Montana Rent Payment Fee Law 2025: Convenience Fees Barred

The statute doesn't ban fees called "convenience fees" specifically; it bans any additional fee based on rent payment type, whatever label a lease puts on it.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4), as amended by Chapter 768, Laws of Montana 2025]

A landlord relabeling a payment-method fee as a "processing fee," "service charge," or anything else doesn't change what actually triggers it: the tenant's choice of payment method. That's what the statute targets, regardless of naming.

Montana law now defines rent payment type to include cash, check, electronic payment, or other forms agreed on in the rental agreement.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-103(15)]

That's a broad, catch-all definition. A landlord can't structure around this rule by treating some less common payment method as outside the definition; anything a lease recognizes as a valid payment method falls under this same protection.

A landlord may charge a fee tied to payment type only to recoup an electronic bank fee incurred for processing that electronic payment.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4)]

That's a narrow, specific exception built around an actual, external cost the landlord incurs, not a general allowance for charging tenants more for the convenience of paying electronically.

The exception is capped at the landlord's actual cost. A landlord can pass through the exact bank fee charged, but can't add a markup on top of it.

[Cite: Montana Lawhelp, "Landlord Fees FAQ"]

A landlord charging a flat $10 or $15 "electronic payment fee" regardless of the actual bank charge, rather than the specific dollar amount the bank charged for that transaction, is exceeding what this exception actually permits.

Since the exception is tied to the landlord's actual cost, a landlord relying on it needs documentation showing what the bank fee genuinely was for a given transaction, rather than an assumed or estimated figure.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4)]

A landlord who can't show the specific bank charge behind a passed-through fee has a harder time defending that fee as falling within this exception rather than as a prohibited payment-method fee generally.

A lease provision requiring a flat service fee or convenience fee for a specific payment method conflicts directly with this statute, regardless of when that lease was signed.

[Cite: Montana Lawhelp, "Landlord Fees FAQ"]

A landlord operating under an older lease template with this kind of clause is working from outdated paperwork; the clause itself doesn't survive this statutory change just because it predates it.

Neither the enacted bill nor the secondary guidance reviewed for this article specifies whether a landlord must formally revise an existing lease containing a convenience-fee clause, or whether that clause simply becomes unenforceable without requiring a lease amendment.

[Cite: House Bill 810, Chapter 768, Laws of Montana 2025]

That's worth stating plainly rather than assuming a specific administrative step is legally required. A landlord in that situation should treat the clause as unenforceable going forward regardless, while confirming with counsel whether a formal lease update is advisable for clarity with tenants.

This same prohibition applies to mobile home lot rentals, where a resident owns their home but rents the underlying land, through parallel amendments to Montana's mobile home park statutes.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, sections 70-33-103 and 70-33-201, as amended by Chapter 768, Laws of Montana 2025]

A mobile home park operator charging a payment-method fee on lot rent is subject to the same prohibition and the same narrow electronic bank fee exception as a standard residential landlord.

A fee charged because rent arrived after the due date is a different category from a fee charged because of which payment method the tenant used, and this statute doesn't address late fees at all.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4)]

A landlord's existing late fee structure, assuming it complies with whatever separate rules govern late fees, isn't affected by this payment-method fee prohibition one way or the other.

A landlord using a third-party rent payment platform that automatically applies a service charge for card payments needs to check whether that charge exceeds the platform's actual processing cost, since a markup built into that automated charge would fall outside the statute's exception.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4)]

A landlord relying on a payment platform's default fee structure without checking the underlying cost is trusting that structure to comply with a Montana-specific rule it may not have been built around.

Before this amendment, a landlord charging an extra fee specifically for cash or check payment was already an unusual and less common practice compared to fees tied to card or electronic payments.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201(4)]

This statute's real practical effect lands almost entirely on electronic and card-based payment fees, since those were the methods most commonly carrying a separate charge before this rule took effect.

Nothing in this statute requires a landlord to accept every payment type; a landlord can still specify which payment methods are accepted under the lease.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-103(15)]

The restriction is on charging an additional fee tied to payment type, not on a landlord's ability to structure which payment methods are offered in the first place.

This amendment arrived in the same legislative session as other Montana landlord-tenant modernization efforts, reflecting a broader legislative interest in how fees and payment mechanics are structured between landlords and tenants.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 70-24-201, history section referencing Chapter 768, Laws of Montana 2025]

A landlord reviewing this specific fee rule has good reason to check whether other recent Montana landlord-tenant changes from the same session also affect current lease practices.

The practical starting point is auditing current lease templates and any third-party payment platform's fee structure for a flat or marked-up charge tied to payment method, and removing or adjusting any charge that exceeds the actual bank fee incurred for that specific transaction.

For any property using an automated online payment system, confirming with the platform provider exactly what fee it passes through, and whether that figure reflects the platform's actual bank cost rather than a built-in markup, closes the compliance gap this rule creates.