The Sitzer/Burnett class action and later NAR settlement changed how compensation offers are communicated and documented. VeriDealPro addresses the recordkeeping gap with one focused place to post, view, exchange, and acknowledge property-specific disclosures—and preserve immutable evidence of every material disclosure action.
By VeriDealPro Editorial Team · Last reviewed July 16, 2026
In October 2023, the jury found that the challenged Cooperative Compensation Rule was enforced through a conspiracy that raised, inflated, or stabilized commissions paid by the seller class. The verdict form awarded approximately $1.785 billion before the parties' later settlements.
Compensation remains negotiable and may be offered off-MLS. The settlement removed compensation offers and fields from covered MLSs, required written buyer agreements before tours for covered participants, and required advance written seller approval for specified payments to buyer representatives.
When terms move outside the MLS, professionals need one place to show what was posted, what changed, who viewed it, and which version was acknowledged. VeriDealPro preserves that evidence while leaving contracts, legal forms, and legal conclusions to the parties and their advisors.
The commission disclosure proof platform
VeriDealPro preserves every material disclosure action in an immutable evidence trail: append-only versions, database timestamps, acknowledgement receipts, and hash-linked audit history protected against ordinary updates and deletes. If you need proof of what happened, the proof is already here.
The evidence trail preserves what the platform recorded. It does not make a user's statement true, replace a binding agreement, or guarantee legal admissibility.
Class action research and industry context
The Burnett case, commonly called Sitzer/Burnett, was a federal class action brought by Missouri home sellers. The plaintiffs alleged that NAR and several real estate companies participated in an anticompetitive arrangement tied to the Cooperative Compensation Rule and caused sellers to pay inflated broker commissions.
On October 31, 2023, the jury answered yes to the verdict questions asking whether a conspiracy existed, whether it raised or stabilized seller-paid commission rates, whether the named trial defendants joined it, and whether it caused the class to pay more. The jury stated damages of $1,785,310,872. NAR and other defendants later entered settlements; NAR continued to deny the allegations in its settlement agreement.
The resulting practice changes did not eliminate buyer-broker compensation. They moved offers of compensation off covered MLSs and added clearer agreement, approval, and disclosure requirements. That created a practical evidence problem: important terms may now be communicated across separate broker-approved agreements, emails, calls, websites, and negotiation records rather than one MLS compensation field.
VeriDealPro exists to make the disclosure record easier to reconstruct. It connects property-specific terms, seller-side authorization attestations, disclosure versions, professional acknowledgements, database UTC timestamps, audit references, and tamper-evident hash-chain context. It does not decide what compensation is owed, create a binding agreement, guarantee compliance, prevent litigation, or guarantee that a court will admit any record.
It was a federal antitrust class action brought by Missouri home sellers. The plaintiffs alleged that NAR and several real estate companies conspired through rules governing cooperative compensation and caused sellers to pay inflated broker commissions. The defendants disputed the allegations.
On October 31, 2023, the jury found that a conspiracy existed to follow and enforce the challenged Cooperative Compensation Rule, that it raised, inflated, or stabilized seller-paid commission rates, that the named trial defendants joined it, and that it caused the class to pay more. The verdict form stated damages of $1,785,310,872.
No. The corrected settlement agreement states that the plaintiffs alleged a Sherman Act conspiracy and that NAR denied the allegations and asserted defenses. A settlement resolves covered claims and risk; it is not the same thing as an admission of liability.
The NAR settlement agreement defines a $418 million total monetary settlement amount. The official settlement administrator reports that the combined value of the NAR, HomeServices, and other defendant settlements exceeds $1 billion.
Covered MLSs may not accept or communicate offers of compensation to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives through compensation fields, remarks, or other MLS fields. The settlement also prohibits using MLS data feeds to create a multi-broker compensation-offer platform that circumvents the rule.
No. Compensation remains negotiable and may be offered and communicated off-MLS with the required consumer approval. NAR identifies direct broker communication, brokerage websites, signs, flyers, social posts, phone calls, and email as possible off-MLS channels. Applicable law, agreements, professional rules, and brokerage policy still control each transaction.
Subject to applicable law, covered MLS participants working with a buyer must enter a written agreement before the buyer tours a home. If compensation will be received, the agreement must state an objectively ascertainable amount or rate and cannot leave compensation open-ended. The participant may not receive more than the amount or rate agreed with the buyer.
Covered participants acting for sellers must conspicuously disclose and obtain seller approval in writing before a payment or agreement to pay another broker or representative acting for a buyer. The writing must specify the amount or rate. Required consumer-facing agreements and pre-closing disclosures must also state that commissions are not set by law and are fully negotiable.
Potentially, yes. Seller concessions are distinct from offers of compensation. Local MLS rules may permit them, but an MLS concession cannot be limited to or conditioned on retaining or paying a buyer broker. Any payment specifically offered toward a buyer broker's fee must be handled off-MLS.
The district court granted final approval in November 2024, but objectors appealed. As of July 9, 2026, the official settlement administrator states that the appeals remain unresolved, the settlement has not reached its defined effective date, and settlement benefits cannot yet be distributed.
Removing compensation offers from the MLS did not remove the need to communicate, approve, verify, and later reconstruct property-specific terms. VeriDealPro provides a focused off-MLS disclosure-verification record showing what was posted, who posted it, what changed, who viewed it, and which version was acknowledged.
VeriDealPro stores append-only compensation versions and records audit, authentication, and field-change events with database UTC timestamps and SHA-256 hash-chain context. Database triggers prevent ordinary updates and deletes to the protected evidence tables, so corrections must be represented by new records rather than silent overwrites. These controls support integrity review but do not make every user statement true or independently verified.
It may reduce factual ambiguity by preserving a shared timeline of disclosure versions, authorization context, views, and acknowledgements. Better records can help professionals, brokers, counsel, insurers, mediators, or regulators understand what happened. VeriDealPro cannot promise to prevent disputes or lawsuits, and it does not determine who is legally right or what compensation is owed.
They may be relevant records, but admissibility is decided under the rules and law governing the particular proceeding. Electronic records may still require authentication, a qualified witness or certification, a hearsay exception, relevance, and other foundation. VeriDealPro's timestamps, actors, snapshots, and hash context can support that process, but the platform does not guarantee admissibility or litigation outcomes.
No. Within VeriDealPro, an acknowledgement is a versioned viewing receipt, not a broker-to-broker agreement or electronic signature. Parties should use their separate broker-approved agreement and execution process for any binding compensation obligation.
Related resources
Real estate commission disclosure software for licensed professionals to post, exchange, acknowledge, track, and preserve property-specific terms.
Post, view, exchange, acknowledge, and prove buyer-agent commission disclosure terms with version history and receipts.
Exchange seller-side contribution disclosures by property address and preserve every material version, acknowledgement, and audit event.
Exchange broker-to-broker commission disclosures and preserve posted terms, acknowledgements, versions, and immutable audit proof.
The safe, go-to non-MLS platform to post, view, exchange, acknowledge, and prove property-specific commission disclosures.
VeriDealPro for licensed professionals
Put every material commission-disclosure action on one protected record from the start.