Arthur Edwards Inc. Management

I live in a condominium association that is managed by Arthur Edwards Inc. They've been managing us for almost two years. There is blatant favoritism to the Board President. They act and advise based on personal bias rather than appropriate and professional guidance. They consistently speak out of both sides of their mouths depending on whom they are talking to. They pick and choose which emails they will respond to. If they don't like or want to answer a question, they ignore it, whether from a Board Member or a Unit Owner. In another review, The biggest problem as I see it, are the very few laws governing Condominium Associations in the State of NJ. This allows boards and management companies to act without fear of consequence. One legislator I spoke with called condo living the "Wild Wild West". That about sums it up. What would be great is if folks from various associations got together and formed a task force of sorts. We could talk to our local mayor & council as well as state elected officials and work toward positive changes. There are many thousands of constituents residing in condominium associations throughout New Jersey.

They are in Hillsdale, NJ and hardly ever come to the property to see what
is happening. They are happy to let criminal attacks happen at this property.
They are not concerned when a renter is smoking and falling asleep. They
are not concerned when owners/renters are driving the wrong way in the
parking lot. they ignore responsibilities and try to get more condo associations to mismanage. Thee want to make more money. They do some things right but many things wrong . C Rice,
Roxbury Condominiums. The board could care less . A person was put
on the board here and allowed to physically attack me for 3 years. Welcome
to the ROXBURY CONDOMINIUMS IN WESTWOOD, NJ !

very harrassive management company. repeatedly makes errors in judgment
how and when to do the work. Manipulative company. fines owners with no
advance notice for things not covered in the bylaw of the condominium ---but
selectively fines owners, some fined , some not. Ignores criminal activity toward
owners --"call the police." Leaves criminals on the board of facilities--dishonesty
in behavior. cr

Review: On February 17, 2015, a flood occurred in the building that I am currently living in, [redacted], Unit [redacted]. A freezing pipe burst in the unit next door to me because the apartment is in foreclosure and [redacted] shut off their heat. My unit suffered significant damage and I was not able to live in the apartment for 2 and a half months. Due to someone’s negligence, I have suffered substantial hardship and inconvenience. The insurance adjuster for the condo association said that I would be compensated for the equal amount of the original carpeting in my unit. I have made numerous calls and emails and even sent a registered letter and I have received no response on the status of my insurance claim.

Regarding another matter, on March 31, 2015, [redacted] (Principal) and [redacted] (VP Administrative Services) were emailed (1) years worth of [redacted] invoices showing my typical electric usage and costs. I had also sent my February 2015 [redacted] electric invoice showing $200 worth of excess usage. Along with that, I also enclosed a photograph of a power extension cord plugged in my electrical outlet, being used to power fan used to dry out Unit [redacted] next door, where the water damage had originated. This is theft of services and I was never reimbursed.

This management company refuses to respond to me at all regarding my claim. The flood happened 5 months ago.Desired Settlement: I would like an update on the insurance claim. I would also like to be reimbursed for the used of my electrical outlet for the unit next door and would also like to be informed of the status of me getting reimbursed for the equal amount of the original carpeting in my unit.

Review: My unit ceiling had a water leak in February that lasted two days. After reporting it, it was a full month later that a painter was engaged to fix it, after the water seeped into the ceiling. This painter conveyed that he would seal the ceiling and repaint. In that I did not know the paint color used prior to my occupying the home as its original owner, I asked Arthur Edwards to provide either this paint information or the paint used by other contractors that were engaged by the company in 2010 who matched it perfectly. I received no information after two requests, and had to call this contractor in North Carolina myself for help. I expressed to the painter that I did not have the paint, but told how the contractors had taken a sample of the ceiling to match the color, which he refused to do. When he was scheduled to come paint, this man did not show up, but sent a Spanish-speaking worker instead that I could not communicate with. Without any preparation as to what was to come, he used a chemical spray that fell haphazardly on my exposed floor and carpet. I have allergies, and I was forced to leave my home afterward for several hours. He also mopped this up with water perfunctorily, leaving residue. Unable to converse with him, he used a touch up paint that I had from another room, that was similar, but not the right color. I had told this to first painter, his boss, at the time of the estimate. The ceiling color did not match, and I asked Arthur Edwards correct it in good faith. I sent several e-mails with photos of job, and I asked for someone who spoke English, that I could communicate with to fix it properly. They refused to do so, and told me to write a letter to the Board requesting this to be rectified. The Board agreed with my request for a painter to take a sample of the ceiling, and repaint. Arthur Edwards again sent a painter who refused to take a paint sample and couldn't match the color, which now alters my home markedly, changing the overall ceiling.Desired Settlement: There isn't enough room to discuss all the details. The main issue I have is that this change of ceiling color now affects other areas of my ceiling, which was a cohesive whole that I now must repaint to return it the state prior to the water damage. In that I pay regular maintenance, and these mistakes were made, I asked Arthur Edward to correct this, and again I had to go through the Board. They said no, the change is "purely aesthetic," but the real issue is about how this was handled from the outset. In my opinion, there was poor judgement made in both hiring/managing the workers, and showing me courtesy as a unit owner with a problem that lasted months to fix. This should have been fairly simple, but there were multiple missteps made, and my requests via e-mail and phone both onsite at Society Hill and corporate headquarters were routinely ignored. I chose to report this because I don't feel safe dealing with this company. I feel it responds bureaucratically, instead of with care.

