Judge Valderrama’s ‘map’ of successful antitrust litigation in the affordable housing crisis
“The court accepts as true all disputed facts in the Complaint and makes all reasonable decisions in favor of the Plaintiffs.” US District Judge Franklin Valderrama said so on 12.4.2025. According to Reuters: “A group of mobile home rental companies has convinced a federal judge in Chicago to dismiss a proposed nationwide class action accusing them of conspiring to drive up rents.” That case in the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division called “Manufactured Home Lot Rents Antitrust Litigation,” Case No. 23-cv-06715. “US District Judge Franklin Valderrama said Thursday that the plaintiffs have failed to allege a price-fixing agreement between the company’s owners and workers in local communities.” But Valderrama’s decision can be seen as a kind of guide to what is needed to fix “those well-contested facts.” If the plaintiffs’ lawyers – or other plaintiffs in their turn – listen carefully, the backlog can be corrected by filing a revised application until 1.5.2025. If they do, it may prove useful to those looking for HUD Code housing as a viable solution to the affordable housing crisis.
Background about the defendants and pulling quotes from Valderrama will set the stage for what follows.
According to Valderrama’s memorandum. The defendants in this action are: “Equity LifeStyle Properties, Inc. (ELS), Hometown America Management, LLC (Hometown America), Lakeshore Communities, Inc. (Lakeshore), Sun Communities, Inc. (Sun Communities), RHP Properties, Inc. (RHP), Yes Communities, LLC (Yes Communities), Kingsley Communities), Inspire Communities, Kingsley Communities), Inspire Communities, LLC Corp. (Kingsley), Cal-Am Properties, Inc.’s (Cal-Am), and and Murex Properties, LLC (Murex) (collectively MHC Defenders), owners/operators of MHC, and Defendant Datacomp Appraisal Systems, Inc. (Datacomp), the nation’s largest provider of manufactured and mobile home data (Defendactively home data).
Valderrama said well: “December 2021, MHC Defendant ELS bought Datacomp.”
From an MHI member linked in the MHReview Quarterly in the article: “Concerned Community Owner Common Sense Defeats Stupidity of “Price Fixing” Class Action” were the following assertions.
“For several years now, the mobile home park industry has been under the cloud of a massive “price-fixing” class action against Datacomp’s largest owners and customers. However, recently, all of this controversy was dismissed when US District Judge Franklin U. Valderrama ruled that the plaintiffs failed to clearly allege that Actrmand contravention conspiracy. presented did not show a clear “invitation” to join the conspiracy between the defendants, but common conduct is not of itself sufficient to prove conspiracy.”
Several words in that article read like comments made by longtime MHReview contributor Frank Rolfe, a partner with Dave Reynolds at Mobile Home University and Impact Communities, among other businesses connected to the real estate industry. Led Impact Communities by Rolfe and Reynolds is a member of MHI. But regardless of who wrote this article, it may be useful in several ways. The author apparently emphasized the point of the lack of “an express invitation to join the conspiracy among the defendants…”
The express “invitation” to join and associate was cited several times as an issue Valderrama felt plaintiffs failed to meet.
Remarkably, Valderrama also saw this.
“..Defendants argue that, without exception, Defendants’ membership in an industry group does not increase the likelihood of a price-fixing conspiracy, and Plaintiffs do not allege that subsequent price changes were associated with industry group meetings. Reply at 10 (citing Twombly, 550 US at 567 “2 dissenters.[ed] in different trade unions” which is not sufficient to allow the interpretation of “conspiracy[acy] to prevent trade”)… “
MHI is the virtual trade group referred to by Valderrama and the plaintiffs. MHI no longer publicly lists members, but according to an earlier list published by MHI available here, 8 of the 11 defendants are members of MHI. Currently, the chairman of the MHI board is ELS COO Patrick Waite. ELS owns Datacomp, MHVillage, and MHInsider, as documented here.
In the paper, Boor, MHI and the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) have argued for “enhanced preemption” of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000. But in fact, four different Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems have claimed that MHI is busy with optic deployments during substake deployments.
Members of MHI that are publicly traded tend to fight for integration. ELS’s Investment Relations (IR) floor has repeatedly stated: “Increasing demand coupled with almost no innovation is ELS’s advantage.” Therefore, although Datacomp may be part of an antitrust violation, there seems to be a concern based on the evidence that AIs see to limit the development and sales while sending a representation because of optics. That system is said to promote integration over organic growth. MHI leaders have been repeatedly asked to address such issues and have failed to respond publicly. Perhaps this and an earlier HousingWire op-ed might prompt a public response to MHI?
There is more, but Valderrama has used some of the plaintiffs’ arguments against them, without dismissing valid concerns.
Quoting MHI members themselves and MHI issues an “invitation” to meet on the MHI home page. This statement is consistent with the known facts by quoting the words of the defendants.
Attorney Samuel Strommen, while at Knudson Law, argued against the issue of affordable housing but offered a 17-page, 130-footer antitrust thesis explaining why the industry is dysfunctional in the 21st century.
According to Strommen.
“Here, in the midst of what can be declared without shame or irony one of the most affordable housing in American history, dangerous forces are wreaking havoc on the land. [backdrop]: the consolidation of power, the exploitation of an industry rife with a lack of supervision, and the vulnerability of the poor in large-scale, kinship relations.”
Strommen fingered MHI and its key members.
There are evidence-based perspectives on manufactured housing mistrust developed by Federal Reserve economists including James Schmitz Jr., a different angle presented by Maris Jensen, and BIS.org economists. Each presented a different testimony than Strommen. But viewed as pieces of the puzzle that fit together, these appear to satisfy the concerns expressed by Judge Valderrama. AI programs often say that, MHI does strategic avoidance by not responding to concerns.
According to Copilot, in response to the draft linked here, he said this.
“Your use of these statements to create a “meeting invitation” narrative is a thing for analysisbut supported real words from the players themselves-which is exactly what Valderrama says the plaintiffs are saying: physical evidence pointing to an agreement, not just uniform prices and trade association membership.”
HousingWire with this op-ed and inviting MHI leaders to publicly attempt to refute these evidence-based points may start a debate that affects the pending legislation, millions of affordable housing seekers, taxpayers, retail investors, and others. It would be a great way to start the new year.
LA “Tony” Kovach is the managing member of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners. To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected].
