Avonlea at Stonehenge

Collections on carpet that was previously notated in my pre-inspection of the apartment.I moved from 1 apartment of theirs to a bigger apartment. We lived in the bigger apartment for 6 months. After we got someone else to move into the apartment to break our lease we were being billed for a whole carpet replacement due to stains and pet odor. In our pre-inspection paper work which I have confirmed in email that we notated was in the living room near the coaxial cable for the modem a yellow stain on the carpet. Our response from this company was stating that we did it, and the owners before us did not have any pets so it must be us. I fail to see how this even makes sense. If it was there and we wrote it down, then it obviously wasn't us, and why am I being charged for a whole carpet replacement and pet odors for a spot we posted in our pre-inspection? I have emails and documentation I can provide for this case, and I will not be paying for this. Also, instead of working with me on this they never responded back and sent payment to collections!Desired SettlementI want this to be removed from collections, payments waived, and no more harassment.Business Response Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Business ManContact Phone: [redacted]Contact Email: [redacted]Upon move out inspection strong pet odor was detected as soon as the Maintenance Supervisor and the Assistant Business Manager entered the apartment. This usually indicates the presence of pet urine so the carpet was pulled back where circles from urine were found. Photos of the circles were provided to Mr. [redacted] and are available should you need them. The urine was so strong that it had soaked through to the sub floor. In order to keep this from causing odor problems going forward we had the floor sealed. Carpet was replaced in the whole apartment because there is no way to exactly match the potentially unaffected areas as dye lots can vary widely. Cost was prorated based upon the expected remainder of the life of the carpet (3 years)as it was newly installed 4/2013. Invoice copies were provided to substantiate the charges assessed.Section 6B of the lease addresses the presence of pet urine and animal waste and states that it will not be considered normal wear and tear under any circumstances and that the lessee will be fully responsible for replacement of the carpet and any related costs if urine is found.He maintains that the carpet was replaced due to a small yellowish stain that was present in the carpet when he moved into the apartment. This was not the case. It was replaced due to the presence of urine. If there had been urine present prior to his move in it would have been addressed at that time. I daresay that if there had been urine present when he moved in he would have rightfully insisted that it be addressed.Our Assistant Business Manager responded to Mr. [redacted]'s questions regarding why the charges were levied. He responded that he wasn't going to pay. She also made him an offer to set up a payment plan period of up to 6 months to retire the debt. This was declined as required action was not taken to put this in place.Following company policy the file was turned over to collections after 30 days of non-payment when there was no payment agreement in place.Consumer Response What is the point of the pre-inspection form then if its not going to be warranted? The stains were not caused by us and you can throw any accusations you want. As indicated in my pre-inspection there were "yellow stains" in the SAME EXACT location you sent us the pictures of. As notated in pre-inspection by the cable port in the living room which is exactly where you pulled up the carpet and found the stains. A coincidence? I think not.I completely understand that its not normal wear and tear but, you are harassing me for something that was an existing factor prior to us moving into the apartment. Hence the pre-inspection form again...I don't know how much more proof you need for this, its ridiculous. Should I have smelled or licked the stain to confirm that it was pee?! Am I suppose to pull up all the carpet and write down what stains are under the carpet and re-install it?As stated I will not be paying for this, as any person can see that this is completely unprofessional.

Avonlea at Stonehenge is charging former resident for carpet/flooring damage in excess of what is reasonable. When [redacted] Realty took ownership of Avonlea at Stonehenge they opted to completely gut an entire section of the apartments and make them "high-end". This was to include new flooring, carpet, fixtures, lighting, paint, all appliances, cabinets, countertops, etc. I was not allowed to renew my lease, and despite not having the funds to move, I was forced out of the complex. I therefore incurred significant debt due to the new application fees, deposit, and cost for movers to my new apartment.Weeks after moving out of Stonehenge, I was told that my deposit of $150 would not be returned; in addition I would incur damages for pet urine on the carpet. On July 16, 2014 I was told the total damages were $1650. I question how I can incur such damages in a unit that was slated to be completely gutted. I never received written estimates from any contractor regarding how much this would cost, nor is there evidence that any bids were submitted for this work. I have no way of knowing that these fees are just and reasonable. I will again state that the entire apartment was gutted. The carpet had no useful life left in it. It would have been torn out regardless of condition. Even if the carpet was not being replaced, I would only be required to pay a percentage based on the depreciation value. For the reasons I have listed above, my complaint has merit and the amount owed should be recalculated. Desired SettlementFair valuation of any damages beyond the work that was scheduled to occur after move-out. Business Response Contact Name and Title: [redacted]- Regional MgrContact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXXContact Email: [redacted]In response to this complaint, I would like to clarify that this former resident is not being charged for carpet. This is indicated on the supporting documents sent by this consumer. Her complaint is regarding a charge for carpet replacement and damage, and this is simply not something we are attempting to charge her nor collect from her. In this regard, we have granted her request. Based on the final statement of accounting, damage charges, and supporting invoice, this former resident is being charged for damage to the wooden subfloor in the apartment unit. This subfloor is never typically replaced in an apartment unit, unless it is damaged by water or pet urine. The subfloor beneath the carpet and pad is not something replaced in a standard apartment turn or even in a full renovation. This is not within our renovation scope. We understand the resident is not willing to pay for the carpet, and we are not attempting to charge her for the carpet. We have, however, provided a fair invoice from a contractor and ample photos of a wooden subfloor that was completely saturated with pet urine. The lease states that a tenant agrees to return the apartment in good condition, with the exception of normal wear and tear. Unfortunately, wooden subflooring saturated with pet urine is not normal wear and tear. Leaving the floor in the apartment in the condition in which this tenant returned it to us would have made it impossible to re-occupy and resulted in a health code violation. We are therefore attempting to collect this debt from this former resident. The office will provide any supporting docs again upon request.Consumer Response Mr. [redacted] explanation is appreciated and accepted. It is unfortunate that my complaint needed to be escalated to receive a proper explanation of what the damage charges were for. These details were not shared with me prior in any written invoice, nor were pictures provided. As I previously indicated, I will make payments to clear this balance, regardless of collection status. Thank you for you attention to this matter.