Waterhouse Place

We appreciate Ms. [redacted] ’s comments and her taking the time to voice her concerns regarding her rental experience with us. To gather information to effectively respond to Ms. [redacted] ’s complaints, our Management Team has documented pictures and video of the condition of the home at the... time of move out, formal proposals and written statements from our carpet vendors (both replacement and cleaning professionals), a signed move-in checklist acknowledging move-in conditions, and lease addendums in respect to potential charges at move-out for the community. These items combined have lead us to our decision stated below. The carpet was damaged when possession was returned to WaterHouse Place Apartments, as a result of pet urine and odor, as documented in the photographs taken at the time of move out, as well as a recommendation to replace from our carpet cleaning company, Cleanaway, as noted on the inspection report dated 8/22/17. The carpet was replaced originally on 10/15/13 by Alliance Flooring Services, therefore, the chargeback rate was prorated on a five-year life span, monthly. The carpet was 46 months old, on a 60-month life span, and as a result, the residents were charged the remaining life of $22.67/mo for 14 months. There were no documented damages at the time of move-in, as reflected in the attached move-in walk through form, signed by Ms. [redacted] dated 8/23/2014. This charge has since been removed as a customer service gesture. While our stance is that the charges were appropriate and necessary, we recognize the fact that Ms. [redacted] had a less than pleasant residency at WaterHouse and attempted to offer a common ground of resolution for her in this manner. In respect to the statement made that we were already removing the carpet, there is a misunderstanding on the part of Ms. [redacted] , as this apartment home had no intended renovation, and the carpet would have been cleaned for the next resident if possible. After reviewing the photographs taken at the time of move out, the apartment home was left with nail holes in the walls, staining caused by liquid spills, and hooks hanging from the ceiling, in one area. These items fall outside normal wear and tear of an apartment, and would be considered the responsibility of the resident under the painting charge. There were no documented damages to the paint or walls at the time of move-in, as reflected in the attached move-in walk through form, signed by Ms. [redacted] dated 8/23/2014. The original charge of $275 has since been reduced to $94.80 to cover the cost of the paint, drywall materials, and team member time to correct the damages. While our stance is that the charges were appropriate and necessary, we recognize the fact that Ms. [redacted] had a less than pleasant residency at WaterHouse and attempted to offer a common ground of resolution for her in this manner as well. At this time, we are unclear on the circumstances surrounding the statement made that we entered her home without her permission, therefore, are unable to provide a comment or resolution for this subject. If dates and times can be provided, we would be more than happy to review our records and respond to this line item. In respect to her utilities, this was previously corrected as soon as it was brought to our attention on 11/2/2016. Ms. [redacted] visited the local leasing office to inquire about their utility charges, and provided a photo of her most recent bill (8/23/16-9/17/16) which listed 4 occupants. This was an error as they only had 3 occupants in the home. As a way to correct this issue, the ledger was credited $382.00 to reimburse her for the overcharge on 11/4/2016. We sincerely regret the unfortunate incident with the previous manager, we have handled internally in the appropriate fashion, and the review was removed from Yelp as soon as we were made aware. A formal apology was provided to Ms. [redacted] from our Corporate office, and a $250 customer service gesture was provided. We also offered to release her from her lease agreement with no penalty, and offered to transfer her to another Sequoia property, if she chose that route. We acknowledge this was a failure on the part of one individual that was employed at the time of the event, and is not reflective of our company values as a whole. As of today, the account balance is $0 owed to WaterHouse, we request this matter closed as a result. Thank you, Rita C [redacted] , Regional Portfolio Manager

We appreciate Ms. [redacted]’s comments and her taking the time to voice her concerns regarding her rental experience with us.   To gather information to effectively respond to Ms. [redacted]’s complaints, our Management Team has documented pictures and video of the condition of the home at the...

time of move out, formal proposals and written statements from our carpet vendors (both replacement and cleaning professionals), a signed move-in checklist acknowledging move-in conditions, and lease addendums in respect to potential charges at move-out for the community. These items combined have lead us to our decision stated below.   The carpet was damaged when possession was returned to WaterHouse Place Apartments, as a result of pet urine and odor, as documented in the photographs taken at the time of move out, as well as a recommendation to replace from our carpet cleaning company, Cleanaway, as noted on the inspection report dated 8/22/17. The carpet was replaced originally on 10/15/13 by Alliance Flooring Services, therefore, the chargeback rate was prorated on a five-year life span, monthly. The carpet was 46 months old, on a 60-month life span, and as a result, the residents were charged the remaining life of $22.67/mo for 14 months. There were no documented damages at the time of move-in, as reflected in the attached move-in walk through form, signed by Ms. [redacted] dated 8/23/2014. This charge has since been removed as a customer service gesture. While our stance is that the charges were appropriate and necessary, we recognize the fact that Ms. [redacted] had a less than pleasant residency at WaterHouse and attempted to offer a common ground of resolution for her in this manner. In respect to the statement made that we were already removing the carpet, there is a misunderstanding on the part of Ms. [redacted], as this apartment home had no intended renovation, and the carpet would have been cleaned for the next resident if possible.   After reviewing the photographs taken at the time of move out, the apartment home was left with nail holes in the walls, staining caused by liquid spills, and hooks hanging from the ceiling, in one area. These items fall outside normal wear and tear of an apartment, and would be considered the responsibility of the resident under the painting charge. There were no documented damages to the paint or walls at the time of move-in, as reflected in the attached move-in walk through form, signed by Ms. [redacted] dated 8/23/2014. The original charge of $275 has since been reduced to $94.80 to cover the cost of the paint, drywall materials, and team member time to correct the damages.  While our stance is that the charges were appropriate and necessary, we recognize the fact that Ms. [redacted] had a less than pleasant residency at WaterHouse and attempted to offer a common ground of resolution for her in this manner as well.   At this time, we are unclear on the circumstances surrounding the statement made that we entered her home without her permission, therefore, are unable to provide a comment or resolution for this subject. If dates and times can be provided, we would be more than happy to review our records and respond to this line item.   In respect to her utilities, this was previously corrected as soon as it was brought to our attention on 11/2/2016. Ms. [redacted] visited the local leasing office to inquire about their utility charges, and provided a photo of her most recent bill (8/23/16-9/17/16) which listed 4 occupants. This was an error as they only had 3 occupants in the home. As a way to correct this issue, the ledger was credited $382.00 to reimburse her for the overcharge on 11/4/2016.   We sincerely regret the unfortunate incident with the previous manager, we have handled internally in the appropriate fashion, and the review was removed from Yelp as soon as we were made aware. A formal apology was provided to Ms. [redacted] from our Corporate office, and a $250 customer service gesture was provided. We also offered to release her from her lease agreement with no penalty, and offered to transfer her to another Sequoia property, if she chose that route. We acknowledge this was a failure on the part of one individual that was employed at the time of the event, and is not reflective of our company values as a whole.   As of today, the account balance is $0 owed to WaterHouse, we request this matter closed as a result.   Thank you,  Rita C[redacted], Regional Portfolio Manager