STUCK AGAIN: eXp realty Stuck in Another TCPA Class Action– And It May Get Worse

Not saying the sky is falling but eXp Realty seems to be facing a ton of TCPA heat lately–and its not going well.

Most recently in Soale v. eXp Realty, 2026 WL 653629 (March 9, 2026) a court refused to dismiss a TCPA class action against the realty giant based on calls allegedly made by an agent without consent.

Apparently the Plaintiff had tried to sell her house on MLS back in 2024. An eXp agent with the Joshua Jackson real estate group apparently left “prerecorded voice[mail] messages,” and texts related to the expired listing trying to convince Plaintiff to use his services. Unsurprisingly the texts included links that prominently referenced eXp.

eXp moved to dismiss the complaint arguing it is not responsible for the actions of its independent contractor agents. The court actually agreed to some extent. Specifically, the Court found eXp could not be liable on a direct liability theory–different than another court had found not long ago– but it still found eXp could be liable on theories of both apparent authority and ratification.

As to apparent authority the court concluded:

Plaintiff received messages from someone purporting to work for Defendant and upon visiting Defendant’s website, found that Defendant displayed Jackson as one of its real estate agents, purported to provide training for real estate agents like Jackson, and had given Jackson access to its branding and logos. Taken as true and considered cumulatively, these allegations of Defendant’s manifestations would plausibly support a reasonable belief that Jackson was an authorized agent of Defendant.

As to ratification the court found:

Here, Plaintiff states a claim under her ratification theory. As an initial matter, because Jackson did purport to contact Plaintiff on Defendant’s behalf (Doc. 1 at 5), the doctrine of ratification is applicable. Kristensen, 879 F.3d at 1014. Plaintiff does allege that Defendant accepted the benefits of Jackson’s conduct by taking “a portion of commission proceeds derived from any representation of a consumer by its” real estate agents and by taking “separate and exclusive” ownership of all brokerage relationships and listings generated by its real estate agents. (Doc. 1 at 7-8). Further, she argues that Defendant’s business structure is “set up to remain willfully ignorant of the conduct of one’s contractor to avoid liability” (Doc. 16 at 15). She bases this willful ignorance on Defendant’s knowledge that many other associates similarly situated to Jackson have generated leads using methods that violated the TCPA which are “materially identical” to Jackson’s methods.

Eesh, willful ignorance?

Not good.

As mentioned the case could get even worse for eXp because although the court concluded the current complaint was not satisfactory to allege theories of direct liability or actual authority the court allowed plaintiff to amend the complaint to add more allegations– so an amended complaint might keep eXp in the suit on all theories.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter, however, as success on any theory of vicarious liability would hold eXp liable for all calls at issue regardless.

We’ll keep an eye on this.

Real estate agents (and brokers) should give serious thought to attending Law Conference of Champions in early May. Although the networking won’t be as great for them as it will be for many others the ability to obtain critical knowledge of the law is unparalleled at this event.

Chat soon.