From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, August 11, 4:PM To: info Subject: Case ID# [redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern We have been in communication with the prospect regarding her concerns Initially, the prospect applied alone for one property, not attributed to this complaint After approval and initial deposit for that unit, she discovered that the property did not have some amenities that she was looking for and was not the specific duplex unit she had reviewed during her showing As a result, the prospect cancelled that move in and picked up her security deposit in full Approximately a week later, upon review of our other properties, she wanted to apply for a different property However, upon review of her information we determined that the income did not meet our minimum standard to apply for the new property As a result, she decided to have another person move in with her and we accepted an application with fee to process an additional resident Upon approval, she dropped off her security deposit in our night-drop box, but did not sign the holding deposit form that is required upon our acceptance of a security deposit In the meantime another approved applicant complied with the requirements and provided the security deposit and holding form for the same property The leasing agent informed her that she could pick up her security deposit money order at the front office anytime as the property was no longer available, and that given the timeframe she was wanting to move in, this property would not have been ready for the move in on the date the leasing agent thought she wanted The prospect misunderstood that because the property was not going to be move in ready it was “unlivable” which is inaccurate She came to the office to discuss the matter and we explained that we understood the confusion because she was under the impression that by dropping off the deposit amount in the night-drop box, that was sufficient to hold the home We explained that it was not enough because our standard procedure to hold a property is when the deposit and holding form are received We further discussed that the “coming soon” listings meant that a property was going to be available soon, even if it meant that it was not ready at the time of the listing Prospect was upset and stated that the only reason she agreed to a roommate for the second property was to meet the income requirement We discussed options with the prospect because we wanted her to find the home she was looking for And, because the prospects were already approved, we suggested that they review the current listings we have available that fall within their income requirement - if there was a suitable home, we would move the file to the new property and ensure we collected the necessary deposit and form for holding the unit for move in; but, if they did not find a property they wanted, we agreed to refund the second application fee as a courtesy, despite our application fees are non-refundable On Friday, the 28th of July, prospect informed the office that none of the properties available had the location and amenities desired and we agreed to process a refund of the second application fee All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices This matter should be resolved Thank you, Angela J [redacted] Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services EMichigan Street, Indianapolis, IN p| f| [email protected] www.barronprop.com
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:31 AM To: info Subject: Revdex.com - case ID#[redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern. We have been in communication with the tenant on a weekly and sometimes daily basis since the charge placed on...
their account was assessed for removing the debris on the side of their home due to being cited by the city/Marion County Health and Hospital, including, but not limited to, providing the tenant with the decision that the charge was valid and would remain on their account. All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices. We initially emailed the tenant on the 7th of December with a decision regarding his account inquiry. In addition, we sent a follow up email on the 16th of December also regarding the decision on his account inquiry. The tenant has claimed that he did not receive our email notifications, which may be part of the confusion on their end. We have also forwarded said notifications to the tenant, and have reminded them both verbally, as well as with written communication, however, the tenant has continued to call our office, asking for a different answer from multiple staff members, and all have given the same response that the decision has been reviewed by managers and is final. Tenant requested photographs of the incident that incurred the charge, which were forwarded to them. Tenant has not contacted our office since photos were sent. This matter should be resolved. Thank you, Angela Johnson Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services 3718 E. Michigan Street, Indianapolis, IN 46201 p. 317.357.4639 | f. 317.489.4384 | [email protected] www.barronprop.com
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 4:35 PM To: info Subject: Case ID#[redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern. We have been in communication with the prospect regarding her concerns. Initially, the prospect applied...
