Rental firm giant, owner to pay $49.75M settlement over allegations of deception

The company is founded and wholly owned by Pretium Partners.

The settlement, announced Nov. 6 by the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Indiana and Utah, represents the largest enforcement action taken against a landlord in FTC history.

Regulators alleged that Progress and Pretium systematically misled prospective and existing tenants across the country through undisclosed monthly fees, false claims about property conditions and unfair security deposit withholdings.

According to the complaint, the hidden fees added tens of millions of dollars in unexpected costs to consumers since at least 2021, with many renters discovering the true expense only after signing lease agreements or moving into properties.

Addressing the settlement, Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, highlighted the importance of clear market information for renters.

“Consumers searching for housing should have access to straightforward information about the costs associated with renting a home,” Mufarrige said. “Transparency regarding rental prices and fees helps consumers compare options and make informed choices. Clear pricing practices also support competition by allowing housing providers to compete on the basis of price, quality and service. The FTC is monitoring the rental housing market and will continue to take action where appropriate to ensure that consumers receive clear and accurate information about the costs of renting a home.”

TRENDING STORIES:

• 1 dead, 1 injured after small plane crashes near metro Atlanta airport
• Georgia Bulldogs move to the top of the College Football Playoff rankings
• Tyler Perry says Georgia will ‘always be home’ despite buying property in Puerto Rico

The joint complaint details broad practices regarding advertised pricing and undisclosed charges. Regulators found that Progress marketed rental homes at baseline monthly rates that excluded mandatory recurring expenses, including monthly smart home technology fees and utility management fees.

The company also charged an inadequately disclosed renter’s insurance exemption fee to tenants who did not provide proof of coverage, an extra cost that frequently appeared for the first time on a tenant’s initial monthly invoice.

In addition to pricing misrepresentations, regulators addressed claims regarding property move-in readiness. Progress routinely advertised that its rental properties were thoroughly inspected and move-in ready before new occupants arrived. In practice, numerous tenants moved into properties that required extensive cleaning, deferred maintenance or major repairs before being livable.

The legal action focused heavily on security deposit practices. Progress promised renters that security deposits would only be used to pay for damage caused beyond normal wear and tear. Instead, the property manager routinely withheld deposit funds to pay for pre-existing damage, standard wear and tear and general renovations or capital improvements that were legally the responsibility of the property owner.

Progress also repeatedly failed to deliver accounting statements after tenants vacated properties. Although the company pledged to issue itemized statements detailing security deposit charges within 30 days of move-out, regulators found that many departing residents never received any written accounting of their deducted funds.

Customer service deficiencies formed another central component of the complaint. Regulators alleged that Progress failed to respond to tenant inquiries in a timely manner or offered repetitive unhelpful responses, leaving urgent maintenance requests, billing errors and deposit disputes unresolved while tenants accumulated unfair late fees.

The complaint noted that the majority of the alleged unlawful conduct occurred under previous management, and current leadership has taken steps to remedy the issues. Under the agreement, $48.5 million of the $49.75 million penalty will go directly to the FTC to fund financial restitution for impacted consumers. The remaining $1.25 million will be paid directly to the state of Arizona.

The proposed order, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, imposes strict ongoing operational requirements on both companies.

Progress and Pretium are prohibited from misleading consumers regarding monthly rental rates and must advertise the true total monthly rental price—inclusive of all mandatory recurring fees—more prominently than any other pricing figures.

Under the stipulated order, the companies cannot misrepresent property inspection statuses and must establish a formalized security deposit refund framework. This framework mandates uniform withholding standards, comprehensive employee training and complete documentation and record-keeping regarding home conditions.

Progress is required to deliver itemized statements explaining all security deposit deductions within 30 days of move-out or within timeframes required by state law. The order explicitly forbids security deposit deductions for normal wear and tear, pre-existing property conditions, or landlord renovation costs, while prohibiting standardized nondisparagement clauses and unfair customer service practices.

The FTC vote authorizing staff to file the complaint and proposed order was 2-0. The stipulated order will take full legal effect once approved and signed by a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

In a statement, Progress said in part, “The well-being of residents is Progress’ top priority. It always will be. Over the past several years, our current management team has made significant changes designed to ensure a resident experience that is built on quality, accountability, and transparency.”

[SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]