within a revenue management system to set rents or any data related to a landlord’s pricing strategy.  

Greystar could use public data under the terms of the deal, which the filing says includes asking rents, advertised concessions and availability. If the data is listed on a website, it is free to use, but Greystar would be prohibited from asking for details. 

“Public Data does not include any Competitively Sensitive Information obtained through communications between competitors,” the settlement says. 

The settlement also includes a carve-out for Greystar’s property management business that would allow it to continue using RealPage’s software or another revenue management system if it is what a client already uses, so long as that platform doesn’t use nonpublic data to suggest rents. 

Enforcement of the settlement would last for five years, and prosecutors could ask for an extension if violations are uncovered.

If adopted by the court, the case against Greystar would be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the state would be prohibited from trying to sue for the same alleged violations, and both sides would pay their own attorneys fees. 

RealPage, which declined to comment about another defendant's settlement, has consistently denied wrongdoing, arguing the lawsuits — along with legislation targeting rent-setting algorithms across the country — were being used to score political points amid a housing affordability crisis. 

A separate class-action case is also winding its way through a Nashville court. Greystar and 26 other landlords and property managers struck a deal in early October to resolve their claims in that case. Greystar agreed to pay $50M as part of the deal. 

But the attorneys general suing for antitrust violations asked the judge in the class-action suit to reject the proposed settlements for the companies that they are separately suing. That filing accused Greystar of playing a “central role in advancing the alleged conspiracy” to fix rents and said the proposed fines were a paltry sum compared to the damages tenants incurred.