UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

RONALD KAZMIRZAK; LUIS

v.

DATACOMP APPRAISAL SYSTEMS, INC.;

EQUITY LIFESTYLE PROPERTIES, INC.;

HOMETOWN AMERICA MANAGEMENT,

L.L.C.; LAKESHORE COMMUNITIES,

INC.; SUN COMMUNITIES, INC.; RHP

PROPERTIES, INC.; YES COMMUNITIES,

L.L.C.; INSPIRE COMMUNITIES, L.L.C.;

Anthony Silverence (together, “Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly

situated (the “Class,” as defined below), upon personal knowledge as to the facts pertaining to

themselves and upon information and belief as to all other matters, and based on the

2

Inc. (“Sun Communities”), RHP Properties, Inc. (“RHP”), Yes Communities, L.L.C. (“Yes

Communities”), Inspire Communities, L.L.C. (“Inspire Communities”), Kingsley Management,

Corp. (“Kingsley”), Cal-Am Properties, Inc.’s (“Cal-Am”), and Murex Properties, L.L.C.

I. NATURE OF THE ACTION

stabilize manufactured home lot rental prices. Manufactured, or mobile, homes have long been

one of the country’s most affordable housing options, particularly for people who do not receive

government aid. According to federal data, about 20 million Americans live in manufactured

homes, which make up about 6% of U.S. residences. And in 2022, nearly one-third of the 10.5

million adults living in manufactured homes were over the age of 60. The effect of Defendants’

conspiracy has been devasting to manufactured home residents. These individuals—whose

median annual household income is approximately $35,000—are being overcharged for what

used to be affordable housing. The consequence is that two of society’s most vulnerable

can range in size from a few lots to hundreds. Most manufactured home residents own their

manufactured homes but rent the lots on which they set down their manufactured homes from the

owners of manufactured home communities.

3

mobile home data—and several large owners of manufactured home communities that use

Datacomp’s reports to coordinate their prices by sharing non-public, competitively sensitive

throughout the United States.

Communities, Inspire Communities, Kingsley, Cal-Am, and Murex (together referred to as

“Manufactured Home Community Defendants”) are manufactured home community owners.

They are part of a recent wave of large corporate owners who have acquired manufactured home

communities across the United States to grow large portfolios of home sites. After acquiring the

communities, these buyers have implemented steep, annual rent increases on their manufactured

4

manufactured home community owners, including the Manufactured Home Community

Defendants, to reduce or eliminate competition amongst themselves on price, services, and

quality for manufactured home lots.

Datacomp placed an advertisement in MHInsider, a magazine for “Manufactured Housing

Professionals,” which claimed that the reports could help community owners “stay competitive.”.

Of course, by providing manufactured home communities owners non-public, competitively

sensitive information, the JLT Market Reports actually eliminate competition by enabling

community owners to coordinate and raise manufactured lot rents to exorbitant prices.

5

Figure 1.

6

The Manufactured Home Community Defendants could never have demanded these rental price

increases unilaterally. To implement the increases, they needed to conspire. They did this by

exchanging non-public, competitively sensitive information through Datacomp’s JLT Market

Reports to be . . . extremely helpful for rent increases across our portfolio throughout the

country.”

Datacomp’s JLT Market Reports allowed Defendants to carry out a price fixing conspiracy to

artificially inflate manufactured home lot rents in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and

common law. The exchange of information through the JLT Market Reports is also separately

unlawful under Section 1 of the Sherman Act as an unlawful information exchange. The

violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and common law, Plaintiffs and members of the Class

were injured by paying significant overcharges on manufactured home lot rents throughout the

United States.

and members of the Class will continue to pay supracompetitive rents for manufactured home

7

efforts to coordinate their prices by sharing competitively sensitive information for manufactured

home lots.

II. JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND EFFECT ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE

the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and 26), to (i) recover treble damages and the costs of suit,

including reasonable attorneys’ fees, for the injuries sustained by Plaintiffs and members of the

Class; (ii) enjoin Defendants’ anticompetitive conduct; and (iii) for such other relief as is

afforded under the laws of the United States for Defendants’ violations of Section 1 of the

Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1).

and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15(a), 26).

Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 15, 22, and 26), and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), (c), and (d), because, at

all relevant times, one or more Defendants resided, transacted business, was found, is licensed to

and intended effect of causing injury to the business or property of persons residing in, located

in, or doing business throughout the United States, including in this District. Each Defendant has

purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting business activities within the United

8

States and has the requisite minimum contacts therein because each Defendant committed

intentional acts that were intended to cause and did cause injury within the United States.

effects on the interstate commerce of the United States.

prevent them from further violations of Section 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act as hereinafter

alleged.

this case.

III. THE PARTIES

Time Period, Kazmirzak rented a manufactured home lot located in a manufactured home

community named Sterling Estates, which is owned and managed by Defendant RHP. During the

Melendez paid higher rental prices by reason of the violation alleged herein.

Relevant Time Period, Roach rented a manufactured home lot located in a manufactured home

community named Bayside Waters, which is owned and managed by Defendant Murex. During

9

the Relevant Time Period, Roach paid monthly rent to Murex for this manufactured home lot.

Roach paid higher rental prices by reason of the violation alleged herein.

community named Village Green, which is owned and managed by Defendant ELS. During the

Relevant Time Period, Sewell paid monthly rent to ELS for this manufactured home lot. Sewell

paid higher rental prices by reason of the violation alleged herein.

Relevant Time Period, Silverence rented a manufactured home lot located in a manufactured

home community named Candlestick Mobile Home Park, which is owned and managed by

Defendant Lakeshore. During the Relevant Time Period, Silverence paid monthly rent to

management companies, developers, lenders, appraisers, homeowner associations and real estate

brokers. Datacomp was purchased by Defendant Equity LifeStyle Properties, Inc. in December

2021 for $43 million.

headquartered in Chicago, Illinois. ELS owns, operates, or has a controlling interest in more than

16

national number.

home lot.”

property and have one owner, manufactured homes and manufactured home lots are considered

separate pieces of property and often have different owners.

17

rent where both the manufactured home and the manufactured home lot are owned by a landlord

and rented to the resident; (2) own-own where both the manufactured home and manufactured

by the resident, but the manufactured home lot is rented. Of the three ownership configurations,

own-rent is the most common.

communities or parks where they rent a manufactured home lot from a property manager such as

the Manufactured Home Community Defendants. Manufactured home communities range in size

in terms of the number of lots they contain, but some large communities contain over 700 or 800

lots. Residents of these communities pay monthly rents for the manufactured home lot and other

18

lot. Since the 1950s, manufactured homes have been designed and used as permanent affordable

housing. The manufactured home industry has responded to housing demand by building

increasingly large and complex manufactured home units that are effectively immobile and are

municipalities also have rules governing when and how manufactured homes can be transported,

making relocation difficult. Additionally, vacancy rates in existing manufactured home

communities are commonly in the single digits, making available lots hard to find. Even if

vacant lots are available, many manufactured home communities refuse to accept pre-owned or

older manufactured homes from other sites. Thus, once installed on a site, manufactured homes

are difficult to move.

19

iii. Lakeshore: In 2022, Lakeshore purchased a 150-lot community in

iv. Sun Communities: In 2019, Sun Communities spent over a billion dollars

20

vi. Yes Communities: In 2018, Yes Communities purchased 24

vii. Inspire Communities: During the Relevant Time Period, Inspire

including the Manufactured Home Community Defendants, have significantly raised

manufactured home lot rents based on the unlawful conduct alleged herein, which has caused

21

Defendants, have touted the acquisitions as being beneficial to the residents of the manufactured

home communities, residents strongly disagree. Across the United States, manufactured home

Home Community Defendants. For instance, residents of Florence Commons, a manufactured

home community in Tennessee owned by Defendant Yes Communities, have complained that

between 2013-2019 rents increased almost 30%, but community conditions have worsened and

basic requests for repairs went unanswered.

owned by Defendants Kingsley and Yes Communities saw their lot rents increase substantially

after those companies purchased manufactured home communities from small operators.

Killingworth, Connecticut that it had acquired in 2019. The Attorney General’s office reported

that it had received, following the Sun Communities acquisition, numerous complaints from

residents “who have seen sustained, escalating rent hikes despite deteriorating conditions.”

22

raised lot rents by 20% and imposed draconian rules prohibiting vegetable gardens without

Lakeshore’s permission, forbidding outdoor laundry lines, and banning fenced-in-yards for pets.

The investigation uncovered multiple violations of Minnesota law and the Attorney General

out-of-state corporate owners controlling more and more manufactured home communities and

substantially raising rents, the Colorado state legislature passed a law offering greater protections

to residents, including giving residents 120 days to buy a community from landlords looking to

sell their land, as well as a right of first refusal. Defendants ELS, RHP, and Kingsley were three

of the manufactured home community operators in Colorado that received the most complaints

on the state system. Additionally, in 2020, Kingsley reached a six-figure settlement agreement

maintenance, and unusable property amenities, the senators wrote: “The business policies and

practices cited above undercut any possible justification for yet another substantial lot rent

increase.”

from government officials, manufactured home community owners, including the Manufactured

23

home lots, including during the Relevant Time Period. The large corporate owners of

manufactured home communities have been clear about their intentions to turn manufactured

home communities into cash cows, and manufactured home community managers and investors

Street Advisors, between 2004 and 2018, operating income from manufactured home

communities rose 87% and never declined, even during the 2008 financial crisis. Green Steet

Advisors analyst John Pawlowski referred to players in the industry as “rocket ships” and stated:

“It’s baffling how good of a business it has been.”

reported huge returns for their shareholders. Between March 2009 and February 2020, ELS and

Sun Communities returned 1,186% and 4,137% respectively—far higher than the S&P 500’s

sensitive information contained within the JLT Market Reports that are published by Defendant

Datacomp. Manufactured Home Community Defendants also used the reports to coordinate

strategic acquisitions of manufactured home communities to consolidate market share and

acquire significant market power.

24

1. History of Datacomp

the manufactured home industry.

MHVillage, a listing site for manufactured home sales. It is the largest manufactured home

marketplace in the world, generating leads for about $3 billion in sales annually. When creating

MHVillage, Datacomp leveraged the information about manufactured homes that it had gathered

while appraising manufactured homes.

which publishes industry reports for manufactured home community operators. After acquiring

JLT & Associates, Datacomp began publishing these reports under the name “JLT Market

Reports,” and it continues to do so today. As explained below, the JLT Market Reports provide

manufactured home community operators, including the Manufactured Home Community

Prior to this acquisition, ELS was a Datacomp customer that used Datacomp’s JLT Market

Reports to price manufactured home lot rents in coordination with its direct competitors. By

acquiring Datacomp, ELS became the owner of a product that it provided to its competitors to

facilitate a price-fixing conspiracy, thus making it even easier for it and the other Manufactured

25

Home Community Defendants—direct competitors in the manufactured home lot market—to

exchange information and coordinate manufactured home lot rent pricing.

2. Datacomp’s JLT Market Reports

manufactured home communities located in as many as 187 geographic areas, referred to as

metropolitan statistical areas (“MSAs”), throughout the United States.

mobile home value reports” that provides “price information”:

Figure 5.

32

33

34

Manufactured Home Community Defendants would never have in a competitive market—and

were the essential component of the conspiracy to artificially inflate manufactured home lot

rents.

3. Datacomp Offers Real-Time Information Market Reports

as well as “real-time information on the web, phone calls or any combination that serves you

best”:

35

manufactured housing market data” to provide “unique custom data projects” that are used to

make “informed, strategic business decisions”:

36

37

comprehensive analysis of competing communities in those markets in which we operate. The

information is a valuable part of our marketing efforts nationwide. The management reports,

JLT Market Reports is current: “The surveys make our business decisions more accurate and

timely. The reports are independent, unbiased and very comprehensive and provide accurate and

timely information. The information helps us determine how our communities compare to the

competition.”

owned a portfolio of manufactured home communities in several states prior to selling its

Market Reports, Defendants have been able to artificially increase the price of rent for

manufactured home lots throughout the United States.

5. Defendants’ Systematic Exchange of Competitively

Act

of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and violates the information exchange safety zone promulgated

by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”).

