Invitation Homes to Pay $48M Settlement Over Alleged Illegal Tactics Against Renters

https://icaro.icaromediagroup.com/system/images/photos/16356934/original/open-uri20240924-17-y38gsh?1727222372
ICARO Media Group
Politics
24/09/2024 23h56

Title: Invitation Homes to Pay $48M Settlement Over Alleged Illegal Tactics Against Renters

Invitation Homes, a Dallas-based company accused of engaging in "unlawful actions against customers," has agreed to a proposed $48 million settlement following a complaint filed by the Federal Trade Commission. The settlement, which has yet to be approved by a federal judge, comes after allegations that the company deceived renters about lease costs, charged undisclosed junk fees, failed to inspect homes before new residents moved in, and unfairly withheld security deposits.

The Federal Trade Commission accused Invitation Homes, the largest landlord of single-family homes in the country, of engaging in various unfair and deceptive tactics. The complaints included misleading renters about lease costs, adding undisclosed fees to rental agreements, and failing to conduct necessary inspections before new residents moved in. Additionally, the company was accused of withholding security deposits unjustly and pursuing eviction proceedings against former tenants. The proposed $48 million settlement aims to address these issues and prevent further unlawful behavior by Invitation Homes.

Invitation Homes will be required to make several changes as part of the settlement agreement. The company must now clearly disclose leasing prices, establish policies for fairly returning security deposits, and cease engaging in any other unlawful practices. The settlement is pending approval by a federal judge, although Invitation Homes has asserted that the agreement contains no admission of wrongdoing on their part. The company stated that the settlement concludes a three-year investigation and allows them to focus on improving customer service and operational practices moving forward.

The views expressed in this article do not reflect the opinion of ICARO, or any of its affiliates.

Related