EasyKnock offers "sale-leaseback" deals where homeowners sell their properties and lease them back with an option to repurchase. However, many, like Randee Noggle from Michigan, claim these deals are essentially high-interest loans in disguise. Noggle is among several plaintiffs suing EasyKnock, arguing that the terms resemble a mortgage, thus requiring consumer protections under the Truth in Lending Act. EasyKnock insists their transactions are transparent and not loans, sparking legal battles and regulatory scrutiny. A Texas court previously ruled such deals as mortgages, but that decision was vacated for a settlement. The Michigan attorney general's office has also challenged EasyKnock, suggesting their deals violate state usury laws. Critics argue these complex transactions exploit financially distressed homeowners, while supporters claim they provide vital financial relief. The outcome of these cases could set significant precedents for the regulation of sale-leaseback agreements nationwide.
Read the full article here.