38

Health Care” (the “1996 Policy”). The 1996 Policy gave guidance to the health care industry on

various antitrust issues, including information sharing, and this has since been applied to

safety zone” for information exchanges. According to the 1996 Policy, an information exchange

that fell within the safety zone was unlikely to raise antitrust concerns and would unlikely be

challenged by the agencies.

following requirements:

data is not used by competing providers for discussion or coordination of provider prices or

costs.” It was important to the agencies that “providers [were] aware of the potential antitrust

consequences of information exchanges among competitors.” The agencies explained that these

conditions were carefully crafted to balance a competitor’s individual interests in obtaining

useful information “against the risk that the exchange of such information may permit

39

legality of information exchanges in other industries. For instance, FTC issued general guidance

in 2014 that referred to the safety zone requirements as necessary criteria for a legal data

intelligence by exchanging price or other commercially sensitive information, that may facilitate

collusion . . . in violation of the antitrust laws.”

legality of the information exchange described in this complaint. The safety zone requirements

are not met here.

Datacomp operates the exchange of information through its JLT Market Reports. As described

manufactured home communities, such as the Manufactured Home Community Defendants, to

provide it with competitively sensitive information that it could sell back to the owners for a

profit. Datacomp therefore had a vested interest with an expectation of financial gain as it stood

to profit from the illegal information exchange.

40

Indeed, as the quotes from Defendants’ executives above demonstrated,

purposes of providing encompassing guidance to the public on relevant healthcare competition

issues in today’s environment.” Thus, Defendants’ information sharing practice violates a

government policy that the DOJ deemed “too permissive,” demonstrating the particularly

egregious nature of the conduct being challenged here.

41

that “throughout its enforcement and policy work, the DOJ has had ‘serious concerns’ about

whether the factors set out in the safety zones are appropriate for the industry as it exists today.”

Mekki noted that “[e]xchanges facilitated by [third-party] intermediaries can have the same

suggestion that data that’s at least three months old is unlikely to be competitively sensitive or

valuable is underpinned by the rise of pricing algorithms that can increase the competitive value

of historical data.”

2023, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Michael Kades commented on DOJ’s new position

related to information sharing. Responding to questions on what proper information sharing

looks like without safe harbors, Kades said that “top-of-mind questions should be what

exchange violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act. DOJ’s withdrawal of the 1996 Policy and the

comments made by Mekki and Kades exemplify DOJ’s current position that information

exchanges can be anticompetitive regardless of their exact form.

6. Economic Analysis Supports the Existence of a Cartel

complaint. Specifically, experts retained by Plaintiffs have analyzed U.S. Census data on

manufactured home lot rental prices, and that analysis reveals that manufactured home rental lot

48

49

50

Defendants’ unlawful agreement to systemically raise the price of manufactured home lot rents

above competitive levels during the Relevant Time Period.

7. “Plus Factors” in the Manufactured Home Industry

that would normally remain private is a “super plus factor” that leads to a strong inference of

1

William E. Kovacic, Plus Factors and Agreement in Antitrust Law, 110 Mich. L. Rev. 393, 393

(2011).

2

See id. at 396-97.

52

Market Reports provide valuable information to support lot rent increases and acquisition

opportunities.

collude. Additionally, as of July 2019, Defendants Datacomp, ELS, Hometown America, Sun

Communities, RHP, Yes Communities, Inspire Communities, and Murex are all members of the

Manufactured Housing Institute (“MHI”). MHI is the only national trade association representing

all sectors of the manufactured and modular housing industries. Executives from Defendants

ELS and Sun Communities have been on the MHI Board of Directors during the Relevant Time

Period. Additionally, MHI organizes numerous industry meetings and events throughout the

year, including MHI Congress & Expo, the MHI National Communities Council (“NCC”) Spring

community owners, including the Manufactured Home Community Defendants, have been

buying up communities across the United States to create massive portfolios. A conspiracy is

easier to effectuate, maintain, and enforce in a concentrated industry.

barriers. These include the high cost of acquiring property and establishing a property

53

Large manufactured home communities run into the hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase.

Market analyst, Ron Trinh, noted that “barriers to entry to compete [are] very high” in this

industry, giving established companies, like the Manufactured Home Community Defendants, a

[manufactured housing] sector is the complete lack of new supply expected to be constructed.

