FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing
Intero Real Estate Services / Intero Resorts litigation history
What Intero Real Estate Services / Intero Resorts disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.
Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance
What the filing discloses
- Cases disclosed
- 3
- Item 3, as counted in the filing
- Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases
- None stated
- Bankruptcy (Item 4)
- None
- Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer
- Filing year
- 2025
- Disclosures cover the prior ten years
Extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document
Item 3: litigation
Three disclosed matters: (1) nationwide seller class action lawsuits against affiliates HSF and BHH (antitrust/commission conspiracy), settled for $250M with final approval Jan 2025; (2) Lutz buyer class action against HSF and BHH in S.D. Fla., motion to dismiss granted July 2025, third amended complaint pending; (3) Homie Technology antitrust suit against HomeServices/HSF, dismissed with prejudice July 2025. IFS itself is not named in any of these cases.
Item 3 (litigation) · 3 matters disclosed · 1 pending listed
Litigation cases
Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor
Pending (1)
James Lutz vs. HomeServices of America, Inc. et al.
pendingBrought by a third party · HomeServices of America, Inc. (with HSF and BHH) · filed 2024 · US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
“(2) James Lutz vs. HomeServices of America, Inc. et al., in which HSF and BHH are also defendants, concerns allegations on behalf of a purported nationwide class of home buyers that otherwise virtually mirrors the facts and allegations being litigated in the seller class action lawsuits described in paragraph 1, above.”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Concluded (1)
Nationwide Seller Class Action Lawsuits
settledBrought by a third party · HSF Affiliates and BHH Affiliates, LLC · filed 2019
“(1) Nationwide Seller Class Action Lawsuits: HSF and BHH are defendants in several class action lawsuits filed on behalf of sellers of residential real estate against participants in the real estate industry, alleging that real estate brokerages and”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “In August 2024, HSF and BHH, together with their indirect parent company, HomeServices of America, Inc. (“HomeServices”), entered into a settlement agreement providing that the HomeServices entities would collectively pay $250 million in damages and make certain business practice changes.”
Status not stated in the filing (1)
Homie Technology Inc. vs. National Association of REALTORS® et. al.
Brought by a third party · HomeServices of America, Inc. and HSF Affiliates
“(3) Homie Technology Inc. vs. National Association of REALTORS® et. al. Homie Technology Inc. is a real estate brokerage operating in the state of Utah.”Page 12 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Update: On July 15, 2025, all of the claims made by Homie Technology against NAR, HomeServices, HSF Affiliates, and the other brokerage defendants were dismissed with prejudice by the overseeing Court.”
Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Disclosure signals that moved the score
How this shows up in the verdict
- Multiple active antitrust and commission-fixing lawsuits with jury verdict against parent companies creating ongoing legal/reputational risk and potential operational disruptions
The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.
Before you weigh a lawsuit
How to read Item 3
A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.
Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:
- Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
- Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
- Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?