New: a trial court in 1 of every 10 U.S. counties. Read the post
Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementHigh Risk

RentGrow to Pay $2.25 Million to Settle FTC Allegations the Company Violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act and FTC Act

RentGrow Inc.July 9, 2026Federal Trade Commission

Penalty Amount

$2,250,000

Summary

The FTC alleged that RentGrow, a tenant screening company, violated the FCRA by failing to use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of its consumer reports, failing to disclose sources of data, and mishandling consumer disputes. RentGrow agreed to pay a $2.25 million penalty and is prohibited from further violations.

Remedy

RentGrow will pay a $2.25 million monetary penalty and is prohibited from failing to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of its consumer reports, including preventing duplicate records, and from misrepresenting that it provides updated screening reports after a successful dispute.

Monetary PenaltyInjunction

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review contracts with tenant screening vendors and data providers to ensure they include FCRA compliance obligations, accuracy requirements, and dispute handling procedures. They should also review customer agreements with landlords to ensure that any representations about updating reports after disputes are accurate. Clauses related to data accuracy, indemnification for FCRA violations, audit rights, and notification of disputes should be strengthened.

Contract Search Terms

tenant screening reportconsumer reportFCRA complianceaccuracy proceduresdispute handlingsource disclosurebackground checkcriminal recordeviction recorddata vendor

Laws Cited

Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)FTC Act

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

RentGrow Inc.

Industry

Data Broker

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Massachusetts-based RentGrow Inc."
Fine Amount
"pay a $2.25 million monetary penalty"
Laws Cited
"violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)"
Laws Cited
"the FTC Act"
Violation Types
"Failing to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of its consumer reports"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

REPS & Company Inc.

The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.

FTC

Digital Forensics Corporation LLC

The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.

FTC

Greenway Auto Group

The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.

FTC

24 healthcare services companies (not individually named)

The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.

FTC

Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC

$1.9M

The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.

FTC

Lens.com Inc.

The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.