Jay Carmac and Associates

Review: They require you to provide a proof of insurance and currant registration to obtain a parking pass once you are an actual tenant living in complex.I understand that they may have had issues with abandon cars and such but I drive a vehical that has a currant reg. and to drive vehical without insurance against the law. I recently had my truck towed out of apt.complex after living there for 5mo.for having an expired temp parking pass and cost me 385.00 to get it out. Can they require me to provide insurance and registration to park in cmoplex parking lot after meeting the requirement for moving in when clearly my truck is legal with currant reg tag on plate?Desired Settlement: I would like to be reinbursed my 385.00

Business

Response:

My name is [redacted] and I am the Office Manager for Jay Carmac Associates.

Review: On 1/25/16 I [redacted] responded with a [redacted] to a [redacted] add. This ad was for a complex called the [redacted], the ad proposed an rental availability for 2/20/15. Upon calling [redacted] we were it was stated by the site manager ([redacted]) that this wasn't the case, and the only available unit would be on 03/16. Even with this being the situation it was stated by the site manager that we could still complete an application.

These two applications consisted of personal information including; Social Security Numbers, California I.D.'s, Income Verification and other personal information. It was explained to us that at that time the process of approving or denying would take 5-7 business days. Less than 24hrs later on 1/26/16 2:32p.m. we received a disappointing call from [redacted] stating that our application was denied. Upon requesting the basis for our denial we were told that this wasn't possible. The next motion that was provided was that we contact corporate for more details on our situation. A [redacted] number was given and we contacted a person named Katie, which told us the very same as the prior. That obtaining a report for the basis of our denial wasn't possible.Desired Settlement: The desired resolution to this incident would be an complete report of who ran our information, along with an complete report of what the basis of our denial consisted of.

Business

Response:

To Whom it may concern,The criteria that we look at for a rental applicant is as follows:Good standing creditapplication filled addresses and phone numbers with a minimum of three years rental and Income history which must be verifiableno evictionsno criminal historyIf an applicant is denied they did not meet one or more of these criteriaThe applicants [redacted] and [redacted] did not meet the criteria due to the verifiable rental and income history was not met

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because:When questioned about rental requirements, the onsite managers responses were particularly vague. The second reason for my rejection is due to the failure once again to provide the services requested. I did not request for rental requirements (that should have been stated in the [redacted] ad.), but the documentation for the grounds for disqualification. As I've given personal documentation, the reputable course of action is to provide such documentation I've requested from your side.Failure to do so will result in the only logical conclusion, that discrimination has taken place. Due to the fact that my rental application was denied for an apartment that doesn't exist. As it was stated by the on site manager (over the phone) there were no units available until 02/20/16, contrary to the [redacted] posting.

Business

Response:

The applications for available units are taken on a first come first serve basis. Prospective tenants are told this as well or if the application for the unit that would be available sooner was disqualified or canceled then their application would be in line for it if they are interested in moving sooner. The applications for [redacted] were taken for unit [redacted] that would be available in March based on the known circumstances of when we were getting the unit back and the approximate time it takes to turn over an average unit.The cover sheet enclosed is on the front of all the applications in the leasing offices that are given to all prospective tenants. This does tell the criteria and we accept all applications for review even if the applicant or the onsite manager doesn’t think the criteria will be met. The applications are then sent to corporate for review based only on the qualifications of the prospective tenant. We gladly accept all applicants who meet the criteria.

