Utah joins 42 other states in a $183.5 million settlement with Draper-based Acima

DRAPER — Acima Digital LLC and its parent, Acima Holdings LLC, agreed to a $183.5 million settlement with the attorneys general of 43 states including Utah, resolving allegations that the company misrepresented the cost of its rent-to-own agreements and marked up the merchandise it financed 12.

Utah Attorney General Derek Brown and the Utah Department of Commerce's Division of Consumer Protection announced the state's participation on Nov. 12, describing Utah as joining "42 other states" 7. The total divides into $43 million in consumer restitution, $130 million in reductions of lease balances and $10.5 million paid to the participating states 27. The coalition was led by Pennsylvania, Colorado and Tennessee, and a consent petition was filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, where it is pending approval 2.

The company confirmed the agreement in its own statement, describing the matter as "the previously disclosed 2021 multistate investigation into rental-purchase transactions of Acima" 5. It puts the cash payment at $53.5 million to the 43 states, with the majority distributed to designated customers and the remainder to the attorneys general offices, and says the payment "was fully reserved in Upbound's year-end 2025 financial statements" 5. Acima described the two entities as wholly owned subsidiaries of Upbound Group, Inc. 5. FOX 13 reported that Acima is a subsidiary of Rent-A-Center 1.

**What the states alleged**

Pennsylvania's release says Acima "marketed its rental-purchase agreements as 90-day pay off programs without disclosing that consumers were automatically placed into the maximum 12-month term where consumers could pay approximately two times the cash price advertised by Acima's retail partner" 2.

The complaint filed with the settlement papers states the mechanics in its own words: "Rather than providing consumers with the ninety (90) day interest-free program advertised by Acima, at the time of enrollment consumers are automatically defaulted into the maximum term, which entails a very high finance charge or cost of lease in order to acquire ownership of the property" 4. Accounts were set up at execution to withdraw the minimum periodic payment automatically, according to the complaint, and a consumer had to contact Acima and make additional or increased payments before the 90-day option expired in order to exercise it 4. The complaint states that "the Total of Payments amounts to at least twice the Cash Price of the merchandise" 4.

The states also alleged that Acima advertised the agreements using terms such as "credit," leading consumers to believe they were obtaining conventional financing, that its electronic signing process obscured the terms, and that it hindered consumers trying to end an agreement by returning merchandise 237.

**What Acima agreed to do**

Under the settlement Acima must train its retail partners on the nature of its agreements, including total cost relative to the cash price; stop advertising claims the states challenged, including that an agreement is "same as cash"; stop obscuring terms during electronic signing; stop marking up the price set by retail partners; allow consumers to end agreements by returning merchandise "without delay or obstruction"; and refrain from reporting rental-purchase agreements to Equifax, Experian or TransUnion for five years 37. It must also properly handle late deliveries and merchandise damaged on delivery, and meet repair obligations during a lease where state law or the agreement requires it 23.

Acima's statement says the settlement "does not include findings or admissions of wrongdoing," and that the agreement resolves a longstanding matter and lets the company focus on serving its customers and retailers 5.

**Where Acima sits, and what Utah gets**

FOX 13 described Acima as Draper-based and published a photograph captioned "Acima headquarters in Draper, Utah" 1. The Pennsylvania complaint describes both Acima entities as Utah limited liability companies "with their principal place of business in Plano, Texas" 4.

None of the three attorneys general releases read for this story states a Utah-specific share of the restitution or the lease forgiveness 237. Cache Valley Daily reported that the Acima settlement will provide Utah consumers approximately $1.52 million in direct financial relief, including $431,148.55 in restitution and $1,085,926.26 in lease forgiveness 8. Colorado's attorney general itemized its own share: $1.36 million in lease forgiveness for 1,229 consumers, $450,000 in restitution for 1,631 consumers and $389,000 to the state 3. Pennsylvania said its consumers are expected to receive more than $5 million in combined restitution and lease forgiveness, and that almost 9,000 Pennsylvanians will have leases paid off or forgiven or money returned 2.

Consumers eligible for restitution or lease forgiveness do not need to take any action: the settlement administrator will contact those eligible for restitution, and Acima will contact those eligible for lease forgiveness 27.

Brown, in the state's announcement, said: "Utahns who choose to pay over time for a laptop or a couch shouldn't be surprised by the final bill. This settlement puts money back in Utah families' pockets and makes sure the deal they see is the deal they get" 7. Commerce Commissioner Margaret Woolley Busse said it was "unacceptable that Utahns were lured into leases advertised at one price, only to find themselves paying nearly double that amount with no easy exit" 7.

The announcement came 22 days after Utah announced a larger multistate resolution with a different rent-to-own financier. On Oct. 21 the Division of Consumer Protection said Utah and 16 other states had joined a $665 million settlement with Snap Finance that cancels $16,758,262 in lease payments owed by Utah consumers who signed agreements from 2017 through 2022 6.

What happens next rests with the Pennsylvania court: the consent petition is pending approval there 2, and Acima describes the agreement as resolving a matter the company had previously disclosed 5.