San Francisco bans "rent-fixing" software used by landlord cartels

Alfonso Maruccia

Posts: 1,385   +420
Staff
A hot potato: Corporate landlords can no longer gouge unsuspecting tenants in the Bay Area using automated rent-setting software. "Rental collusion" has driven rental rates sky-high in the already expensive US coastal region. So, San Francisco authorities have banned the sketchy practice that many consider illegal.

A recent ordinance set by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors will stop the "automated rent-setting" practices managed by large landlord ventures. The Board unanimously approved the proposal, led by supervisor and 2024 mayoral candidate Aaron Peskin. Peskin looks to unseat current San Francisco Mayor London Breed in the November 2024 election.

The new rule prohibits the sale and use of "algorithmic devices" designed to autonomously set rent prices or manage occupancy levels for residential units in San Francisco. The Board of Supervisors is targeting software developers such as RealPage and Yardi, which were collecting rental data from landlords to suggest new pricing recommendations.

Officials in Peskin's office said these software companies were combining rent data sets unavailable to the public and using the information to develop price and occupancy strategies that could maximize profit. Peskin described the activity as an "automated price-fixing" scheme, with large landlord organizations colluding in a blatant effort to bleed tenants dry.

Peskin noted that RealPage has exacerbated the San Francisco rent crisis and empowered corporate landlords to keep units vacant intentionally. According to attorney Lee Hepner, a member of the American Economic Liberties Project, the entire business model of these companies is essentially illegal.

"What they're doing, their entire business model is illegal," Hepner told CBS News. "They are manipulating the market to fix prices and hike rents and remove really healthy competition from markets that should be responding to that competitive pressure and actually bring rents down."

Hepner contends that RealPage software provides a convenient way to manipulate the rental market, damaging competition. In a healthy household market, competitive pressure should decrease rents, not vice versa. The Board of Supervisors wants to lower rental rates while putting more housing units on the market.

RealPage faces several lawsuits accusing it of promoting landlord cartels against tenants' interests. RealPage idenies any wrongdoing. The company stated that its software contributes to a healthier and more efficient rental housing ecosystem and that media reports or lawsuits are false and misleading. Now that the city has banned price-fixing software, City Attorneys and affected tenants have a firm legal foundation for filing future lawsuits against the app developers.

Permalink to story:

 
Well, in Brussels if an apartment or a house is kept empty more than one year, the federal taxes increase on that property by the taxable income gained if that property would have been rented
Unpleasant, I agree.
 
2018 in Pittsburgh you could get a $350/m apartment and 2 bedrooms were 550. Keep in mind these were decent neighborhoods, too. The 3 bedroom I was staying in went from 750 to 1500 in 2 years and is currently resting somewhere around 1800 now. Rooms above bars are going for $800/m now with studio or 1bdr apartments starting at 1200. It's not like many of these apartment buildings are full, most of them are hovering at around 60% occupancy rate.
 
LOL yeah it's this piece of software that is causing high rent prices. Not decades worth of disallowing construction of additional residential units (while commercial activity skyrocketed); not rent control keeping people in the same apartment for much longer than they otherwise would be (whether in actuality, or just in fraud); nor Prop 13 and capital gains taxes keeping the homes for sale market similarly gummed up.

The most software could do is prevent errors in pricing from landlords with insufficient knowledge of actual market condition, which I'm not sure is any more or less fair than the emergence of internet sites with on-demand pricing for available units all over the city. In the end a price that is too high will still result in no sale / the prospective renter living elsewhere. But keeping supply artificially depressed over decades - that will jack up prices quite effectively.
 
Well, in Brussels if an apartment or a house is kept empty more than one year, the federal taxes increase on that property by the taxable income gained if that property would have been rented
Unpleasant, I agree.

There is no occupancy tax in California. An empty house is taxed exactly the same as one with 6 people living in it so long as it's considered a primary residence on paper. While that sounds reasonable, there is zero difference in taxes for occupied vs. unoccupied where this article is referencing.
 
Well, in Brussels if an apartment or a house is kept empty more than one year, the federal taxes increase on that property by the taxable income gained if that property would have been rented
Unpleasant, I agree.
That seems reasonable.

 
Contrary to what the city is saying, sitting on a property that’s not being rented out loses the landlord money. In other words if the opportunity cost is too great, the price will be lower instead. But if it’s worth it, that doesn’t make it illegal. Nor does market research, whether the data is public or private.
 
Back