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because: Jay Carmac And Associates needs to stand by all their statements stated here point for point as 100% truth The applications for available units are taken on a “first come first serve” basis. Prospective “tenants are told this as well” or if the application for the unit that would be available sooner was disqualified or canceled then their application would be in line for it if they are interested in moving sooner. The applications for [redacted] and [redacted]. [redacted] were taken for unit [redacted] that would be available in March based on the known circumstances of when we were getting the unit back and the approximate time it takes to turn over an average unit.“The cover sheet enclosed is on the front of all the applications in the leasing offices that are given to all prospective tenants.” This does tell the criteria and we accept all applications for review even if the applicant or the onsite manager doesn’t think the criteria will be met. The applications are then sent to corporate for review based only on the qualifications of the prospective tenant. We gladly accept all applicants who meet the criteria.As stated above by [redacted]- [redacted] representative of Jay Carmac And Associates on 3/8/2016 4:24 PM to the Revdex.com Northeast California concerning complaint ID#: [redacted].1. The applications for available units are taken on a “first come first serve” basis.a. Available as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, available, adj. Legally valid <available claims> <available defenses>.b. First come First serve as defined by [redacted] is thus, First-come, first-served (FCFS) – sometimes first-in, first-served and first-come, first choice – is a service policy whereby the requests of customers or clients are attended to in the order that they arrived, without other biases or preferences.c. Basis as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, basis. (14c) 1. A fundamental principle; an underlying fact or condition. I. The fundamental principal and underlying condition for your rental application algorithm is the “FIRST COME FIRST SERVE” service policy. Factual ONLY ON THE CONDITION OF “AVAILIBALITY”, as stated in the 1ST sentence of paragraph one in this statement. ii. Applications for [redacted] AND [redacted] were submitted on 01/25/16, for a unit that was stated by [redacted]- [redacted] to not be available until sometime 03/16. Logic concludes that if we were not first, we shouldn’t have been served because the two fundamental conditions of “AVAILIBALITY” and Jay Carmac and Associates (FCFS) service policy were not met. iii. Based off Jay Carmac and Associates stated rental algorithm only, ‘the applications for available units are taken.” As of 01/25/16, my rental application was submitted there was no available unit, yet my application was taken anyway. Violating Jay Carmac and Associates, very own CONDITION OF “AVAILIBALITY”.2. Prospective “tenants are told this as well” or if the application for the unit that would be available sooner was disqualified or canceled then their application would be in line for it if they are interested in moving sooner.a. Prospective as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, prospective, adj, (18c) 1. Effective or operative in the future <prospective application of the new statute>. 2. Anticipated or expected; likely to come about <prospective clients>. I. As stated by [redacted]- [redacted] representative of Jay Carmac and Associates, Prospective “tenants are told this as well”. In order to be considered a Prospective tenant your rental algorithm states that, it’s mandatory to tell Prospective tenants information expressed in the 1st sentence paragraph one.1. Prior to 2/10/2016 7:56:14 this information was never expressed to me either verbally or via written communication. 2. Logic concludes that if Jay Carmac and Associates stands by these statements. [redacted] and [redacted] were NEVER considered Prospective tenants. 3. To be a Prospective tenant as stated by [redacted]- [redacted], these initial requirements are mandatory.a. Be told either verbally or via written communication concerning sentence one paragraph one.b. CONDITION OF “AVAILIBALITY”.c. “FIRST COME FIRST SERVE” service policy3. if the application for the unit that would be available sooner was disqualified or canceled then their application would be in line for it if they are interested in moving sooner.a. Cancel as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, cancel, vb 1. To destroy a written instrument by defacing or obliterating it. 2. To terminate a promise, obligation, or right.b. Cancellation as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, cancellation, n, (16c) 1. The act of defacing of obliterating a writing (as by marking lines across it) with the intention of rendering it void. 2. An annulment or termination of a promise or an obligation.c. Disqualification as defined by [redacted] pocket addition is defined as thus, disqualification, n. (18c) 1. Something that makes one ineligible; esp., a basis or conflict of interest that prevents a judge or juror from impartially hearing a case, or that prevents a lawyer from representing a party. I. If the cancellation or disqualification of an application exist then by nature of the definitions of such, it would be impossible to be “in line” as my application would be void and ineligible. Once again eligibility can only be possible if these requirements are present as stated by [redacted]- [redacted] (sentence one, paragraph one and sentence two, paragraph one);1. You’re a Prospective tenant 2. THE CONDITION OF “AVAILIBALITY” EXISTS.3. And you met the “FIRST COME FIRST SERVE” service policy4. The applications for [redacted] and [redacted] were taken for unit [redacted] that would be available in March based on the known circumstances of when we were getting the unit back and the approximate time it takes to turn over an average unit.a. As it was stated by the on-site manger once in person and once via telecommunication there were no available units prior until sometime 3/16. So the statement that, “[redacted] and [redacted] were taken for unit [redacted]” is false. Also prior to 02/10/16 it was never expressed either verbally or in written communication unit [redacted] is the unit applicants were applying for. This wouldn’t be possible because it was stated there was no available units. I. Applications shouldn’t have been taken for any unit, when the fundamental requirements stated by Jay Carmac and Associates representative [redacted]- [redacted] were non-existent from the beginning.5. The cover sheet enclosed is on the front of all the applications in the leasing offices that are given to all prospective tenants.a. The cover sheet enclosed here was never provided with the application, provided on site of [redacted] Apartments 1/25/16. b. As stated here cover letters, “are given to all prospective tenants.” I. Facts conclude, that it was never possible to be a prospective tenant because the basis of the rental application algorithm doesn’t allow such. Along with the added fact that I never received the enclosed document until 2/10/16 7:56:14 PM.6. This does tell the criteria and we accept all applications for review even if the applicant or the onsite manager doesn’t think the criteria will be met.a. In order for acceptance of an application, it must meet the fundamental conditions as stated in paragraph one sentence one. My application didn't meet this standard voiding out the enclosed documents criteria, on the basis that there was no unit availability.7. The applications are then sent to corporate for review based only on the qualifications of the prospective tenant.a. "Applications are then sent to corporate for review." As of 02/13/16 corporate has never provided the requested reviewed documentation as fact for application denial. I. This statement in its entirety concludes that review is based only on the qualifications of the prospective tenant. Which as stated by Jay Carmac and associates representative as the, "qualifications of the prospective tenant." This being documentation for prospective tenants (enclosed cover letter) needs to be present via written communication. This documentation was never presented until 02/10/16.8. We accept all applicants who meet the criteria. a. 1. The criteria stated in the cover letter could have never been fact, because the fundamental conditions of Jay Carmac and associates rental algorithm. These conditions had to be in place in order to be able to move forward. I. The algorithm as stated by Jay Carmac and Associates representative is as thus: condition of availability+FCFS service policy+Prosepective tenant qualifications+cover sheet criteria+corporate review= accepted applicant (unless cancellation or disqualification occurs). 1. Neither cancellation nor disqualification occurred; a denial of applicats was stated to have occurred, (By the on-site manger).For the third time my initial request has been ignored, maybe I’ve failed to articulate my request in a comprehendible manner. I will attempt here to be as clear and concise as possible. • Prove point for point my application denial was truthfully accurately justified. •Provide documents supporting this denial, with an explanation. • Provide names of all persons included in the denial process of my application. • Investigation of business practices, such as not providing the qualifying documentation (cover sheet) needed to be a prospective tenant. •Explain why corporate is reviewing applications, when it's stated review is, "based only on the qualifications of the prospective tenant." Which is stipulated by the cover sheet document being present. • Explain why the Jay Carmac and associates rental application algorithm was ignored, when dealing with my application. • Provide an answer as to why personal identification documents and pay stubs were accepted, when fundamental conditions for the rental application algorithm weren't present.Please review all statements above as 100% truthful statements and provide Revdex.com with a written rebuttal. Please provide all facts concerning these statements above within 7 calendar days so as to avoid the only logical conclusion that discrimination has taken place.Also see attached document.

Review: My husband, [redacted], and I resided at [redacted] from 6.28.13 to 1.03.14. We paid a deposit of $1000 and received a bill of $44.61 received by mail 1.24.14. [redacted] charged us $130 for partial clean and VCT, $784.61 for full carpet replacement, and $130 for touch-up paint with no explanation, photos, or receipts. Our walkthrough notes taken on 6.28.13 by the manager of Tokay Villa Apartments states damaged carpets, walls, and VCT. [redacted] called for reasoning for charges, but was told [redacted] has no information for the charges and they only reason they charged for full carpet replacement is our Sears Carpet Cleaning receipt stating that we paid extra for Pet Enzyme Removal because of our dog. [redacted] then offered us 25% of the carpet charge back, but we denied. We received a information paper on the carpet charges, not the receipt, on 2.08.14. We have, yet, to receive explanations, photos, or receipts for any of the charges made.Desired Settlement: We would like a refund of our entire deposit.

Business

Response:

My name is [redacted] and I am the Office Manager for Jay Carmac Associates. I spoke with Mr. [redacted] when he called.

A deposit disbursement form was sent to [redacted] and [redacted] with a balance due of $44.61. The charges were as stated a partial clean + VCT at $130, full carpet replacement at $784.61 and touch-up paint at $130. The total for these charges is $1044.61 less the deposit of $1000.00.

When Mr. [redacted] called about the charges it was explained to him that these were the necessary charges for the apartment to be rent ready as when they moved in. He was not happy stating that the carpet had previous damage and he did not feel they should be charged for it. I explained that the reason it needed to be replaced was due to the pet urine caused by their pet that could not be cleaned out but did in fact have to be replaced. I also did bring it to his attention the Sears receipt that he gave us for cleaning stated under Problem Stain: "urine black", under Heavily Soiled: "all areas", and Pet Stains/Odor: "heavy smell urine". Also Sears stated under Special Instructions: "NO GUARANTEE ON PET URINE REMOVAL". The mention of his receipt was to reinstate the fact that their pet had caused damage to the carpet and Sears had documented the fact of the urine being heavily throughout the apartment and they did not state that it could be removed by cleaning only.

Due to the fact that Mr. [redacted] stated there was damage to the carpet upon move-in I did speak with the owner and the only thing documented by the tenant was carpet in bedroom had sun-bleached damage and a small bleach stain; living room floor/carpet uneven. The owner said due to what was stated we would offer a 25 % discount off the carpet replacement price of $784.61, to cover previous usage.

It was discussed with Mr. [redacted] that the Waiver of Right To Receive Documentation With Itemized Disposition of Security Deposit form was signed and that was why there were no invoices or receipts mailed to them with the deposit disbursement. I told Mr. [redacted] that I would send the copy of the invoice for the carpet since this was what he stated as his main concern, as soon as we received it. Upon the receipt of the invoice for $823.22 it was mailed to them. You will notice the price charged is more than our original quote of $784.61, but we are still honoring the price billed to Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] of $784.61 subtracting the 25% to equal $588.46. A refund of $151.54 is due them.