BEWARE of fraud by erentpayment.com
Karen HigginsPro Member
Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2017 · 83 posts · 89 votesBEWARE of fraud by erentpayment.com
Most Popular Reply
Property Manager · Blaine · Member since 2015 · 209 posts · 276 votes
9yMy wife found this company on bigger pockets. She most definitely is in the right, and boarder line obligated to inform the public that a company that used to accept payments from tenants, and disburse the funds to landlords is no longer longer disbursing the funds to landlords. Furthermore, they have shutoff their phones and customer service department, not updated their customers as to the status of their funds, and refused to name their banking institutions or legal representation that they are using.
This is most certainly a fraud, and a large one. If not, they should be updating their customer base as to where their money is at, and when they will get it. This rent collection and payment scheme is the perfect Ponzi scheme. They take a clients money and can move it from bank to bank like it's their own money. (Matt, thats apparently what you think happened). Thus, proving the lack of oversight involved in this kind of business/industry. As long as they can grow their customer base the scheme continues. The creator doesn't even have to put himself out there as the frontman of the scheme, and can hide behind an LLC. Interestingly, Rick S is a "pro" member, claims to be the manager or owner, and has 397 post on bigger pockets. I encourage him to comment, or better yet send me my 13,000$. At this point I doubt either will happen.
I hope I'm wrong, but when the company shuts off the phone and fails to deliver on the "updates" they promise. You have to fear the worse. This company is still accepting "new" money and the public needs to know. I don't want to come across as confrontational, but the public needs to be made aware of the problem/fraud.
345 Replies
- Investor · Fremont, CA · Member since 2017 · 3 posts · 2 votes8y
My tenant just received response from bank (Wells Fargo) on the refund request. The bank refused saying that that since tenant "authorized" the transaction, hence it is a legitimate transaction, it cannot refund the money . Any suggested course of action?
- Pensacola, FL · Member since 2017 · 26 posts · 50 votes8y
Originally posted by @Sachin Kapur:
My tenant just received response from bank (Wells Fargo) on the refund request. The bank refused saying that that since tenant "authorized" the transaction, hence it is a legitimate transaction, it cannot refund the money . Any suggested course of action?
As has been stated prior, banks are pushing back because most have no clue what an R07/R10 reversal are. On the facebook group page, they have a letter from Jeanette Fox (NACHA), erentpayment email, and a template for the Tenant to fill out to hand into the bank. All three of these make it hard for a bank to refute the claim...the issue comes with talking to the right manager/higher employee within the bank. Bank tellers aren't going to know what to do and many managers won't know either...that is where having those 3 pieces of paper help.
- Boxford, MA · Member since 2017 · 6 posts · 6 votes8y
Update - My tenants were able to get their money back through the R10. I gave them the letter that was emailed by ERP. I did offer $150 to tenants for each months rent. I think it was through TD Bank.
- Boxford, MA · Member since 2017 · 6 posts · 6 votes8y
What have people who left ERP switched to? Any good ideas out there?
any update on eRent payments? I have to assume by now most if not all the issues have been resolved by now.
I'm hoping there are no more issues. The only thing I didn't appreciate was them not answering the phone. However, when I sent an email they were very responsive.
Okay after doing some research can someone please explain to me why eRent is at fault here? I believe some of the really negative posts should be removed by the moderator. From my research they use a company eCheckit to processed the ACH payments. That company from what I read went bankrupt.
eRent had nothing to do with eCheckit going bankruptand since then they have changed banks. I believe the only payments that were affected were those made from 10/3 to 10/16 of this year.
Originally posted by @Mitch Ro:
Okay after doing some research can someone please explain to me why eRent is at fault here? I believe some of the really negative posts should be removed by the moderator. From my research they use a company eCheckit to processed the ACH payments. That company from what I read went bankrupt.
eRent had nothing to do with eCheckit going bankruptand since then they have changed banks. I believe the only payments that were affected were those made from 10/3 to 10/16 of this year.
Not sure if you read all the posts. One of the biggest issues was the lack of communication, attempting to hide the facts, having people scramble for themselves, etc...
Don't know about you, but I rather deal with straight up folks that don't hide when there is a problem.
- Santa Rosa, CA · Member since 2017 · 325 posts · 701 votes8y
Originally posted by @Mitch Ro:
Okay after doing some research can someone please explain to me why eRent is at fault here? I believe some of the really negative posts should be removed by the moderator. From my research they use a company eCheckit to processed the ACH payments. That company from what I read went bankrupt.
eRent had nothing to do with eCheckit going bankruptand since then they have changed banks. I believe the only payments that were affected were those made from 10/3 to 10/16 of this year.
At the time this thread started, erentpayment was refusing to answer and emails, turned off their phones, and did not respond in any way. It was a stretch, but it was plausible it was fraud.
I can’t agree erentpayment is without blame here. They picked the vendor. And they switched, but it was 2 weeks too late. If they had switched 1 month earlier this would have been totally avoided, so bad luck, but they used a non-bank for 9+ years, it was a choice with known risk. They also made a written assertion they had insurance for just this sort of thing, turns out they didn’t.