With essentially zero net supply coming online for the foreseeable future, manufactured housing

is relatively immune from the oversupply fears that encumber other REIT sectors.” Thus, new

entrants into the market are unlikely to discipline cartel pricing.

competition in the manufactured home lot rental market. In other markets with low switching

costs, consumers can stop purchasing a particular manufacturer’s product when its prices are no

years’ worth of accrued equity for mobile homeowners.” Therefore, when a manufactured home

community owner raises lot rent, residents are often forced to accept the price increase—or leave

their home. These factors are what led Frank Rolfe, an investor who has owned thousands of

manufactured home lots, to make the controversial, and often quoted, remark that a

manufactured home community “is like a Waffle House where the customers are chained to their

54

V. ANTICOMPETITIVE EFFECTS AND RELEVANT ANTITRUST MARKET

iii. Individuals have been deprived of free and open competition.

the Class to pay higher prices for manufactured home lot rents than they would have in the

absence of Defendants’ illegal contract, combination, or conspiracy, and, as a result, Plaintiffs

and members of the Class have suffered damages in the form of overcharges paid on their

manufactured home lot rentals. This is an injury of the type that the antitrust laws were meant to

punish and prevent. Defendants’ price fixing agreement and information exchange are per se

manufactured homes as infill housing in areas zoned residential or restrict placement of

55

manufactured homes to manufactured home communities only. By renting a manufactured home

lot, manufactured home residents get to enjoy the benefit of owning their own home but are not

burdened with the expense of landownership. Additionally, many manufactured home residents

include special perks such as community or recreation centers, playgrounds, and dog parks.

Many manufactured home communities are 55+ communities and provide other specific benefits

to older residents.

a. The Relevant Geographic Market Is National

States. The Manufactured Home Community Defendants own manufactured home parks across

the United States and have increased rental prices universally.

produced) JLT Market Reports (the “Regional Submarkets”).

constraint on where a manufactured home lot renter chooses to live, the manufactured home

housing market can be regional and tied to a center of commerce or education and the

their own submarket. Leases outside a Regional Submarket are not substitutable for leases inside

56

a submarket because they would leave renters with inordinately long commutes to schools, jobs,

family, or doctors. Consequently, manufactured home lots outside the Regional Submarket are

not within the relevant geographic markets for antitrust purposes.

competition nationally, including in at least the following Regional Submarkets (listed in order

of the number of manufactured home communities, following the Chicago, IL MSA), each of

which comprises a separate and distinct relevant regional geographic market:

57

vi. Riverside County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 94

ix. San Bernadino County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 78

xii. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater (Hillsborough County), FL MSA:

64

lvi. Dallas County, TX: Regional Submarket consists of at least 29

lviii. Oklahoma City, OK MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 28

lix. Macomb County, MI: Regional Submarket consists of at least 27

65

lxiii. Brevard County, FL: Regional Submarket consists of at least 26

lxvi. South Jersey, NJ: Regional Submarket consists of at least 25

lxix. Elkhart-Goshen-South Bend, ID MSA: Regional Submarket consists of

66

lxxii. Western Colorado: Regional Submarket consists of at least 24

lxxiii. Salem, OR MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 24

lxxvi. Wichita, KS MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 23

67

lxxviii. Medford-Grants Pass, OR MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at

lxxx. Santa Barbara County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 22

lxxxi. Contra Costa County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 22

lxxxiv. Fort Wayne, IN MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 20

68

lxxxv. Gary-Michigan City, IN MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least

lxxxvii. Alameda County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 20

lxxxviii. Northern Michigan: Regional Submarket consists of at least 20

69

xcii. Citrus-Hernando-Sumter Counties, FL MSA: Regional Submarket

xciv. Charleston, SC MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 18

xcv. Washtenaw County, MI: Regional Submarket consists of at least 17

xcviii. Tulsa, OK MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 17

70

xcix. Prescott, AZ MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 17

cii. Brownsville, TX MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 17

cv. Birmingham, AL MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 16

71

cvii. Dayton-Springfield, OH MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least

cx. Osceola County, Fl: Regional Submarket consists of at least 15

cxiii. Livingston County, MI: Regional Submarket consists of at least 14

72

cxiv. Champaign-Urbana, IL MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least

cxvi. Louisville, KY MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 13

cxvii. Jackson County, MI: Regional Submarket consists of at least 13

cxx. Santa Fe, NM MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 13

73

cxxi. Spokane County, WA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 13

cxxiii. San Luis Obispo County, CA: Regional Submarket consists of at least

cxxiv. Yuma, AZ MSA: Regional Submarket consists of at least 12

cxxvii. Lapeer County, MI: Regional Submarket consists of at least 11