Rent Payment Processor Agrees To Fee Caps In Colorado AG Settlement

The Colorado Attorney General announced a consent judgment with a California-based rent payment processor on July 29, 2026, resolving allegations that its payment fees violated the Colorado Uniform Consumer Credit Code, C.R.S. § 5-2-212, and the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, C.R.S. § 6-1-101 et seq. The company denied liability but agreed to modify its fee practices and pay $100,000 to the state.

The company offers digital rent-payment options to tenants, including credit card, debit card, ACH, and check-based payment methods. Following an investigation that began in October 2024, the state alleged that certain fees charged through the company’s “Certified Funds” services violated Colorado’s surcharge and junk-fee requirements. Specifically, the state alleged that the company:

• Charged excessive card-payment fees. The company allegedly imposed a 3.25% fee when renters used certain card payment options. Colorado generally limits credit card surcharges to 2% of the payment or the merchant discount fee the seller actually incurs, and separately prohibits surcharges on debit card payments altogether.
• Failed to provide adequate fee disclosures. The company allegedly did not provide the clear and conspicuous disclosures required under Colorado’s surcharge statute.
• Did not consistently offer an accessible free payment option. The state alleged that the company’s practices implicated Colorado’s junk-fee law, which requires businesses charging certain mandatory fees to provide a cost-free and reasonably accessible payment method.
• Maintained fee-sharing arrangements. According to the state, the company shared revenue from percentage-based card fees with at least one property, creating an incentive to promote higher-cost payment methods.

Under the consent judgment, the company must cap covered rent-payment fees at 2%, provide clear disclosures and a reasonably accessible free payment option, terminate fee-sharing arrangements with Colorado properties, and support continued use of paper and mobile check payments. The company must also submit annual compliance reports for two years identifying every Colorado property using its services, the payment methods available at each property, and the associated fees, and pay $100,000 for investigative costs, restitution, consumer education, enforcement, or other public purposes.

Putting It Into Practice: The settlement reflects broader state and local scrutiny of junk fees and consumer payment practices (previously discussed here and here). Payment processors, property managers, and other businesses that facilitate rent or consumer payments should review surcharge percentages, fee disclosures, revenue-sharing arrangements, and the availability of fee-free alternatives. Companies operating across multiple states should continue monitoring evolving surcharge and junk-fee requirements and update payment practices and merchant agreements as necessary.