Major Victory For Pennsylvanians’ Ripped Off By Vision Property Management’s “Rent To Own” Scheme
Attorney General Josh Shapiro today announced the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court entered judgment against Vision Property Management LLC (Vision) and other defendants. The judgment ordered that 285 homes owned by defendants and located in Pennsylvania be immediately deeded to consumers who have signed a “lease with option to purchase,” “agreement for deed” land installment contract or mortgage, and who are currently or most recently occupied these homes. The Commonwealth will continue to seek restitution for consumers who had a contract with Vision, but are no longer occupying the homes.
“Pennsylvanians who were taken advantage of by Vision Property Management and its affiliates’ deceptive “rent to own” schemes will finally be homeowners. My office will work tirelessly to implement the Court’s order as quickly as possible and seek fair compensation for anyone who was ripped off and forced to leave their home,” said Attorney General Shapiro. “Companies like Vision — you are on notice. My office will investigate and prosecute businesses who use predatory tactics to take advantage of consumers.”
The Court further ordered that all consumer contracts associated with such homes will be terminated, deemed satisfied and paid in full. This order was issued in response to a Motion for Sanctions filed by the Commonwealth due to the defendants’ repeated failures to comply with Orders of the Court. The defendants have filed an appeal.
The Commonwealth filed a complaint in October 2019 against Vision Property Management and its affiliates for operating a “rent to own” scheme that has affected more than 650 Pennsylvania residents. The suit alleges that Vision utilizes misleading sales tactics to lure consumers into entering “rent to own” agreements on foreclosed houses that are in serious disrepair.
Without the consumers’ knowledge, the agreements provided no ownership rights, consumers faced immediate ejection if they fell behind on payments, and provisions in Vision’s agreements making the consumers responsible for expensive repairs required to make the homes habitable are unlawful. While most of Vision’s contracts were “rent to own,” Vision also utilized an “Agreement for Deed” and other contract formats that are also targeted in the lawsuit.