Skip to content

Rent-A-Center

Controversies

Controversies tied to this brand in public sources. A listing is not a finding of fault.

Back to profile6 entries

  1. 2023

    Massachusetts unfair-practices settlement

    Rent-A-Center paid Massachusetts a reported $8.75 million to resolve claims involving unfair and deceptive business practices and agreed to stop filing criminal complaints against customers for missed payments.

  2. 2020

    California freight-charge class-action settlement

    The company settled a California customer class action concerning allegedly improper add-on freight charges for a reported $13 million.

  3. 2020

    Communication Interface Technologies files patent suits against multiple companies

    Lawsuit filed

    Communication Interface Technologies filed multiple patent infringement suits in the Texas Eastern District Court against several companies, including Cinemark Holdings and Yum! Brands. The suits alleged unauthorized use of patented push-notification technology; the plaintiff sought infringement adjudication, damages, costs, fees, and other relief.

    Source excerpt

    • Communication Interface Technologies has sought an adjudication of infringement of the patents-in-suit, an award for damages, an award for costs and fees, and other relief as determined by the court.
    • Communication Interface Technologies also alleged Yum! Brands infringed the ’010 patent through the KFC All-Stars App, Yum Mobile Forms App, and the KFC Suppertime Stories App.
  4. 2010

    Washington collection-practices settlement

    Rent-A-Center settled allegations by Washington authorities that its collection practices were unfair or deceptive under the state’s consumer-protection law.

  5. 2006

    California deceptive-business-practices settlement

    California authorities alleged unfair competition and misrepresentation of merchandise pricing. The settlement included reported consumer restitution and civil penalties.

  6. 2002

    Sex-discrimination hiring settlement

    A lawsuit alleging gender bias in hiring ended in a settlement requiring a reported $47 million cash payment and prospective hiring, training, and human-resources measures.