Mauricio Umansky Sues NAR Over Clear Cooperation Policy: Antitrust Battle on Pocket Listings Explained

Key Takeaways

Mauricio Umansky’s PLS.com refiled an antitrust lawsuit against NAR, challenging its Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP) .
The CCP mandates listings be added to NAR-affiliated MLS within one business day, crippling private “pocket listing” platforms like PLS.com .
Umansky argues the policy eliminates consumer choice for sellers seeking privacy and suppresses market innovation .
NAR defends the CCP, claiming it ensures transparency while allowing “office exclusive” listings .
The outcome could reshape digital property marketing amid parallel lawsuits (Compass vs. Zillow) and DOJ scrutiny .

The Lawsuit: Why a Celebrity Broker Is Taking on NAR

Mauricio Umansky isn’t just any real estate agent. As founder of The Agency and star of Buying Beverly Hills, he built PLS.com in 2019 as a private network for off-market “pocket listings.” Think luxury homes in L.A. marketed discreetly to elite buyers—no public ads, no MLS footprints. By 2019, it had 20,000 users . Then came NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP). The rule forced agents to submit listings to NAR-affiliated MLS databases within one day of public marketing. For PLS, “public marketing” included sharing listings within its private network. Overnight, PLS became unworkable. Umansky sued NAR in 2020, paused the case during NAR’s commission-fixing lawsuits, and refiled it 30 minutes after the legal freeze lifted on July 1, 2025 .

“We created a platform for privacy and discretion—and met coordinated resistance from gatekeepers.” — PLS Spokesperson

What Are Pocket Listings—And Why Do They Matter?

You know those Hollywood mansions sold quietly, without fanfare? That’s the world of pocket listings. Also called “whisper listings,” they let sellers test prices, avoid public showings, or dodge stigma if a home lingers unsold. High-profile clients (celebrities, execs) love them . But critics argue they limit buyer access and might enable discrimination .

How Brokerages Use Pocket Listings Today

Compass: Runs “Private Exclusives” for 35% of its listings. Sellers start privately, then phase into public MLS .
Corcoran & Douglas Elliman: Launched invite-only networks like Corcoran Reserve .
The Agency: Umansky’s firm uses pocket listings for 50% of luxury L.A. sales .

When San Francisco homeowner Caitlin Bigelow listed her condo as a Compass Private Exclusive, she got two quick offers—one $95k over ask. But she later netted $100k more after listing publicly. “Only two people saw it first. What if 50 had?” she says .

NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy: Transparency or Monopoly?

NAR rolled out the CCP in late 2019 to stop “side deals.” The rule requires:

Any listing marketed publicly (e.g., on social media, brokerage sites) must be added to MLS within 1 business day.
Brokers can still use “office exclusives” (not marketed beyond their firm) .

NAR calls this pro-consumer: “It promotes transparency while preserving choice” . But PLS’s lawsuit alleges NAR orchestrated the CCP to crush rivals. White papers, closed-door meetings, and fines for non-compliance allegedly forced PLS out of business .

Table: CCP’s Impact on Stakeholders

Industry Civil War: Compass, Zillow, and DOJ Enter the Fray

Umansky’s case isn’t happening in a vacuum.

Compass vs. Zillow: When Zillow banned non-MLS listings in May 2025 (mirroring CCP rules), Compass sued. Its “Private Exclusives” vanished from Zillow overnight .
DOJ Investigation: Since 2018, the DOJ has probed if the CCP violates antitrust law .
NAR’s Partial Retreat: In March 2025, NAR added a “delayed marketing” option. Sellers can now withhold listings from MLS if they avoid all public promotion .

Brokerages are split. eXp Realty CEO Leo Pareja calls private listings “exclusionary,” while Anywhere Real Estate (Coldwell Banker’s parent) advocates “broad distribution” . Yet both own pocket-listing networks—hypocrisy PLS cites as evidence of NAR’s coercive power .

What’s Next for Real Estate Listings?

Three outcomes could reshape the market:

Umansky Wins: CCP gets voided. Pocket listing platforms resurge, fragmenting MLS control. Sellers gain marketing flexibility .
NAR Wins: CCP upheld. MLS remains the central hub. Pocket listings persist only as “office exclusives” with strict limits .
Hybrid Model: NAR’s new “delayed marketing” rule expands. Sellers opt for phased approaches (private → public) without penalties .

Meanwhile, Umansky’s American Real Estate Association (5,000 agents) pushes to replace NAR. “It’s a monopoly,” he insists . With trials likely in 2026, the fight over who controls listing data—and consumer choice—is just escalating.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did Mauricio Umansky sue NAR?

Umansky’s pocket-listing platform, PLS.com, claims NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP) crushed its business by forcing listings onto MLS within one day of marketing. He refiled an antitrust lawsuit on July 1, 2025 .

What is NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy?

The CCP requires agents to submit publicly marketed listings to a NAR-affiliated MLS within one business day. NAR says it ensures transparency; critics call it anti-competitive .

Are pocket listings illegal?

No. But the CCP limits how they’re marketed. “Office exclusives” (listings not advertised outside one brokerage) are still allowed .

What do pocket listings mean for home sellers?

Pros: Privacy, price testing, no public stigma.
Cons: Fewer buyers might mean lower offers (as Caitlin Bigelow learned) .

Could this lawsuit change how homes are sold?

Yes. If PLS wins, private listing networks could resurge. If NAR wins, MLS dominance continues. Parallel lawsuits (like Compass vs. Zillow) add pressure.

Finance Foggle

Search This Blog