Expedia antitrust class action says hotel rate rules raised prices even off Expedia

Estimated reading time: 8 minutes.

Key facts

What happened: Three consumers filed a proposed class action against Expedia Group, Inc. on October 2, 2026, claiming its contracts and search rankings kept U.S. hotel prices high, even for people who never booked on Expedia.
The case: Andrews v. Expedia Group, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-03743, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. The court's docket lists Judge Lauren King.
Who it covers: Two proposed nationwide groups. One is people who booked a U.S. hotel directly with the hotel since October 2, 2022. The other is people who booked through a rival travel site such as Booking.com or Priceline.
Who it does not cover: Bookings made on Expedia's own sites, including Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Travelocity, Orbitz and CheapTickets, are not part of either proposed class.
Legal claims: Violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. The plaintiffs seek triple damages and an order ending the practices.
Expedia's position: An Expedia spokesperson told The Seattle Times the allegations are meritless.
Status: Newly filed. No class has been certified, and there is no settlement or claim process.

What the lawsuit says

The complaint accuses Expedia of using its position as the largest online travel agency in the U.S. to stop hotels from offering lower prices anywhere else. Online travel agencies, often called OTAs, are websites that let travelers compare and book rooms from many hotels in one place.

The plaintiffs say Expedia holds about 78% of U.S. hotel bookings made through online travel agencies, measured by dollar value, with Booking.com at about 18% and all others at about 4%. The complaint calls Expedia a "must-list" site for U.S. hotels.

According to the complaint, Expedia charges hotels a commission of about 15% of each booking, and 25% to 30% for hotels that pay for extra visibility. The plaintiffs argue that hotels build this cost into their room rates across every channel. They say Expedia's rules then stop hotels from offering cheaper rates on their own websites or on rival travel sites, so consumers overpay "no matter how they book."

These are allegations. Expedia has not yet filed a formal response, and no court has ruled on them.

Who the parties are

The plaintiffs. The complaint names three consumers:

Lorraine Rocci of Royersford, Pennsylvania, who booked a room directly from a Hilton hotel.
Ronisha Andrews of Carlsbad, California, who booked the WoodSpring Suites Santee in Santee, California through Priceline.
Pak Seong Hoi of Bellevue, Washington, who booked the Davenport Tower, Autograph Collection in Spokane, Washington through Priceline.

The defendant. Expedia Group, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered at 1111 Expedia Group Way West in Seattle. It runs Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Travelocity, Orbitz and CheapTickets.

The lawyers. The plaintiffs are represented by Terrell Marshall Law Group of Seattle, Berger Montague and Freedman Normand Friedland.

How hotel booking commissions work

The complaint describes two main ways hotels sell rooms. They sell through travel sites, which take a commission, or through their own websites, apps, call centers and loyalty programs, which the complaint calls the direct-booked channel.

Travel sites use two common contract types. Under the agency model, the hotel sets the price, the guest pays the hotel, and the hotel pays the travel site a percentage. Under the merchant model, the travel site buys the room at a discounted rate, sells it to the guest at a higher price and keeps the difference.

A direct booking carries no travel site commission. The plaintiffs argue that in a competitive market, hotels would reward direct bookers with lower prices, and that pressure would push travel sites to cut their commissions.

What an MFN clause is

A "most favored nation" clause, or MFN, is a contract term that bars a seller from offering a lower price somewhere else. Hotels and travel sites often call this "rate parity." The lawsuit claims Expedia's version keeps prices high for everyone.

The two practices the lawsuit challenges

The contract clause. The complaint quotes Section C.1 of Expedia's standard hotel agreement: "Unless you are located in Australia, you agree that the Rates and Rate Plans you provide to Expedia will be equal to or better than those made available through your own Online Public booking or your own Online Public distribution channels." The plaintiffs say this stops hotels from offering a cheaper rate on their own websites.

The complaint says Expedia waived this clause for Australian hotels in March 2019 after an investigation by Australia's competition regulator, and still lists Australian hotels. The plaintiffs cite that as evidence the clause is not necessary for Expedia's business.

