Sign in

Burke Community Management Group

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Burke Community Management Group? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Burke Community Management Group

Burke Community Management Group Reviews (3)

From: [redacted] arial;">>Date: Wed, Nov 5, at 4:PMSubject: FW: HOA [redacted] ***To: " [redacted] " < [redacted] > Sorry, this is the right e-mail with HOA's refusal with no explanation whatsoever Date: Fri, Oct 16:44:- Subject: HOA [redacted] From: [redacted] To: [redacted] , In response to your email message of October 23, 2014, and your letter of October 20, 2014, the Board stands by its position that the deck remains in violation For the HOA Board, Don H [redacted] From: [redacted] [mailto: [redacted] @hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 6:PMTo: [redacted] ; [redacted] - AMSCc: [redacted] Subject: Re: HOA [redacted] Dear HOA Board, I sent you my Letter on October 20, and gotten this response from you on the same day In my Letter I did not ask for a violation to be removed, but for the HOA to Honor its Own Approval of My Deck Stain Dated 6/30/ The facts remain facts Your response does not correspond to my Letter of October 20, All I requested was for the HOA to honor its Approval Please respond by COB Friday, October 24, Thank you P.S: PLEASE NOTE: The Letter of 7/that the HOA referring to is again full of discrepancies Namely, it was stained not in red, but in redwood colorMoreover, the current Letter states that beams and supports are not stained-- I don't now where such disinformation came from, because all posts were stained the same day and are stained as you can see on the photo Some letter of 12/2/that is referred to in the same Letter - This is where the problem lies I hear of this for the first timeNever seen it, never even heard of it At this point, it will be considered as a mathing Most importantly, I applied AND my application for my deck was Approved If you read the Approval it was NOT conditioned on a color It wrongly assumed a color, which was NOT in the Application In addition, I clarified the color as a natural redwood by e-mail, when asked I did everything by the rules and should not be punished for HOA's own wrong assumptions, not doing their due diligence PRIOR to the Approval, and after spending time and money on getting the deck power washed and re-stained to the original color of years From: [redacted] To: [redacted] @hotmail.com Subject: FW: [redacted] Date: Tue, Oct 10:14:- Please see the Boards response Terri emailed out yesterday Crystal T [redacted] Burke Community Management Group Business Center Court Manassas, VA Phone: ###-###-#### Fax: ###-###-#### Confidentiality Notice: This message (including any attachments) contains privileged and confidential information intended for a specific purpose, and is protected by law If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and permanently delete this message and any attachments immediately Any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited You should not retain, copy or use this message or any attachments for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the contents to any other person This electronic message contains information generated by the [redacted] solely for the intended recipientsAny unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penaltiesIf you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately

From: [redacted]
arial;">>Date: Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 4:16 PMSubject: FW: HOA [redacted]To: "[redacted]" <[redacted]>
Sorry, this is the right e-mail with HOA's refusal with no explanation whatsoever.
 
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:44:57 -0400
Subject: HOA [redacted]
From: [redacted]
To: [redacted]
[redacted],
In response to your email message of October 23, 2014, and your letter of October 20, 2014, the Board stands by its position that the deck remains in violation.
For the HOA Board,
Don H[redacted]
From: [redacted] [mailto:[redacted]@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 6:10 PMTo: [redacted]; [redacted] - AMSCc: [redacted]Subject: Re: HOA [redacted]
 
Dear HOA Board,
 
I sent you my Letter on October 20, 2014 and gotten this response from you on the same day.  In my Letter I did not ask for a violation to be removed, but for the HOA to Honor its Own Approval of My Deck Stain Dated 6/30/14.  The facts remain facts.   
 
Your response does not correspond to my Letter of October 20, 2014.  All I requested was for the HOA to honor its Approval.
Please respond by COB Friday, October 24, 2014.
 
Thank you.
P.S: PLEASE NOTE:  The Letter of 7/22 that the HOA referring to is again full of discrepancies.  Namely, it was stained not in red, but in redwood color. Moreover, the current Letter states that beams and supports are not stained. -- I don't now where such disinformation came from, because all posts were stained the same day and are stained as you can see on the photo.  Some letter of 12/2/10 that is referred to in the same Letter - This is where the problem lies.  I hear of this for the first time. Never seen it, never even heard of it.  At this point, it will be considered as a made-up thing.  Most importantly, I applied AND my application for my deck was Approved.  If you read the Approval it was NOT conditioned on a color.  It wrongly assumed a color, which was NOT in the Application.  In addition, I clarified the color as a natural redwood by e-mail, when asked.  I did everything by the rules and should not be punished for HOA's own wrong assumptions, not doing their due diligence PRIOR to the Approval, and after spending time and money on getting the deck power washed and re-stained to the original color of 10 years.
 
From: [redacted]
To: [redacted]@hotmail.com
Subject: FW: [redacted]
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 10:14:30 -0400
Please see the Boards response Terri emailed out yesterday.
 
Crystal T[redacted]
Burke Community Management Group
10494 Business Center Court
Manassas, VA 20110
Phone: ###-###-####
Fax: ###-###-####
 
 
Confidentiality Notice: This message (including any attachments) contains privileged and confidential information intended for a specific purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and permanently delete this message and any attachments immediately.  Any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.  You should not retain, copy or use this message or any attachments for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the contents to any other person.
 
 
 
This electronic message contains information generated by the [redacted] solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.

