Amarillo Home Buyers, LP

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: The property located at [redacted] is a rental property and upon securing the property we signed a rental agreement with a required rental deposit of $1, The security deposit was explained and outlined in the contract as funds that would be used toward restoring the property in the event that we vacate the home and repairs were required Within the first year of living at the home, we inquired about purchasing the property We were informed by [redacted] Property Management that a lease option was available (see contract attached) The lease option required the establishment of a $5,escrow Due to unforeseen circumstances, we no longer could take advantage of the lease option for the home In August of 2014, we decided to cancel the Lease Option and submitted a day notice to vacate the property by the end of September When notifying the management company of our intensions to vacate, we were informed that the good faith escrow that was established would not be returned The management company did reach out to the property owner in reference to our request for the return of the escrow and the property owner did agree to refund a portion of the escrow The management company is now seeking an additional $1,in damages, claiming that due to the lease option that was provided, our initial rental security deposit is no longer valid and the security deposit would be rolled into the good faith escrow that the company will be keeping I am disputing this practiceWhen reviewing my contract, it is not outlined that I would be forfeiting my rental security deposit I was not aware that the rental security deposit would no longer be utilized as a security deposit This information was not provided to me either verbally or by contract At the time of signing the lease option the company should have established this principle and if this information was divulged to me I may have made a different decision in reference to agreeing to a lease option I believe that the rental deposit should be used for the purposes in which it was established As a rental security deposit and no additional funds should be required for any damages that would be covered under the funds that were already provided Regards, [redacted] Jr

Thank you. Our business and the owner of the property remain with our original response to the initial complaint with no changes. Please see attached a few photos of how the owner received the property from Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]. Our original response:We have ample proof to show them that the property was vacated in a manner in which it required additional maintenance to allow the house to be placed on the market for new tenants.  Mr. [redacted]'s family was under contract to purchase the home since July 2013, with a purchase date of May 1, 2015.  A $5000 good faith deposit was a condition of the contract, with him forfeiting his deposit of $1500 and providing an additional $3500 to cover the good faith.  This was non-negotiable.  The lease agreement between the Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] and the owner was broken by the tenant, which in the agreement it was noted that if he defaulted on the purchase that he would lose his entire good faith deposit.  That was spelled out clearly in the contract and the fact that the owner gave them some of that deposit back was out of generosity.  The inconvenience of withdrawing his purchase was entirely his decision and had no influence from the owner or from our company.  The agreement to release some of his good faith deposit was agreed upon before his family vacated the property.Mr. [redacted] vacated the property at the end of September 2014, in a state that could not allow immediate occupation from new tenants.  The property had to be reconditioned professionally, which is a condition of the Kansas City [redacted].    Since Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] accepted and lived in the property prior to the intended purchase date, all problems and maintenance to the home belonged was charged to them.  Due to the condition of the home upon their vacation, it was determined that they were responsible for repairing all damages to the property as well as the reconditioning of the property to allow new tenants.Maintenance to the property was conducted professionally, which included professional repairing and painting of walls throughout the home, reattaching and fixing multiple items throughout the house, clearing out all personal items (that the tenants had left behind) which was extensive, professional cleaning of all surfaces and flooring, clearing out external personal items from the exterior of the home as well as fixing the landscaping.  Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] were billed the amount necessary to fix the property, which the owner had to pay for in order to get the property back on the market.    Thank you and have a good day,[redacted]Assistant Office Manager- [redacted] Property ManagementReal Estate Agent- [redacted] Real EstateOffice ###-###-#### Fax ###-###-####www.[redacted].com

We have ample proof to show them that the property was
vacated in a manner in which it required additional maintenance to allow the
house to be placed on the market for new tenants.  
 
Mr. [redacted]'s family was under contract to purchase the home
since July 2013, with a...

purchase date of May 1, 2015.  A $5000 good faith
deposit was a condition of the contract, with him forfeiting his deposit of
$1500 and providing an additional $3500 to cover the good faith.  This was
non-negotiable.  
 
The lease agreement between the Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] and
the owner was broken by the tenant, which in the agreement it was noted that if he
defaulted on the purchase that he would lose his entire good faith
deposit.  That was spelled out clearly in the contract and the fact that the owner
gave them some of that deposit back was out of generosity.  The
inconvenience of withdrawing his purchase was entirely his decision and had no
influence from the owner or from our company.  The agreement to release
some of his good faith deposit was agreed upon before his family vacated the
property.
 
Mr. [redacted] vacated the property at the end of September
2014, in a state that could not allow immediate occupation from new
tenants.  The property had to be reconditioned professionally, which is a
condition of the Kansas City [redacted].    Since Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]
accepted and lived in the property prior to the intended purchase date, all
problems and maintenance to the home belonged was charged to them.  
 
Due to the condition of the home upon their vacation, it was
determined that they were responsible for repairing all damages to the property
as well as the reconditioning of the property to allow new tenants.
 
Maintenance to the property was conducted professionally,
which included professional repairing and painting of walls throughout the
home, reattaching and fixing multiple items throughout the house, clearing out
all personal items (that the tenants had left behind) which was extensive,
professional cleaning of all surfaces and flooring, clearing out external
personal items from the exterior of the home as well as fixing the landscaping.
 
 
Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] were billed the amount necessary to fix
the property, which the owner had to pay for in order to get the property back on the
market.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
The property located at [redacted] is a rental property and upon securing the property we signed a rental agreement with a required rental deposit of $1,500.  The security deposit was explained and outlined in the contract as funds that would be used toward restoring the property in the event that we vacate the home and repairs were required. 
Within the first year of living at the home, we inquired about purchasing the property.  We were informed by [redacted] Property Management that a lease option was available (see contract attached).  The lease option required the establishment of a $5,000 escrow.  Due to unforeseen circumstances, we no longer could take advantage of the lease option for the home. 
In August of 2014, we decided to cancel the Lease Option and submitted a 30 day notice to vacate the property by the end of September 2014.  When notifying the management company of our intensions to vacate, we were informed that the good faith escrow that was established would not be returned.  The management company did reach out to the property owner in reference to our request for the return of the escrow and the property owner did agree to refund a portion of the escrow. 
The management company is now seeking an additional $1,500 in damages, claiming that due to the lease option that was provided, our initial rental security deposit is no longer valid and the security deposit would be rolled into the good faith escrow that the company will be keeping.  I am disputing this practice. When reviewing my contract, it is not outlined that I would be forfeiting my rental security deposit.  I was not aware that the rental security deposit would no longer be utilized as a security deposit.  This information was not provided to me either verbally or by contract.  At the time of signing the lease option the company should have established this principle and if this information was divulged to me I may have made a different decision in reference to agreeing to a lease option. 
I believe that the rental deposit should be used for the purposes in which it was established.  As a rental security deposit and no additional funds should be required for any damages that would be covered under the funds that were already provided.   Regards,[redacted] Jr