The search ranking rules. The plaintiffs say Expedia also enforces price parity with rival travel sites through what they call algorithmic restraints. The complaint lists four:

a "rate competitiveness" factor that the plaintiffs say pushes hotels down in Expedia search results if they offer lower prices elsewhere;
a "most likely to convert" ranking factor that the plaintiffs say penalizes hotels whose cheaper rates on rival sites reduce Expedia bookings;
an automatic rate match tool that adjusts a hotel's Expedia rate to match its lowest price on competing sites, which the plaintiffs say hotels are pressured to use;
a VIP Access program that the plaintiffs say ties extra visibility to rate parity.

The complaint argues that since rival sites cannot get hotels to post lower prices, they have no reason to compete by cutting commissions.

The plaintiffs also point to Europe. The complaint says the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in September 2024 that similar clauses are not necessary for booking platforms to operate. It says Booking.com removed comparable clauses for hotels across the European Economic Area after EU regulators designated its parent company a "gatekeeper" under the Digital Markets Act in May 2024.

Rival travel sites are not defendants

Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda and Trip.com appear in the complaint only as examples of non-Expedia travel sites. The lawsuit does not accuse them of wrongdoing.

Who the proposed classes include

The complaint proposes two nationwide classes for the period from October 2, 2022 until the challenged conduct stops:

Direct-Booked Class: people and businesses in the U.S. who bought a U.S. hotel stay directly from a "Listed Hotel" through the hotel's own channels.
OTA Class: people and businesses in the U.S. who booked a stay at a Listed Hotel through a non-Expedia travel site, paying either the hotel or that site.

A Listed Hotel is any U.S. hotel that lists rooms on an Expedia site. The complaint gives examples that include hotels under brands of Marriott, Hilton, IHG, Wyndham, Choice, Hyatt, Best Western, Accor, Sonesta, ESA Management and G6 Hospitality.

Expedia and its affiliates, government entities and the judges on the case are excluded.

These definitions are only proposals. A judge must decide later whether the case can proceed as a class action and, if so, who is included.

Booked on Expedia? Read this

The proposed classes leave out bookings made on Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Travelocity, Orbitz and CheapTickets. If you booked only through those sites, you would not be in either class as currently written.

What Expedia says

An Expedia spokesperson told The Seattle Times that the allegations "are meritless." Expedia has not yet filed its formal answer or a motion to dismiss on the public docket we reviewed.

The complaint's claims about market share, search rankings and price effects come from the plaintiffs and their sources. They have not been tested in court.

What happens next

The docket shows summonses issued on October 5, 2026 and a standing order from Judge King on October 6. Expedia will have time to respond, often with a motion to dismiss in antitrust cases. If the case survives, the parties would exchange evidence before the plaintiffs ask the court to certify the classes.

There is nothing for consumers to sign up for in court right now. If the case ever produces a settlement or judgment, class members would be notified and told how to claim. Law firms sometimes collect contact details from potential class members, but that does not make anyone a party to the case.

You can browse other class action cases you can join while this one is in its early stages.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Expedia hotel price lawsuit about?

Three consumers claim Expedia used contract terms and search ranking rules to stop hotels from offering lower prices on their own sites and on rival travel sites. They say this raised hotel prices nationwide.

I booked on Expedia or Hotels.com. Am I included?

Not under the proposed class definitions. They cover people who booked directly with a hotel or through a non-Expedia travel site.

I booked directly with a Hilton or Marriott hotel. Am I included?

Possibly, if the stay was at a U.S. hotel listed on Expedia and you booked on or after October 2, 2022. The court has not certified any class yet.

Do I need to do anything now?

No. There is no settlement, no claim form and no deadline.

What does Expedia say?

An Expedia spokesperson told The Seattle Times the allegations are meritless.

What are the plaintiffs asking for?

Class certification, a ruling that Expedia violated the Sherman Act, triple damages, an order permanently barring the challenged practices, interest and attorneys' fees.