Review: October 17, 2014TO:Revdex.comRE: ILLEGAL AND DISCRIMINATORY DEMANDS BY HOAS NEW MANAGEMENT COMPANY BURKE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT GROUP Dear Sir/Madam,I am the owner of the townhouse located on [redacted] VA [redacted]. I am forced to turn to you for your help because of illegal and discriminatory demands of the HOA since July of 2014. I have been the owner of the said property for the last 10+ years and currently my house is pending a sale to be closed on October 31, 2014. Because of this fact, the time is of essence and I respectfully request your prompt involvement and assistance with resolving this issue before October 24, 2014, please. On June 17, 2014 I submitted an Application to the HOA (attached) clearly requesting power washing and freshening up the stain of my deck, which was weathered and needed refreshing. My neighbors from both sides gave their consent and the HOA approved my application on June 30th. Based on the approval the deck was stained in the natural redwood color the same color it has had for the last 10 years. After approving however, the HOA came back asking what color it was, which I clarified as same color, i.e. deck was power washed and refreshed to the existing natural redwood stain of 10 years as it was exactly stated in my application. According to the HOAs Standards 13.2.7 (enclosed for your view) - Decks shall be constructed of pressure-treated wood and sealed or stained naturally or stained in a muted natural wood color that is that is harmonious with the colors of the house. Dark color staining or re-staining of a deck requires ACC approval.My deck (photo attached) is constructed of pressure-treated wood and stained naturally in a natural redwood color. It is harmonious with the colors of the house and looks beautiful, thus enhancing the overall look of not only the townhouse, but the whole back row of the townhouses, which face the woods. The redwood color is found in nature and is a natural wood color accepted universally. Moreover, the Standards allow for dark color staining and the HOA approved it, so there should be no issue. Yet, the HOA has been demanding that I scrape(!) the whole deck, its railings, and posts, and then re-stain it to again natural wood color. The whole thing not only does not make any sense, but is straight forth illegal. Now, the HOAs new management (who are in place since March 2014) is trying to cover up their unprofessionalism, namely Terri J[redacted], for not doing her due diligence prior to the approval and assuming that it was some other color. Had the HOAs new management asked questions, clarifications prior to the approval, no such issue have been present to begin with.In addition, the HOA made up a new violation stating that my front yard (which has been there for the last 6 years unchanged) all of a sudden now does not comply(?) with the Standards. The HOA is now demanding that I dig out all the stones around bushes and put mulch instead. The Standard 22.3.1 reads: Stone used as accent elements, ground cover, or paving material, should be chosen so that its color, size, and installation complement the architecture of the house, the natural environment and associated plant materials. Monolithic paving of yards, or coverig yards with decorative stones as a primary design element is prohibited.22.3.1.1 Stones smaller than 1 in diameter maybe used as ground cover under plants and under trees. Stones under trees may cover an area up to 24 in diameter. Stone ground cover not under plantings shall not cover an area 6 larger than the plant. One element of stone ground cover may cover an area not exceed 36 in diameter or 7 square feet. Total stone ground cover in the front of any townhouse may not exceed 50% (as determined in the sound(?) judgement of the ACC) of the front yard plantable area. Please note, the language is ambiguous to say the least. One sentence says the ground cover shall not cover 6, while the very next sentence says it may cover an area up to 36. Even this does not matter, because my front yard (photo attached) is NOT monolithically covered in stone nor as you can see the stone covering is NOT a primary design element. Moreover, the bushes cover up to 80% of the yard. Please also note, that the yard has been there unchanged for the last 6 years and it was fine with all the previous HOAs all these years until June 30, 2014. That is why the sudden violation part worries me, because the yard, just like the deck conforms to the HOAs Standards. All this made-up violations constitute a clear retaliation on HOA Management's part for my speaking out about the HOA's double standards practices, for pointing out HOA's approving and then denying their own approvals and e-mails; for my protesting unlawful discrimination because I am of foreign origin - as there is no other legitimate reason for presenting something that is perfectly within the standards as a violation.All this while clearly ignoring the actual violation since 2006 with the basketball hoop, which still creates safety and noise issues for the whole community despite numerous complaints from several home owners. I tried to work with our HOA by even considering re-staining the deck again despite the fact that it conforms to the Standards AND it was approved by the HOA, however, the HOA is incooperative and continues to demand that I scrape (!) the whole deck! This is never heard of and does not benefit anybody. Unfortunately it is just another way for the HOA to create obstacles for my pending sale for the reasons I stated above. I simply cannot let this happen. That is why I am turning to Revdex.com, as a final destination who has the authority over HOA that is conducting unprofessional, unfair practices and is sure to get away with it. Because time is of essence I respectfully request Revdex.com to assist in HOA accepting its own approval/regulations and scratching allDesired Settlement: Because time is of essence, I respectfully request Revdex.com to assist in HOA accepting its own approval/regulations and scratching all made-up violations against me in writing before October 24, 2014.

Consumer

Response:

From: [redacted]>

Date: Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Subject: FW: HOA [redacted]

To: "[redacted]" <[redacted]>

Sorry, this is the right e-mail with HOA's refusal with no explanation whatsoever.

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:44:57 -0400

Subject: HOA [redacted]

From: [redacted]

To: [redacted]

[redacted],

In response to your email message of October 23, 2014, and your letter of October 20, 2014, the Board stands by its position that the deck remains in violation.

For the HOA Board,

Don H[redacted]

From: [redacted] [mailto:[redacted]@hotmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 6:10 PM

To: [redacted]; [redacted] - AMS

Cc: [redacted]

Subject: Re: HOA [redacted]

Check fields!

Write a review of Burke Community Management Group

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by adding a photo

Burke Community Management Group Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: Associations

Address: 10494 Business Center Court, Manassas, Virginia, United States, 20110

Phone:

Show more...

Add contact information for Burke Community Management Group

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated