Sitzer/Burnett Data Motion Signals MLS Compliance Warning

On July 23, plaintiffs in the Sitzer/Burnett and Gibson cases filed a motion with Judge Stephen Bough requesting enforcement of data sharing agreements previously made by Multiple Listing Services (MLSs) that opted into the National Association of Realtors (NAR) settlement. The plaintiffs are seeking access to listing and commission data that MLSs had committed to provide. The primary obstacle to this data release is identified as FBS, a vendor that powers Flexmls. FBS has reportedly declined to release the data without explicit consent from each individual MLS and has not disclosed which MLSs are withholding their permission. In response to this impasse, the plaintiffs have proposed a procedural rule: to notify every MLS that opted into the settlement, provide each with a seven-day period to raise objections, and consider any silence as consent to release the data. While the headline might suggest a routine administrative matter, a closer examination of the court filing reveals a more significant implication for the industry. The listing and commission data in question serves a dual purpose. Its stated function is to ensure compliance with the terms of the NAR settlement, verifying whether MLSs have removed compensation fields and implemented the new rule changes effectively. This data is considered the foundational material for any subsequent analysis or action. It includes critical historical information such as status changes, entry dates, and the time lag between the signing of a listing agreement and its appearance on the market. Furthermore, it details the compensation paid and the recipients of those payments. This dataset is precisely what would be required to investigate patterns of listings being circumvented or to determine if concessions are being used to subtly replicate the function of the old co-op commission structure. The plaintiffs' continued engagement in filing motions nearly three years after the initial verdict underscores the ongoing nature of these compliance efforts. The filing specifically names the four plaintiffs, rather than their legal counsel, but Michael Ketchmark of Ketchmark & McCreight is recognized as the lead plaintiffs' counsel in both the Sitzer/Burnett and Gibson cases, indicating his team is likely behind this latest motion. The practice changes mandated by the settlement are not inherently complex. They stipulate that an agent representing a buyer must secure a written agreement before showing a property. This agreement must clearly state a specific compensation amount or rate, rather than an open-ended figure contingent on the seller's offer. It must also explicitly state that fees are negotiable and not legally fixed. Additionally, agents are prohibited from collecting compensation exceeding the amount specified in the agreement.