At the end of the day, they failed at their primary purpose, so move rent from tenets to landlords, They compounded that failure by not communicating. They made some very bad choices before, during, and after the bankruptcy. He appears to have saved the business for now, but according to the latest bankruptcy documents there are about 1million dollars that is still help by erentpayment customers in the account that has not been returned. It is not over.
Yes I agree Bob the communication or lack thereof was a major problem and should of been handled a lot differently. I think this happened so fast it caught them off guard . On the other hand I read all the Facebook comments and some were really nasty. Lot's of pissed off landlords ( rightfully so) but they didn't ignore the comments they answered all of them. They appeared to have fixed the problem.
- Boxford, MA · Member since 2017 · 6 posts · 6 votes8y
Mitch Ro - Did you loose any money? Were your rental payments affected?
- Flipper/Rehabber · Golden, CO · Member since 2013 · 590 posts · 319 votes8y
Mitch Ro has 3 posts.. Looks like someone working for eRent trying to salvage the rep for eRent.
I know I'm still missing money, just like many others..
- Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2017 · 83 posts · 89 votes8y
I agree with @Kyle Doney. After 2 plus months and no less than 50 phone calls, we thought we had all of of money returned, but continue to have issues with the R10 being reversed. This is not without causing tension with tenants in the process, as we are having to have multiple conversations about what happened to the funds. I don’t believe erent can shift the blame and claim that they were not at fault. I think that anyone who works with them is a fool. There was no communication and erent did little, if anything, to help me recover my funds. Do not work with this company in the future. I recommend finding a more reputable company that is up front and honest.
- Santa Rosa, CA · Member since 2017 · 325 posts · 701 votes8y
I have been following the erentpayment case and the bankruptcy loosely. I was not impacted, but I found the situation interesting. I saw a new bankruptcy document today that was posted by the bank that holds the pool of funds (not erent or the bankrupt company)
It is docket 89
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-3Xoz8yJTCgoIFYfIepiW1gT5GLmsRig
I have never tried to share a google drive so let me know if you can's see it
The bank bank had objected to the original motion (original motion was docket 19 and objection was docket 27 both in same drive)
I am no lawyer, but the upshoot is that the bank is suggesting the bankruptcy court set up a "reverse class action" to get the money back from the people who did the R10 transaction.
"The complaint would also commence a reverse class action under Bankruptcy Rule 7023(b)(1)(B),4 naming certain defendants that are representative of the parties that claim an interest in the Reserve Account funds. The complaint would also likely name the Trustee. A reverse class action is necessary due to the enormous number of parties that may potentially have an interest in the funds; standard service of the interpleader complaint on each such party would present a huge economic burden."
The trustee has withdrawn his original motion now and there is a hearing scheduled on Jan 19 to work it out. It looks to me like the trustee is going to go with the plan. (Docket 93). Hopefully someone following this thread is a lawyer that can be more educated in his interpretation of this, but it looks like the bankruptcy trustee may try to re-claw bank the rent money from the tenets. Obviously this would be bad for the landlords and the tenets.
FYI, Docket 90 (same drive) say that there is only ~900,000 left in the fund and ~3.3 million has been returned to the renters. So they really want that money back.
- 8yJay HinrichsBusiness MemberReal Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
Originally posted by @John Nachtigall:
I have been following the erentpayment case and the bankruptcy loosely. I was not impacted, but I found the situation interesting. I saw a new bankruptcy document today that was posted by the bank that holds the pool of funds (not erent or the bankrupt company)
It is docket 89
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-3Xoz8yJTCgoIFYfIepiW1gT5GLmsRig
I have never tried to share a google drive so let me know if you can's see it
The bank bank had objected to the original motion (original motion was docket 19 and objection was docket 27 both in same drive)
I am no lawyer, but the upshoot is that the bank is suggesting the bankruptcy court set up a "reverse class action" to get the money back from the people who did the R10 transaction.
"The complaint would also commence a reverse class action under Bankruptcy Rule 7023(b)(1)(B),4 naming certain defendants that are representative of the parties that claim an interest in the Reserve Account funds. The complaint would also likely name the Trustee. A reverse class action is necessary due to the enormous number of parties that may potentially have an interest in the funds; standard service of the interpleader complaint on each such party would present a huge economic burden."
The trustee has withdrawn his original motion now and there is a hearing scheduled on Jan 19 to work it out. It looks to me like the trustee is going to go with the plan. (Docket 93). Hopefully someone following this thread is a lawyer that can be more educated in his interpretation of this, but it looks like the bankruptcy trustee may try to re-claw bank the rent money from the tenets. Obviously this would be bad for the landlords and the tenets.
