whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Property & WEG Management

PayProp

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by PayProp (Humanstate) · www.payprop.com

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

PayProp: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai PayProp: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds. The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.

PayProp at a glance

Vendor
PayProp (Humanstate)
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates PayProp 0.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. PayProp positions itself as property management software and a rental payment platform for letting agents — rent collection, real-time reconciliation and client accounts, not community administration. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources

PayProp alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Skeptic

Weighted verdict

Has read many pages claiming "WEG-konform" and wants the feature that makes it true — the post-2021 settlement form, the maintained Beschluss-Sammlung, the majority arithmetic. Also reads for the per-unit minimum, the setup fee, and what it costs a community to leave with its own records.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Skeptic

Panel median The Skeptic This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Skeptic
Wirtschaftsplan, Jahresabrechnung & Rücklage 0 of 5 0 of 5
Eigentümerversammlung & Beschluss-Sammlung 0 of 5 0 of 5
Maintenance, defects & contractors 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
Documents, retention & handover 0.5 of 5 0 of 5
European sovereignty 0.5 of 5 0.5 of 5

Wirtschaftsplan, Jahresabrechnung & Rücklage

How this is scored

The statutory financial cycle: business plan, annual settlement in the form the law and the BGH require, distribution keys, and the separate handling of reserve funds held in trust for the community.

0 — Not WEG accounting: general bookkeeping or a rental tool with no Wirtschaftsplan or Jahresabrechnung, or no accounting at all.

3 — Bookkeeping per property with templates or a basic generator for Wirtschaftsplan and Jahresabrechnung, distribution keys entered per document.

5 — Wirtschaftsplan and Jahresabrechnung generated from the bookings with configurable distribution keys (MEA, units, consumption), Hausgeld and reserves booked per community.

8 — Settlement in the post-2021 BGH form with the Abrechnungsspitze shown separately, Vermögensbericht produced, the Rücklage kept as a separate reserve with its own statement, heating-cost apportionment per HeizkostenV integrated, owner changes apportioned mid-year, and Hausgeld arrears tracked with dunning.

10 — The whole financial year is discharged inside the system: multi-community bookkeeping with strict per-WEG separation, trust accounting for reserves with its own reporting, settlement documents an accountant would sign, and the arithmetic auditable back to individual postings.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The captured pages describe a rent-collection and payment platform for UK letting agencies — automated incoming and outgoing transactions, client accounts, arrears chasing by text and e-mail — and I found no public information on a business plan, an annual settlement in the form German community law requires, distribution keys or a reserve held in trust. This is agent-side money plumbing, not community accounting. 1

Report an error

Eigentümerversammlung & Beschluss-Sammlung

How this is scored

Convening, running and recording the owners' meeting — including the resolution register the law requires the administrator to maintain, and the majority arithmetic that decides whether a resolution stands.

0 — No owners' meeting features at all; the product is not built for WEG administration.

3 — Invitation templates generated from owner data and minutes stored with the property.

5 — Invitations with an agenda sent to all owners, votes or attendance recorded per agenda item, and a Beschluss-Sammlung kept as a register in the system.

8 — Quorum and majority computed per resolution type including MEA-weighted and qualified majorities, proxies and voting restrictions handled, minutes generated from the recorded votes, and the register maintained continuously with amendment and invalidation notes as § 24 (7) WEG requires.

10 — The meeting is conducted in the system: hybrid or online meetings and written circulation procedures supported with their own legal rules, contested resolutions flagged within the challenge period, the register complete and exportable as evidence, and every entry traceable to the meeting that produced it.

Report an error

The Skeptic

I found no public information on convening an owners' meeting, recording votes per agenda item, or maintaining the resolution register an administrator is required to keep. The captured pages position the product for letting agencies, which is a different kind of tool from community administration. 1

Report an error

Owner & tenant self-service

How this is scored

How an owner exercises their right to see the records, and how much routine correspondence the portal removes: statements, documents, meeting papers, defect reporting.

0 — No portal or app for owners or tenants; the product is used by the administrator alone.

3 — A document area or app where owners or tenants can view documents shared with them.

5 — A portal or app with a personal login per owner and tenant showing their own documents and statements, plus a request or defect form that reaches the administrator.

8 — Owners and tenants scoped separately with correct visibility, meeting papers and voting available in the portal, defect reports with status visible to the reporter, and consumption or arrears shown per unit.

10 — The portal discharges the disclosure duty: every record an owner is entitled to see available on demand with an access log, tenant and owner views strictly separated, notifications for statutory deadlines, and enough self-service that routine correspondence largely disappears.

