CRS Temporary Housing

This is a very bad business to do business with, When an Insurance has a contract with them they will make you pay a deposit. Then cheat you out of at least $100 by making up false charges against the customer to collect extra money from you. They will hold your deposit and send a threatening letter demanding the money for the false charge against you or they will turn you over for collection. Then when the insurance still owes them a payment they will hold the rest of your deposit hostage till the insurance pays them. You have no control over the insurance and CRS contract but they hold your money ( refuse to pay you ) till they are paid by the insurance company. If This Is Not Illegal it should be. Do NOT do business with CRS Temporary Housing as they are NOT an up an up business to deal with, The are very sneaky and make false charges against customers

CRS is a temporary housing company. Part of what we do is search for landlords with available properties and bring prospective tenants to them. Our clients (prospective tenants) have typically suffered a loss in their own home and are in need of a place to stay while their own home is...

being repaired. In this case, our clients (the tenants) were displaced from their home due to a fire and needed temporary housing while their home was being rebuilt.  In this case, the landlord is the party filing the complaint against CRS. This landlord withheld a portion of our clients security deposit after our client moved out of the rental property. While landlords are entitled to make deductions for confirmed damages, CRS does not believe the deductions were justified in this situation. Therefore, CRS is disputing the deductions on behalf of our client and recently sent a letter demanding refund of their $380. We did recently state the possibility of submitting this landlord to a collection agency in order to recoup the $383 being wrongly withheld if we are unable to collect it amicably. CRS does act on behalf of our clients to dispute deductions when proof of damage is not provided as in this case. The issues are as follows:1) The landlord did not give full use of the rental property to the tenant (our client) as agreed to prior to move in. The landlord kept personal property inside the home and kept cars in the garage, so our client did not have use of the entire home nor the garage. When this was discovered, a verbal agreement was made to lower the rental amount by $250 in March. Now, the landlord changed her mind regarding that agreement and is wrongly withholding that $250 from the deposit refund.2) The landlord also deducted $133 for one day of rent, for March 31st. She stated that a new agreement was entered into and that was the justification for that additional charge. However, CRS is not aware of such an agreement and the landlord cannot produce documentation signed by our client to prove the deduction is valid. a. There is no lease agreement The only paperwork regarding rent was created by CRS and agreed to by the landlord in writing and that document (Temporary Housing Confirmation) clearly states “Lessor agrees that there are no other fees, rents or charges unless stated above.” b. CRS already granted a rent increase mid stay, which was not agreed to originally. c. CRS paid a monthly (not daily) rate throughout our clients stay and the monthly did not fluctuate throughout the stay aside from the known rate increase. When the landlord accepted the request to extend the lease, there was no mention of additional fees and there was no lease drawn up that we are aware of. Therefore, is no justification for changing terms from monthly to daily and there is no justification of the rent deduction.  For these reasons, CRS is disputing this deduction on behalf of our client and legal or collection action is still a possibility due to the unjustified deduction made by this landlord. Our clients need their full deposit back and CRS will continue to assist them with their dispute.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.My dispute to CRS Temporary Housing claim that I improperly withheld security deposit for unpaid rent [redacted]Sunday, May 10, 2015

Regards,

Thank you for the opportunity to review the customer’s concern. We are disappointed to learn of their dissatisfaction and upon receipt of the complaint, we immediately reviewed the claim file in full detail. CRS has been in business for over 26 years and we have a strict Quality...

Assurance policy that we follow on each and every claim. Within our review we confirmed that the details addressed in the complaint were not brought to the attention of a manager within our organization and therefore we did not have the opportunity to follow our internal escalation policy. The client’s insurance carrier approved to cover a refundable security deposit of $3,500, $3000 to be paid to the landlord and $500 to be paid to the furniture vendors. Upon carrier approval, CRS issuedfunds to the landlord in an expedited fashion to arrive promptly in time for their move-in to the temporary home. CRS was notified after the insured’s move-out date from the property that their insurance carrier was no longer able to cover the cost of the deposit. Due to the notification coming after the move-out, CRS requested the deposit to be returned to our offices in hopes of limiting any burden that may fall on the insured. The goal of this was that if the deposit had been recovered in full, the collection of funds would never be displayed or requested of the insured. Unfortunately, upon receipt of the disposition from the landlord, multiple costs were deducted leaving a balance due in the amount of $1,919.50. With confirmation from the insured’s carrier, CRS reached out to the insured for coverage of this balance. Within receipt of this complaint, we spoke to the insured and confirmed new details of the disposition which we were not aware of previously. These details included correspondences between the insured and the landlord indicating no damages existed at the time of vacating the rental. In further review it has been noted that the landlord acted in bad faith by fraudulently withholding funds. The state statute for dispute has passed and therefore CRS is no longer able to debate these charges. In review of additional details provided, we have agreed to waive the balance due and will ensure that the total is removed from our collection agency. We truly apologize for any concern and frustration this may have caused. We strive to provide outstanding service to all our policyholders and adjusters on a daily basis. We take great pride in the industry we work in and are appreciative of the feedback provided. If you’d like to discuss this further, please feel free to contact CRS at ###-###-#### and the Operations Director will be able to assist you further.