One tenant's landlord put it in writing: the Jetty Deposit was "refundable." According to a new class action, it never was.
Four renters from Florida, North Carolina, California, and Nevada have filed a class action against Jetty Insurance Agency, alleging the company's "Jetty Deposit" product is marketed as a security deposit replacement but, according to the filing, shares none of the features that make a security deposit what it is. The complaint, filed October 6, 2026, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges the product is nonrefundable, must be repurchased every year, and leaves tenants fully on the hook for any damage claims their landlords make - all while being sold under the word "deposit."
Jetty, a New York-based insurtech with partnerships across the property management industry, offers a product it calls the Jetty Deposit. According to the complaint, Jetty markets the product as a way to "[d]ramatically lower your move-in costs by swapping traditional cash deposits for a low-cost alternative" and tells renters they can "[s]ave money by replacing your expensive security deposit with a low-cost alternative."
The filing alleges these representations are misleading because, unlike a traditional security deposit, payments to Jetty are never returned to the tenant. The complaint further alleges that if a landlord claims damage or unpaid rent, Jetty pays the landlord directly and then pursues the tenant for the full amount - without crediting any of the fees the tenant has already paid.
"Moving out is a breeze," Jetty's website tells renters, according to the complaint. "No more hassling with your property manager to get your deposit back."
The complaint alleges tenants who use the product lose the protections that state security deposit laws provide - including the right to an itemized list of deductions and the ability to dispute charges in court.
The complaint adds a second layer. It alleges Jetty uses personalized algorithmic pricing - setting each tenant's price using an algorithm fed by personal data, including credit reports - without disclosing that fact at the point of sale.
New York's Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act, which took effect in November 2025, requires businesses using such pricing to display a clear notice stating the price was set by an algorithm using the consumer's personal data. The complaint alleges Jetty never provided that disclosure.
One tenant in Florida allegedly paid $99 per month. Another in Nevada paid $9.75 per month. A third in North Carolina paid a flat $140. A fourth in California paid $175. The complaint alleges Jetty never disclosed that each price was individually calculated.
The suit brings seven legal claims, including under New York's deceptive business practices statute, consumer protection laws in Florida, Nevada, California, and North Carolina, and a claim that Jetty kept money it should not have. The complaint seeks class-wide damages exceeding $5 million, triple damages where permitted, a court order to stop the alleged practices, and attorneys' fees.
The proposed class includes all persons who paid Jetty for its deposit alternative product, plus a separate class of those charged billing and processing fees on rent payments made through Jetty's platform.
The filing also alleges Jetty strikes deals with landlords who then require or pressure tenants to use the product - and that Jetty supplies those landlords with marketing materials and talking points that are themselves incomplete or inaccurate. In one case, the complaint says, a landlord's own welcome letter described the Jetty Deposit as "refundable."
For insurers and insurtechs offering deposit-replacement products, the case poses a pointed question: whether marketing what the complaint describes as a nonrefundable, recurring charge under the word "deposit" invites exactly this kind of regulatory and litigation risk.
The allegations have not been tested, and no court has ruled on the merits.