FYI, Docket 90 (same drive) say that there is only ~900,000 left in the fund and ~3.3 million has been returned to the renters. So they really want that money back.
this is what happens in these BK cases you get claw back.. I know just in one case where I had a tenant pay me rent then she BK's I had to give the trustee 3 or 4 months of rent back to the trustee by court order.
claw back is a beotch.. those in the Madoff stuff learned it the hard way as well.
When you say "obviously this would be bad for the landlords and the tenants" I believe you are referring to those who got paid in full for their October rents. Even though every landlord would technically be the same class of creditor, some landlords got treated as though they had higher priority claims.
This is an effort to rectify that arguably unfair result.
What will be implemented -- if the Motion is granted -- is that all clients doing business with them in the past X days would be paid pro rata. At least that's where I imagine this is headed.
What a mess.
Gimer Law516 Reviews- Santa Rosa, CA · Member since 2017 · 325 posts · 701 votes8y
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
When you say "obviously this would be bad for the landlords and the tenants" I believe you are referring to those who got paid in full for their October rents. Even though every landlord would technically be the same class of creditor, some landlords got treated as though they had higher priority claims.
This is an effort to rectify that arguably unfair result.
What will be implemented -- if the Motion is granted -- is that all clients doing business with them in the past X days would be paid pro rata. At least that's where I imagine this is headed.
What a mess.
I agree it is unfair if it is assumed the money in the account is property of the bankrupt company. But as the response by the bank shows, an argument can be made they had never taken control of those funds. They provided a spreadsheet on how to distribute those funds. But the funds themselves where never in control of the bankrupt company, only the bank. There was a hearing in November and it came out that this particular situation had not happened with a non-bank.
I agree the trustee is doing what he thinks is right. I also agree it is a real mess. But if you believe the funds were never property of the company recouping them through the R10 process in ACH is not “unfair”
Originally posted by @John Nachtigall:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
When you say "obviously this would be bad for the landlords and the tenants" I believe you are referring to those who got paid in full for their October rents. Even though every landlord would technically be the same class of creditor, some landlords got treated as though they had higher priority claims.
This is an effort to rectify that arguably unfair result.
What will be implemented -- if the Motion is granted -- is that all clients doing business with them in the past X days would be paid pro rata. At least that's where I imagine this is headed.
What a mess.
I agree it is unfair if it is assumed the money in the account is property of the bankrupt company. But as the response by the bank shows, an argument can be made they had never taken control of those funds. They provided a spreadsheet on how to distribute those funds. But the funds themselves where never in control of the bankrupt company, only the bank. There was a hearing in November and it came out that this particular situation had not happened with a non-bank.
I agree the trustee is doing what he thinks is right. I also agree it is a real mess. But if you believe the funds were never property of the company recouping them through the R10 process in ACH is not “unfair”
I need to be honest... I only read the first few pages of the motion, up to the point where they started talking about doing a reverse class action.
Of course there will be parties who object to this, and they will raise their own unique legal arguments as to why they deserve the funds or shouldn't be subjected to a claw back. As they should... some just might win, on a technicality. Or some may litigate to the bitter end and the trustee will not bother doing so with every party.
But like I said, so far some landlords got paid in full and others got stiffed. I believe the end result for most will be somewhere in between.
Gimer Law516 Reviews- Investor · Cathedral City, CA · Member since 2014 · 481 posts · 170 votes8y
I agree with Mitch.
Originally posted by @Mitch Ro:
Okay after doing some research can someone please explain to me why eRent is at fault here? I believe some of the really negative posts should be removed by the moderator. From my research they use a company eCheckit to processed the ACH payments. That company from what I read went bankrupt.
eRent had nothing to do with eCheckit going bankruptand since then they have changed banks. I believe the only payments that were affected were those made from 10/3 to 10/16 of this year.
@Jeff Gates When a company has a terrible business model that is ultimately the reason that its clients suffer millions of dollars of losses, they deserve what they get.
Why anyone other then their attorneys are defending them is a mystery.
Gimer Law516 ReviewsI've used them based on recommendations I seen on Bigger Pocket but still haven't gotten my money back from this mess. I will probably have to chalk this one as a loss and will not use any of these types of rent collection methods again as they don't take responsibility for the service they provide. They got paid their sevice charge but you as the client gets screwed.
- 8ySteve HodgdonPro MemberInvestor · Novato, CA · Member since 2015 · 433 posts · 321 votes
months of trying to get an R10 accepted by a small Florida bank have resulted in zero recovery. We signed up only to help our tenants improve their credit. No value to us. We went back to processing ACH ourselves.
- Real Estate Agent · San Antonio, TX · Member since 2017 · 523 posts · 362 votes8y
This thread is crazy and I am so glad I took the time to read through it all @Karen Higgins @Matt Higgins thank you for posting this and creating this thread. I don't care what anyone says that is wrong in every way shape and form. I appreciate you turning this negative into a positive and alerting others and helping other people out. I'm sorry that this happened to you and everyone else I hope everything works out and you get your money back.
- Investor · richmond, VA · Member since 2011 · 29 posts · 16 votes8y
is the facebook discussion group still there? I can't find it.
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.