You open several tabs: Expedia, Hotels.com, Booking.com, the hotel’s own site. Prices look nearly identical, and that similarity may not be accidental, according to a newly filed federal lawsuit. If you’ve been paying too much for hotel rooms, this case may explain why.
A proposed class action filed against Expedia Group argues the uniformity stems from contractual restrictions and algorithmic tools the company allegedly used to suppress price competition across every booking channel.
On October 2, 2026, three consumers filed Andrews et al. v. Expedia Group Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-03743, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiffs are Ronisha Andrews, Pak Seong Hoi, and Lorraine Rocci.
The complaint alleges violations of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act, the two primary federal antitrust statutes that prohibit conduct designed to suppress competition. No court has made findings on those allegations.
The plaintiffs allege that Expedia required hotels to maintain rate parity across distribution channels through contractual provisions. According to the complaint, those provisions prevented hotels from offering lower rates on their own websites, loyalty portals, or call centers.
A hotel that offered a lower price on a competing platform such as Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda, or Trip.com could allegedly face reduced search visibility on Expedia as a result. The complaint specifically identifies an automatic rate-matching tool that plaintiffs say pressured hotels to align their prices with the lowest rate available anywhere online.
Commission costs factor into the plaintiffs’ theory of harm. The complaint alleges Expedia charges hotels roughly 15% per booking, rising to approximately 25% to 30% for enhanced visibility programs.
The plaintiffs argue hotels passed those costs to consumers through higher room rates across all channels. These figures are allegations in the complaint; no court has made findings on them.
We allege that Expedia has abused its monopoly power in the online travel agent market to inflate prices for hotel rooms to millions of consumers even when those consumers did not use Expedia.
Eric L. Cramer, attorney representing the plaintiffs, as reported by Courthouse News Service
What This Means If You Never Booked Through Expedia
Even consumers who avoided Expedia entirely may have been affected, according to the plaintiffs’ theory.
The complaint claims Expedia accounts for approximately 78% of gross booking value within the defined U.S. online travel agency market. That figure is a plaintiff allegation, not a court finding, and it refers specifically to OTA-processed booking dollars rather than all hotel reservations made by U.S. consumers.
The plaintiffs argue that Expedia’s alleged market position could affect prices well beyond its own platform. If hotels could not safely advertise lower prices on competing platforms or their own websites, the complaint argues, those channels may converge toward a higher rate regardless of where you actually booked.
No substantive response from Expedia was identified in the sources reviewed at the time of publication.
Two proposed classes cover the period from October 2, 2022 onward: consumers who booked directly with listed hotels and consumers who booked through non-Expedia OTAs. No class has been certified, and no settlement, claims administrator, or compensation process currently exists as of this report.
Your most practical step right now is comparing total costs across channels, including taxes, resort fees, cancellation terms, and any loyalty benefits a hotel’s direct site may offer that an OTA does not. The next significant developments in the case could include Expedia’s formal response and any motion to dismiss, which would test whether the plaintiffs’ antitrust theory survives initial judicial scrutiny.
