People who booked a U.S. hotel directly or through a travel site other than Expedia since October 2022 may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Expedia used contract terms and search-ranking penalties to keep hotels from offering lower prices anywhere else. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Expedia has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
Three hotel guests filed a proposed nationwide antitrust class action against Expedia Group on October 2, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. The case is Andrews v. Expedia Group, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-03743. The 53-page complaint claims that Expedia, which it says handles about 78% of U.S. online hotel bookings by value through Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Travelocity, Orbitz and CheapTickets, uses its hotel contracts and search rankings to stop hotels from selling rooms for less on their own websites or on rival travel sites. The result, the plaintiffs allege, is higher hotel prices for travelers who never used Expedia at all. Expedia has not yet responded in court.Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What Does the Lawsuit Allege?
The complaint says Expedia charges hotels a commission of about 15% of each booking, and 25% to 30% for hotels that pay for extra visibility. A hotel selling a room on its own website pays no commission, so it could afford to charge less there. The plaintiffs allege Expedia prevents that in two ways:- A contract clause. Section C.1 of Expedia’s standard hotel agreement, the complaint says, requires hotels to give Expedia rates “equal to or better than” those on the hotel’s own online booking channels. This kind of term is known as a rate parity or most-favored-nation clause.
- Search-ranking penalties. The complaint describes four mechanisms that allegedly push a hotel down Expedia’s search results if it is cheaper elsewhere: a “rate competitiveness” ranking factor, a “most likely to convert” ranking factor, an automatic rate-match tool, and the VIP Access program, which the complaint says ties visibility benefits to rate parity.
Because Expedia is a site most U.S. hotels feel they must be listed on, the plaintiffs argue, hotels keep their prices the same everywhere rather than risk being buried on Expedia. They also allege that rival sites such as Booking.com have little reason to cut their own commissions, since hotels cannot pass the savings on as lower prices. The complaint includes a table of nightly rates at six hotels, including the Hyatt Regency Chicago, showing identical or nearly identical prices on Expedia, Booking.com and the hotel’s own site.
Who Is in the Proposed Class?
The complaint proposes two classes, both covering October 2, 2022 through the date the challenged conduct stops:- Direct-Booked Class: people and businesses in the U.S. who bought a U.S. hotel stay directly from a hotel listed on an Expedia site, through the hotel’s own website, app, call center or loyalty portal.
- OTA Class: people and businesses in the U.S. who booked a stay at such a hotel through a travel site other than Expedia’s, such as Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda or Trip.com.
The complaint gives Marriott, Hilton, IHG, Wyndham, Choice, Hyatt and Best Western among its examples of brands whose hotels list on Expedia. Those hotel companies are not defendants. Travelers who booked through Expedia’s own sites are not part of either proposed class, and a court decides later whether any class is certified.
What Laws Does It Claim Were Broken?
The complaint brings two federal claims against Expedia Group, the only defendant: unreasonable restraint of trade under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, based on its hotel agreements, and monopolization under Section 2. It asks for triple damages, a court order ending the challenged practices, interest, and attorneys’ fees. It does not name a dollar amount. The plaintiffs are represented by Terrell Marshall Law Group, Berger Montague and Freedman Normand Friedland.Has This Been Tried Before?
Rate parity has been challenged in the U.S. before. A group of more than 30 consumer suits filed in 2012 against Expedia, other travel sites and major hotel chains, consolidated in federal court in Dallas as In re Online Travel Co. Hotel Booking Antitrust Litigation, was dismissed in 2014. That case alleged a conspiracy among travel sites and hotels; the new complaint instead targets Expedia alone and relies on its alleged market dominance. It also cites a 2024 decision in the same Seattle court that let a monopolization suit against Expedia by the bankruptcy trustee of a Swiss travel site move past a motion to dismiss.Outside the U.S., the complaint points to regulators and courts that have restricted parity clauses, including the European Union’s Digital Markets Act, German competition authorities and a 2024 ruling by the EU’s top court. According to the complaint, Expedia dropped its parity clause for Australian hotels in March 2019 after a regulatory investigation there, which the plaintiffs say shows the clause is not necessary for Expedia’s business.
What Has Expedia Said?
Expedia did not respond to a request for comment from Courthouse News, according to a PYMNTS report, and OCA did not find a public statement from the company about the lawsuit. Some coverage described the case as accusing Expedia of using AI; the complaint itself challenges contract terms and ranking algorithms and does not allege the use of artificial intelligence. Earlier litigation over how Expedia charged hotel taxes and fees involved a different issue and is not related to this case.What Happens Next?
Expedia has not yet appeared in the case. Antitrust suits like this one usually move next to a motion to dismiss, where the court decides whether the complaint states a plausible claim, and only later to class certification. OCA will update this page as the case develops.Questions
Who is covered by the Expedia hotel pricing class action?
The complaint proposes two classes covering people in the U.S. who, since October 2, 2022, booked a U.S. hotel that lists on Expedia either directly with the hotel or through a rival travel site such as Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda or Trip.com. People who booked through Expedia’s own sites are not in either proposed class. No class has been certified.
Why are Expedia customers not in the proposed class?
The lawsuit’s theory is that Expedia’s rules kept prices high everywhere else, so the harm it alleges falls on people who paid hotels directly or used competing travel sites. The complaint defines its classes around those two booking channels.
Is there an Expedia hotel settlement or claim form?
No. The case was filed on October 2, 2026 and is at the complaint stage. There is no settlement, no certified class and no claim form. Earlier litigation over Expedia’s hotel tax and fee charges is a separate matter.
What is a rate parity clause?
A rate parity or most-favored-nation clause requires a hotel to give a booking site prices at least as good as the ones it offers elsewhere. The complaint says Section C.1 of Expedia’s standard hotel agreement requires rates equal to or better than those on the hotel’s own online channels. Expedia removed the clause for Australian hotels in 2019, according to the complaint.
Does the Expedia lawsuit claim Expedia used AI?
No. Some headlines described the case as being about AI, but the complaint challenges contract terms and search-ranking mechanisms, which it calls algorithmic restraints. It does not allege that Expedia used artificial intelligence to set prices.
Sources
• Andrews v. Expedia Group, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-03743 (W.D. Wash.) — docket and complaint• PYMNTS / Competition Policy International — October 6, 2026 report
• Wolters Kluwer Antitrust Law Daily — October 7, 2026 report
• In re Online Travel Co. Hotel Booking Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Tex. 2014) — dismissal opinion