Business

Response:

It is the association who makes decisions for these repairs. Fact is the association is not responsible for repairing the interior of a unit, however it offered to make this attempt as an accommodation. The owner was not satisfied with the effort. The matter was again escalated to the Board who inspected the ceiling and decided that no further action would be taken. This decision is not acceptable to the owner. We are the managing agent for the association and take directive from it's Board of Trustees. The owner continues to harass the management staff with phone calls and emails threatening legal action. The owner was advised of the Board's decision which she has refused to accept. The owner has been directed to the governing documents for the association yet refuses to accept same. The owner has falsely filed a complaint against Arthur Edwards Inc. believing that Arthur Edwards Inc. is the responsible party. Thank you. [redacted] President Arthur Edwards Inc. ###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

After reading Mr. [redacted]’s response, it is clear how

communications have been so difficult with this company. It is my impression

reading this, that Mr. [redacted] has completely misconstrued my words and my

character to protect his interests. At no time did I threaten legal action, and

in fact made a point of telling him that I had not engaged an attorney. I have

an e-mail that I wrote to Mr. [redacted] expressly conveying this. Mr. [redacted], in my

opinion, is trying to escalate the conflict in order to make me look bad; no

harassment from me ever occurred. I have not had any communications with the

office since my report. My calls and e-mails to Ms. [redacted] only occurred when

no adequate response was provided, leaving me with an unfinished ceiling to

deal with, without any support for my difficulty on the property.

I also disagree that this was repair to the “interior” of my

unit only. The ceiling also has an outside structure that, with water damage

left untreated for a month, was subject to mold and a pervasive spreading of

damage that compromised both interior and exterior of the unit.

Mr. [redacted] is also mistaken that I have been “directed to the

governing documents” as he suggests. That is untrue.

I am, however, aware of the Association’s decision to not

make further repairs, and though I am extremely disappointed in how this was

handled, it is not the Association I take issue with. My understanding is that

the contractors hired were not engaged by the Association itself, but by Arthur

Edwards and its onsite manager [redacted]. It is my impression that the

Association stepped in after the problems arose, and my issue is not with the

Association, nor its final determination.

Though Mr. [redacted] may want to assign responsibility to the

Association, my issue remains with Arthur Edwards, and how it managed the

issue. This is not a “false complaint.” I believe Arthur Edwards was acting on

behalf of the Association, and had the situation been managed well by Arthur

Edwards, I wouldn’t have had months of difficulty on this issue, and the

Association would have an affiliation with a management company that reflects

its interests well, in my opinion. Through my experience, I don’t believe that

is the case. It is my sincere hope that by reporting this, I can spare others

similar problems in the future.

Business

Response:

The owner [redacted]t [redacted], who resides in a condominium association community, comprised of 414 units continues to believe the management company is responsible for repairs to interior of her unit. The owner refuses to accept the ownership responsibilities outlined in the community's governing documents and after being advised the association would not take further steps to accommodate a request for repainting her ceiling, harassed the community on site manager with verbal abuse and eventual threats, in writing to sue the management company. The owner continues to refuse to accept it is not the management company that makes these decisions and that all decisions are made at the Board level. Once again, the owner is directed to the governing documents which govern the community as to repair responsibilities, regardless of how damage was allegedly caused to the inside of the unit. The reporting of this claim to the Revdex.com is false and being used as mechanism to cast blame against the managing agent for following the policy governance of the association's controlling documents of which the owner agreed to, by contract, when purchased the unit. As the owner writes, "they only used the Revdex.com as a vehicle to "spare others similar problems in the future". Had the owner making this complaint accepted the very fist response by the manager, on behalf of the Board, these efforts to defend a baseless claim would not be needed. Ms. [redacted] has threatened to sue the association by a family member who practices law. Unfortunately when an owner threatens to file legal action, further discussion of the issue is deferred to this venue, which an owner has every right to pursue. The unfortunate end to this issue is, the owner will continue to refuse to accept their responsibility for repair and if legal action is taken, while it make not cost the owner anything because they will be represented by a family member who practices law, the Association will incur unnecessary expense to defend its position which ultimately will cost ALL 414 owners more. We are sorry the owner is not satisfied. As a leader in the industry with close to 30 years, with CAI Accreditations as well as being a CAI Mediator, it is clear from the facts the owner has no intention to withdraw her complaint.

Review: I own a condo that Arthur Edwards/Premiere Management manages and they do not properly maintain the property. I pay my maintenance fees timely every month and the property is a mess. The dumpsters are overflowing (I also have pictures of proof) and inhabited with raccoons. The snow removal is unsatisfactory. I have slipped on numerous occasions and have pictures of the icy sidewalks that go unsalted/shovel and stairs that are not shoveled/salted. The hallways are never cleaned and the building is never powerwashed. The trees are overgrown. Lights have gone out and are not replaced. I have sent numerous emails all of which have either gone unanswered or have not resulted in any improvements. This is completely unacceptable considering I pay fees to maintain a property which is not being done.Desired Settlement: I want proof the complex is maintained and someone is ensuring this is done. I want the services I pay monthly for to be done and well. My property value is going down and I am very displeased with my living conditions.