Pretium, Progress Residential to Pay $49.75 Million to Settle FTC Charges Over Rental Fees

Regulators named the private equity sponsor as a defendant alongside its property manager, citing Pretium investor presentations that made ancillary fee income a priority.

November 10, 2026

Progress Residential, the single-family rental manager owned by private equity firm Pretium Partners, and Pretium itself have agreed to pay $49.75 million to resolve charges from the Federal Trade Commission and four states that the companies advertised rents that left out mandatory monthly fees, kept security deposits for ordinary wear and tear, and marketed homes as inspected and ready for move-in when many were not. The FTC called it the largest enforcement matter it has brought against a landlord.

The FTC, joined by Arizona, Colorado, Indiana and Utah, filed the complaint and a proposed stipulated order on Nov. 6 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The order takes effect once a judge approves and signs it. The companies neither admit nor deny the allegations.

Progress manages more than 90,000 homes across 17 states. According to the complaint, Pretium owns most of those homes indirectly through investment funds it manages and founded Progress to serve as their property manager. The complaint puts Pretium's assets under management at more than $62 billion, including $32 billion of real estate equity.

Payment Terms

Of the total, $48.5 million is a judgment owed jointly and severally by both companies and payable to the FTC for consumer redress. The remaining $1.25 million goes to Arizona for attorney's fees and costs. The FTC amount is paid in installments, starting with $4.5 million already held in escrow and due within 10 days of the order's entry, followed by $4 million payments every 30 days through day 330. A missed installment makes the unpaid balance of the judgment due immediately, with interest.

Fees Left Out of the Advertised Rent

The complaint alleges that since at least 2021, Progress listings on its own website and on sites such as Zillow and Trulia showed a monthly rent that excluded required add-ons, including a smart home fee of $17 to $30 a month, a utility management fee of $7.95 to $9.99, a $15 resident benefit package fee, and other charges such as pool, septic, landscaping and pest control fees, some tied to specific homes. Renters typically paid between $30 and $330 or more per month above the advertised price, according to the complaint, and many saw the full cost only on a cost sheet sent with the lease, after paying a nonrefundable application fee of up to $55 per adult and in many cases a holding fee of up to $500.

The complaint also targets a $14.95 monthly charge for residents who did not provide proof of renter's insurance. It says the charge was disclosed in fine print as a one-time fee, provided no coverage, and was sometimes billed to residents who had submitted proof of a policy.

A late-2021 Progress report found recurring fees added an average of $70 a month and non-recurring fees $73 a month, or $1,716 over a one-year lease, according to the complaint. A 2023 report circulated to Progress and Pretium executives showed $68.8 million in fees and penalties in 2022, plus $6.9 million from smart home fees, and forecast $101 million in fees and penalties for 2023. The complaint says a Progress vice president described the resident benefit package internally as pure profit, and that the company's then-CEO declined in 2023 to fix its holding fee refund process because doing so would cost about $1 million in revenue.

After Zillow began showing a total monthly price badge in September 2025, Progress told Zillow not to display the total price on its listings, the complaint alleges.

Why Pretium Is a Defendant

The complaint seeks to hold Pretium liable for Progress's conduct, alleging that the sponsor knew of the practices and participated in or controlled them. It cites a 2022 Pretium investor presentation identifying growth in ancillary, non-rental income as an area of focus for its real estate platform, and a 2023 presentation to investors stating that the firm had continued to grow ancillary income through smart home technology packages.

The complaint further alleges that Pretium executives received internal reports on fee complaints, move-in conditions and deposit disputes, and that Pretium instructed Progress to reduce turn budgets and increase fee income. In a 2024 email cited in the complaint, a Progress revenue executive wrote that Pretium's CEO did not want the company to display fees in its listings before its peers did.

The complaint also cites a 2022 Minnesota Attorney General lawsuit in which courts rejected Pretium's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, based on evidence that its executives dealt directly with residents over repairs.

Deposits, Move-Ins and Reviews

On security deposits, the complaint alleges Progress promised to deduct only for damage beyond normal wear and tear while its own policy required residents to return homes to their pre-move-in condition. It says internal research found fewer than 35% of residents received itemized move-out statements, and that the company faced about 2,500 move-out disputes a month and more than 100 deposit lawsuits a year. A 2024 survey cited in the complaint found 17% of Progress renters recovered 95% to 100% of their deposits, against about 44% of renters nationally who got back the full amount.

The complaint also says Progress advertised homes as move-in ready without substantiating that it inspected them. A 2024 internal report found about 30% of move-ins from 2019 through 2024 generated at least three work orders in the first 30 days, and company guidelines called for editing listing photos in Photoshop to remove dirt and add missing appliances.

Form agreements used for account credits, early lease terminations and relocation assistance carried non-disparagement clauses that the FTC says violated the Consumer Review Fairness Act. A separate count under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act alleges the companies used false representations to obtain renters' financial information, a theory the FTC has also brought against Invitation Homes and Greystar.

The FTC said the complaint attributes most of the conduct to prior management and notes that new management has moved to address it. A Progress spokesperson told Gizmodo the company disagrees with the FTC's claims and believes its practices have been in line with industry norms.

What the Order Requires

The proposed order requires the companies to show a total monthly rental price, covering all recurring mandatory fees, more prominently than any other pricing information, and to disclose each fee's amount, purpose, frequency and whether it is mandatory before collecting any initial payment or deposit. It also bars the companies from:

• Deducting from deposits for normal wear and tear, conditions that existed before move-in, or renovations and upgrades not tied to resident damage
• Misrepresenting that homes are inspected before move-in
• Using contract terms that restrict reviews
• Charging late fees or pursuing eviction over improperly assessed charges, or blocking rent payments while a fee dispute is pending

Itemized deposit statements are due within 30 days of move-out, or sooner if state law or the lease requires. Staff who decide deposit deductions must be trained annually, and inspection records and photographs must be kept for at least three years and provided to residents on request. Work orders and complaints cannot be closed without notifying the resident and allowing 48 hours to respond. The companies must file a sworn compliance report one year after the order is entered.