alone for one property, not attributed to this complaint. After approval and initial deposit for that unit, she discovered that the property did not have some amenities that she was looking for and was not the specific duplex unit she had reviewed during her showing. As a result, the prospect cancelled that move in and picked up her security deposit in full. Approximately a week later, upon review of our other properties, she wanted to apply for a different property. However, upon review of her information we determined that the income did not meet our minimum standard to apply for the new property. As a result, she decided to have another person move in with her and we accepted an application with fee to process an additional resident. Upon approval, she dropped off her security deposit in our night-drop box, but did not sign the holding deposit form that is required upon our acceptance of a security deposit. In the meantime another approved applicant complied with the requirements and provided the security deposit and holding form for the same property. The leasing agent informed her that she could pick up her security deposit money order at the front office anytime as the property was no longer available, and that given the timeframe she was wanting to move in, this property would not have been ready for the move in on the date the leasing agent thought she wanted. The prospect misunderstood that because the property was not going to be move in ready it was “unlivable” which is inaccurate. She came to the office to discuss the matter and we explained that we understood the confusion because she was under the impression that by dropping off the deposit amount in the night-drop box, that was sufficient to hold the home. We explained that it was not enough because our standard procedure to hold a property is when the deposit and holding form are received. We further discussed that the “coming soon” listings meant that a property was going to be available soon, even if it meant that it was not ready at the time of the listing. Prospect was upset and stated that the only reason she agreed to a roommate for the second property was to meet the income requirement. We discussed options with the prospect because we wanted her to find the home she was looking for. And, because the prospects were already approved, we suggested that they review the current listings we have available that fall within their income requirement - if there was a suitable home, we would move the file to the new property and ensure we collected the necessary deposit and form for holding the unit for move in; but, if they did not find a property they wanted, we agreed to refund the second application fee as a courtesy, despite our application fees are non-refundable. On Friday, the 28th of July, prospect informed the office that none of the properties available had the location and amenities desired and we agreed to process a refund of the second application fee. All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices. This matter should be resolved. Thank you, Angela J[redacted] Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services 3718 E. Michigan Street, Indianapolis, IN 46201 p. 317.357.4639 | f. 317.489.4384 | [email protected] www.barronprop.com
From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, August 11, 4:PM To: info Subject: Case ID# [redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern We have been in communication with the prospect regarding her concerns Initially, the prospect applied alone for one property, not attributed to this complaint After approval and initial deposit for that unit, she discovered that the property did not have some amenities that she was looking for and was not the specific duplex unit she had reviewed during her showing As a result, the prospect cancelled that move in and picked up her security deposit in full Approximately a week later, upon review of our other properties, she wanted to apply for a different property However, upon review of her information we determined that the income did not meet our minimum standard to apply for the new property As a result, she decided to have another person move in with her and we accepted an application with fee to process an additional resident Upon approval, she dropped off her security deposit in our night-drop box, but did not sign the holding deposit form that is required upon our acceptance of a security deposit In the meantime another approved applicant complied with the requirements and provided the security deposit and holding form for the same property The leasing agent informed her that she could pick up her security deposit money order at the front office anytime as the property was no longer available, and that given the timeframe she was wanting to move in, this property would not have been ready for the move in on the date the leasing agent thought she wanted The prospect misunderstood that because the property was not going to be move in ready it was “unlivable” which is inaccurate She came to the office to discuss the matter and we explained that we understood the confusion because she was under the impression that by dropping off the deposit amount in the night-drop box, that was sufficient to hold the home We explained that it was not enough because our standard procedure to hold a property is when the deposit and holding form are received We further discussed that the “coming soon” listings meant that a property was going to be available soon, even if it meant that it was not ready at the time of the listing Prospect was upset and stated that the only reason she agreed to a roommate for the second property was to meet the income requirement We discussed options with the prospect because we wanted her to find the home she was looking for And, because the prospects were already approved, we suggested that they review the current listings we have available that fall within their income requirement - if there was a suitable home, we would move the file to the new property and ensure we collected the necessary deposit and form for holding the unit for move in; but, if they did not find a property they wanted, we agreed to refund the second application fee as a courtesy, despite our application fees are non-refundable On Friday, the 28th of July, prospect informed the office that none of the properties available had the location and amenities desired and we agreed to process a refund of the second application fee All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices This matter should be resolved Thank you, Angela J [redacted] Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services EMichigan Street, Indianapolis, IN p| f| [email protected] www.barronprop.com
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:31 AM To: info Subject: Revdex.com - case ID#[redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern. We have been in communication with the tenant on a weekly and sometimes daily basis since the charge placed on...
their account was assessed for removing the debris on the side of their home due to being cited by the city/Marion County Health and Hospital, including, but not limited to, providing the tenant with the decision that the charge was valid and would remain on their account. All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices. We initially emailed the tenant on the 7th of December with a decision regarding his account inquiry. In addition, we sent a follow up email on the 16th of December also regarding the decision on his account inquiry. The tenant has claimed that he did not receive our email notifications, which may be part of the confusion on their end. We have also forwarded said notifications to the tenant, and have reminded them both verbally, as well as with written communication, however, the tenant has continued to call our office, asking for a different answer from multiple staff members, and all have given the same response that the decision has been reviewed by managers and is final. Tenant requested photographs of the incident that incurred the charge, which were forwarded to them. Tenant has not contacted our office since photos were sent. This matter should be resolved. Thank you, Angela Johnson Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services 3718 E. Michigan Street, Indianapolis, IN 46201 p. 317.357.4639 | f. 317.489.4384 | [email protected] www.barronprop.com
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 4:35 PM To: info Subject: Case ID#[redacted] Thank you for your letter of concern. We have been in communication with the prospect regarding her concerns. Initially, the prospect applied...
alone for one property, not attributed to this complaint. After approval and initial deposit for that unit, she discovered that the property did not have some amenities that she was looking for and was not the specific duplex unit she had reviewed during her showing. As a result, the prospect cancelled that move in and picked up her security deposit in full. Approximately a week later, upon review of our other properties, she wanted to apply for a different property. However, upon review of her information we determined that the income did not meet our minimum standard to apply for the new property. As a result, she decided to have another person move in with her and we accepted an application with fee to process an additional resident. Upon approval, she dropped off her security deposit in our night-drop box, but did not sign the holding deposit form that is required upon our acceptance of a security deposit. In the meantime another approved applicant complied with the requirements and provided the security deposit and holding form for the same property. The leasing agent informed her that she could pick up her security deposit money order at the front office anytime as the property was no longer available, and that given the timeframe she was wanting to move in, this property would not have been ready for the move in on the date the leasing agent thought she wanted. The prospect misunderstood that because the property was not going to be move in ready it was “unlivable” which is inaccurate. She came to the office to discuss the matter and we explained that we understood the confusion because she was under the impression that by dropping off the deposit amount in the night-drop box, that was sufficient to hold the home. We explained that it was not enough because our standard procedure to hold a property is when the deposit and holding form are received. We further discussed that the “coming soon” listings meant that a property was going to be available soon, even if it meant that it was not ready at the time of the listing. Prospect was upset and stated that the only reason she agreed to a roommate for the second property was to meet the income requirement. We discussed options with the prospect because we wanted her to find the home she was looking for. And, because the prospects were already approved, we suggested that they review the current listings we have available that fall within their income requirement - if there was a suitable home, we would move the file to the new property and ensure we collected the necessary deposit and form for holding the unit for move in; but, if they did not find a property they wanted, we agreed to refund the second application fee as a courtesy, despite our application fees are non-refundable. On Friday, the 28th of July, prospect informed the office that none of the properties available had the location and amenities desired and we agreed to process a refund of the second application fee. All account reviews and decisions were completed within an appropriate and allowable timeframe based on consumer rights and fair debt collection practices. This matter should be resolved. Thank you, Angela J[redacted] Office Manager | Accounting Manager Barron Property Services 3718 E. Michigan Street, Indianapolis, IN 46201 p. 317.357.4639 | f. 317.489.4384 | [email protected] www.barronprop.com