Diamond Apartments

For decades Diamond Apartments has successfully and responsibly managed several multifamily buildings in Pacific Beach. Our relations with all residents are predicated on fairness and honesty. On occasion there are differences of opinion, which are almost always resolved without the necessity of...

third party intervention.In response to the allegations of the [redacted] regarding their residency at [redacted]. the following facts are pertinent:• The Garden Manor Property is located at [redacted]. just three blocks from the ocean, which contributes to elevated moisture in the air.• The Garden Manor property that includes [redacted]. has 4 nearly identical units.• In more than 15 years of the management of Garden Manor there have been no previous reports of mold in this unit or any of the other units.• No mold was reported in the bathroom of [redacted] by the resident who vacated the unit just prior to the [redacted] occupancy, nor by the vendors and managers who prepared 949 for occupancy by the [redacted].Specific items of the Lease Agreement the [redacted] signed prior to their occupancy also contain relevant details to this issue.• The Move-In Inspection that the [redacted] signed at the time of initial occupancy indicates that the entire apartment was clean, with no mold in evidence.• The Mold Notification Addendum to the Lease Agreement which the [redacted] signed states “Resident agrees to clean and dry any visible moisture on windows, walls, and other surfaces, including personal property, as soon as reasonably possible. (Note mold can grow on damp surfaces within 24 to 48 hours).”A thorough review of this issue and timeline has been done. A few months after the [redacted] May 15, 2015 move-in date it was reported that water from the shower was splashing on to the walls adjacent to the tub. Splash-enders or splash guards, although never previously necessary in 949, were installed at the ends of the tub to prevent the water from being splashed out of the shower onto the adjacent walls. At that time the shower and surround was photographed with no visible signs of mold or tile discoloration. Soon after that, on October 24 2015 the [redacted] subsequently reported mold on the shower tile and the ceiling.The [redacted] retained a certified mold investigator/technician moisture management inspector who visited 949 on November 3rd 2015. That inspection report found that “No elevated moisture levels were detected; visible microbial growth & corrosion were noted at the shower/bathtub caulking and enclosure at time of inspection.” This inspection found that nothing about the building was causing the moisture that was allowing the mold to grow, which in turn created an elevated level of mold spores in the bathroom air. The report recommended “Contact & consult with a professional mold restoration company for further evaluation concerning the mold levels & species detected at the bathroom.”In order to insure that nothing about the building was responsible for the concerns, a licensed plumber inspected the backside of the shower wall which includes the plumbing fixtures and valves. A hole was cut into the other side of the wall from the kitchen to check the wall. In addition the walls and plumbing lines were inspected from underneath the building. The plumber found everything to be dry, further eliminating water from the building as a source of moisture that caused the mold.The [redacted] moved into [redacted]. on May 15th2015, No mold or discoloration on the tile, caulking or grout was noted until October 24 th2015. On December 14, 2015 [redacted]s inspected [redacted]reet and found: “......visible suspect mold growth was observed on the tile and grout materials in the shower at the time of the investigation.” Most importantly their report, stated “All relative moisture readings collected throughout the investigation indicated dry conditions”. The H.M. Pitt report again confirms that nothing about 949 Law, nor the building itself is responsible for moisture that would cause the mold.The conclusion of the H.M Pitt Labs report is that “Based upon the visual inspection and surface sample indicating the presence of Cladosporium spp. general cleaning of the area is recommended.” This recommendation is much the same as that by the investigator the [redacted] retained.On December 12th 2015 the [redacted] provided notice to vacate by January 1, 2016. In order for the move-out to proceed without interruption, the cleaning of the mold in the shower area by a licensed contractor experienced in the cleaning of contaminated materials in accordance with industry standards was deferred until January 2, 2016. The cleaning of the mold in the shower area was followed by post remediation verification.It is abundantly clear from the tests and inspections that nothing about the building has caused the mold in the shower area which occurred during the [redacted] occupancy. Any statement to the contrary is false and libelous.Unrelated to the bathroom mold concern was a slow dripping faucet in the kitchen sink. The kitchen sink faucet had a slow drip that was dripping into the sink drain, to reduce a drip that might contribute to water waste we immediately replaced the faucet on Dec 1st. After replacing the kitchen faucet on Dec 7th the residents reported a drip appeared on the shut-off valves under the kitchen sink... presumably because using the shut-off valves while replacing the faucet disturbed the seal on the old valves. The valves were old and the disturbance triggered a drip that was not present prior to the replacement of the faucet. On Dec 9th we replaced the valves under the kitchen sink. The kitchen faucet and drip was responded to and repaired as promptly as possible. Again, the faucet drip was unrelated to any bathroom issue and the drip was dropping into the sink drain. The valve repair was made within a couple days of it being reported.In response to the resident’s complaint about the heater, again, we would like to clarify. After residents moved in on May 15thwe discovered the furnace was not functioning properly. We immediately had licensed contractors inspect the furnace and on May 20th we had SDGE inspect the furnace as well. Our initial finding was that the floor furnace needed to be removed and a new wall furnace needed to be installed. The residents requested to have the plumbers postpone the replacement of the heater siting that the weather was hot and they did not want the disturbance of the repair when the heater was not needed. W e respected their request and postponed the replacement. On October 24 ththe residents asked to schedule the heater repair. The furnace replacement was immediately scheduled. On November 1st. the [redacted] emailed managers requesting to postpone the heater repair until the mold concern was addressed. After responding to the mold concern we again rescheduled the furnace replacement as early as the plumbers schedule would permit which was November 24 th. On November 16thwe bought the [redacted] two portable electric heaters. On November 22ndthe residents called and cancelled the heater replacement again stating that the heater repair would disturb mold and that they would prefer to postpone the heater repair until mold in their bathroom was cleaned for them. We accommodated their requests to postpone the repair and on November 24thhad the bathroom inspected for possible moisture intrusion issues (previously explained). At this point we again rescheduled the heater repair and were finally able to start the repair on December 3rd. We make sure to have all repairs involving gas lines done by licensed professionals, permitted and inspected for safety by the City of San Diego. The repair was inspected, permitted and finished by December 10th 2015.Diamond Apartments feels the experience these residents describe is not representative of our management or properties. We hope that our explanation shows a different perspective to the complaint and that we did our very best to be responsive and responsible.Thank you,[redacted]