Estate Agents Launch 15 Billion Pound Class Action Against Rightmove Over Excessive Fee Allegations

A formal class action claim seeking £1.5 billion in damages has been filed against Rightmove at the Competition Appeal Tribunal, brought by Jeremy Newman, a former panel member of the Competition and Markets Authority. The claim, submitted on Wednesday, accuses Britain’s dominant property search portal of levying excessive and unfair fees on the estate agents who depend upon it for lead generation and sales activity.

Newman confirmed that more than 250 estate agencies across the country have expressed interest in and support for the legal action. In a statement accompanying the filing, he noted that the volume and nature of responses from agents had validated longstanding concerns about Rightmove’s commercial conduct, adding that the claim represents a meaningful route to compensation for businesses that have had little choice but to absorb sustained fee increases over a prolonged period.

Rightmove moved swiftly to reject the allegations, stating that it remains confident in the value it provides to its partners and consumers, and describing the claim as being without merit. The company indicated it would defend the action vigorously.

Despite Rightmove’s dismissal of the claim, financial markets reacted with notable unease. Shares in the company fell by more than 8 per cent in early trading on Wednesday before partially recovering, ultimately closing down 1.4 per cent at 423p. Anthony Codling, a housing industry analyst at RBC Capital Markets, characterised the initial market reaction as unwarranted, expressing the view that the claim was unlikely to succeed on the basis that no estate agent is compelled to list on the platform.

Codling’s point is one that Rightmove itself would likely echo, yet the commercial reality for many agents tells a rather different story. Rightmove commands an unrivalled position within the UK residential property market; British consumers spent the equivalent of nearly 32,000 years browsing its site and app in 2025 alone. With more than 19,000 estate agent branches subscribing to the platform, the practical ability to operate outside its ecosystem is, for most practitioners, negligible.

The financial burden that accompanies this dependency is substantial. Rightmove’s average monthly subscription cost rose by 6 per cent in 2025, increasing by £97 to reach £1,621 per branch. For the majority of estate agents, that subscription represents their second-largest operational cost after staffing. Compounding the grievance is the platform’s extraordinary profitability: for every pound collected from agent subscriptions, Rightmove retains approximately 70 pence as profit, a margin that stands unmatched across the entire FTSE 100 index.

Testimonies from agents supporting the claim paint a stark picture of market pressure. One small London-based agency owner attributed the closure of their business in no small part to the weight of Rightmove’s fees, while a separate respondent accused the company of abusing its dominant market position to set charges at will. Not all agents share this perspective; one Kent-based operator acknowledged the cost but noted that Rightmove generates approximately three quarters of their inbound leads, with an estimated 90 per cent of prospective buyers consulting the site prior to submitting offers.

The litigation is being funded by Innsworth Capital, a commercial litigation funder that will receive a proportion of any compensation awarded. Legal support is being provided by Scott+Scott, a law firm with an established track record of pursuing claims against major corporations. James Hain-Cole, a partner at the firm, argued that Rightmove’s subscriber base had effectively become a captive market in the absence of meaningful competition, allowing the company to raise prices consistently and materially without adequate justification or transparency.

The case will now proceed through the Competition Appeal Tribunal, a specialist court equipped to handle disputes of this nature under UK competition law. The outcome carries significant implications not only for the estate agency sector, but for the broader regulatory conversation surrounding platform dominance and the pricing power it confers. With litigation funding secured and substantial industry support behind the claim, this is unlikely to be a matter resolved quickly or quietly.