Report an error

The Skeptic not rated — no public information

I found no public information on owner or tenant self-service: the only tenant-facing capability the captured pages show is outbound arrears reminders by text and e-mail, and the site's tenant-portal page was captured but yielded no fact I can judge. Whether an owner can log in and see their own records, statements or meeting papers is, on this evidence, unknown to me. 1 3

Report an error

Maintenance, defects & contractors

How this is scored

The building side: defect intake and tracking, recurring maintenance obligations, contractor assignment, and the evidence trail when something goes wrong.

0 — No building-side features at all; defects and maintenance are outside the product's scope.

3 — Defects or tasks recorded per property with a status, and a contractor contact list.

5 — Defect tickets per unit or property with status and photos, contractors assigned with a work order, and recurring maintenance tasks with reminders.

8 — Warranty and Gewährleistung periods tracked against the responsible trade, statutory inspections (lift, heating, fire safety, drinking water) scheduled with proof of completion stored, quotes and invoices linked to the defect, and cost allocated to the correct account.

10 — A defensible operating record: every obligation, inspection and defect with its evidence and dates, contractor performance visible, budget consumption against the Wirtschaftsplan tracked live, and a history that answers the question of what the administrator knew and when.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The homepage promises "a simple and convenient way to manage maintenance and repair tickets", alongside a maintenance-reporting integration partner and contractor invoices automated through the Reapit connection. That is ticket intake with contractor payment on the side; I found no public information on recurring statutory inspections, warranty periods, quotes linked to defects or evidence trails. 1

Report an error

Documents, retention & handover

How this is scored

The archive and the exit. A Verwalter's appointment is finite by law, and the records belong to the community — so handover is a statutory event, not a support ticket.

0 — No document storage in the product; records are kept elsewhere.

3 — Central document storage per property with folders and upload.

5 — Document management per property and unit with search, documents linked to owners or units, and an export of a community's data or documents.

8 — Full-text search across the archive, version history, retention periods stated, documents linked to the resolutions and settlements that reference them, and a complete handover package (ledger, register, documents, master data) in open formats.

10 — Handover is a first-class feature rather than an obstacle: a complete, structured export a successor administrator can actually load, retention executed per statutory period, an access log over the archive, and no commercial friction placed in the way of a community leaving.

Report an error

The Skeptic

I found no public information on document storage, search, version history, retention periods or a handover package for a community's records; the captured pages describe payment automation, client accounts and integrations. On this evidence the archive and the statutory handover that ends an administrator's appointment are outside what the pages describe. 1

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the community's financial and personal records live, who the contracting entity is, and which subprocessors touch them. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it. Dimensions the sources do not establish are unknown, not non-EU.

0 — Proven non-EU: a non-EU vendor and contracting entity with hosting stated outside the EU.

3 — One European element proven — an EU contracting entity or EU hosting stated — with the rest of the chain undocumented.

5 — An EU contracting entity and EU hosting both stated, and a data processing agreement offered.

8 — German or EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, a subprocessor list published with locations, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, certification published, and an export that keeps the community compliant for the full retention period after the appointment ends.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The privacy policy names PayProp Ltd and Reapit Ltd, both registered in England and Wales, under the Information Commissioner's Office, and discloses international transfers to group companies in the United States, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand among others. I found no public information on where data is hosted, a data processing agreement for a community's records, or the locations of the CRM, hosting, analytics and marketing suppliers it names — so the captured pages prove a non-EU contracting chain and nothing European beyond geography. 2

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether an administrator can compute the real annual cost for the units under management — including modules, per-community fees and setup — from public pages alone.

0 — No public prices at all; every quote is a sales conversation.

3 — A public "from" price or a single tier with a per-unit or per-community figure.

5 — Per-unit, per-community or per-tier prices public with the billing period stated and the main inclusions listed.

8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with per-unit maths, minimum term, setup and migration costs and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom enterprise work lacks a number.

10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given number of units and communities including every module, with no per-seat surprises and any exit or export fee stated outright.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The captured homepage shows a pricing link and the statement "No long-term contracts", but no per-unit, per-community or tier figure appears on any page I was shown. An administrator cannot compute the annual cost for the units under management from this evidence; I found no public information on setup, migration or any per-unit minimum. 1

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 6 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Hosting location Not determined — uncited Report an error
Hosting options Not determined — uncited Report an error
Open source Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data processing agreement Not determined — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about PayProp

Is PayProp European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where PayProp is based.

Where does PayProp store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

Does PayProp have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to PayProp?

As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Condomana (3.5/5), etg24 (2.5/5) and facilioo (2/5) highest among the other 21 Property & WEG Management products evaluated. The highest-rated European alternative is Condomana (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: PayProp alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

Do you know more about PayProp? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (3)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor page www.payprop.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Privacy policy — found from the homepage www.payprop.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Owner & tenant self-service — found from sitemap www.payprop.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →