D'Hondt Construction

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: All invoices were sent to separate addresses as advised when setting up the service calls (It is customary that we ask where to send the bills and we set it up under the provided addresses we were given) It wasn't until much later that we were told that the addresses were incorrect It was also mentioned in the business response that it was made clear that the owed amount in the payables system did not represent the full amount owed which is why it was requested of us on different occasions to email copies of all outstanding invoices showing a total amount owed In the handful of conversations we had, it was stated by East Lake that they did not have an update, that they needed invoices re-sent and finally that they were all in the system to be paid out which was inaccurate because we did not receive payment in full and were asked again to resend invoices because they only showed in their system [redacted] Inccan provide a detailed call log of all attempts at communication showing where emails were "read" and not responded to and that calls were not returned ***, Inchas continually requested contact from David [redacted] and Yolanda [redacted] in which we are still waiting Call logs can be provided upon request showing how often we tried to call and speak with someone.As stated by East Lake, we did receive another partial payment in the amount of $2,on March 6, Upon receipt of the remaining balance for the other invoices we will mark this as an "accepted" response to satisfy the complaint Sincerely, Mary ***

The delay in this matter was the result of invoices not being received in our Accounting Department at our Corporate office (South Michigan, Chicago) in a
timely manner, as our procedure dictates We are not sure where the vendor sent the invoices initially, but we were not made aware of the outstanding balance until late when the vendor reached out to the office of our CFO It was during several conversations that it was made clear that what we showed in our Payables system did not represent the full amount owedEast Lake staff, in fact, had several conversations with an *** representative; their calls were not ignored as *** complaint suggests.Nevertheless, a partial payment was sent to ***, Inc($2,998.42) on 03/01/ The balance of the amount due this company will be sent to them before the end of March Thank you

This is to acknowledge receipt of this complaint We are researching same and will be in touch w/our formal response.Thank you

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: All invoices were sent to separate addresses as advised when setting up the service calls (It is customary that we ask where to send the bills and we set it up under the provided addresses we were given). It wasn't until much later that we were told that the addresses were incorrect. It was also mentioned in the business response that it was made clear that the owed amount in the payables system did not represent the full amount owed which is why it was requested of us on different occasions to email copies of all outstanding invoices showing a total amount owed. In the handful of conversations we had, it was stated by East Lake that they did not have an update, that they needed invoices re-sent and finally that they were all in the system to be paid out which was inaccurate because we did not receive payment in full and were asked again to resend invoices because they only showed in their system. *** Inccan provide a detailed call log of all attempts at communication showing where emails were "read" and not responded to and that calls were not returned. ***, Inchas continually requested contact from David *** and Yolanda *** in which we are still waiting. Call logs can be provided upon request showing how often we tried to call and speak with someone.As stated by East Lake, we did receive another partial payment in the amount of $2,on March 6, 2017. Upon receipt of the remaining balance for the other invoices we will mark this as an "accepted" response to satisfy the complaint
Sincerely,
Mary ***

On Monday, April 25, 2016, a City of Chicago building inspector came out, unannounced, to inspect *** SKing Drive Ms*** occupies a unit in this building During the inspector's visit, he gained access to two of the four occupied units in this tier (***), one of which reported
to the inspector that they had bed bugs This had not been reported to management Once notified of this issue, management contacted the extermination vendor immediately and scheduled for them to inspect all four units in this tier Forty-eight hour notices went out to the tenants of *** SKing Drive on 04/25/16, as required When Ms*** (unit #***) refused to grant access to the exterminator, management was contacted In an effort to inspect (and possibly treat) her unit, the exterminator rescheduled a visit to her unit on May 4, Ms*** again refused access The vendor, accompanied by management staff, attempted a final time to speak with and inspect/treat her unit and Ms*** refused Ms*** accused staff of "targeting her," and called the Chicago Police Department.As a result of her unwillingness to allow East Lake Management staff to conduct the necessary inspection and determine whether it was necessary to treat her unit, Ms*** was issued a lease violation At this time, the tenant has continued to cooperate w/staff to schedule the necessary inspection.Be advised that staff does not "illegally" enter Ms*** or any other unit.Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint