FirstService Residential Minnesota

Any one having knowledge of First Service Residential Minnesota, for suit for damages of over growing trees on the properties. Federal or State court filings please post or reply.

FirstService Residential is the management company for the homeowners association of which the complainant is a member It is our responsibility to collect the monthly assessment payments for the association from each of the homeowners The complainant alleges an improper late fee being assigned to their assessment account and subsequent inappropriate collection action for nonpayment of the late fee Complainant’s payment for the month in question was initiated through Paylease, a third party service provider, two days prior to the payment deadline Paylease transferred the funds to the association’s account though they did not arrive and, therefore, were not credited to the account, until after the deadline and, therefore, a late fee was assessed As a third party service provider, Paylease is not within our control nor can we count funds that are paid through this process as received until they are actually deposited to the association’s bank account In making payments through this process, making an allowance for the three day processing time, as indicated on the Paylease website, will ensure timely payments and avoid the necessity of future late fees being assessed The following month the amount of the monthly assessment for this association changed and, for nearly all of 2015, the monthly assessment payment that was made by the complainant was unchanged and, therefore, continuously underpaidAt the end of the accumulation of short payments raised the amount of unpaid assessments to the point that collection action was initiated Please note that an assessment account statement was mailed to the complainant each month on which was reflected the account status Complainant has entered into a payment plan with the association

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/06/23) */ We are in receipt of the Revdex.com complaint dated June 1, which we received in our office in early JuneWe are responding to the complaint submitted to the Revdex.com Our response to this complaint is as follows: Complaint "FirstService Residential is responsible for the operations of our neighborhood poolThey don't do the work and don't give us timelines." aResponse: Our company is the management company for the [redacted] Owners' AssociationOur company is responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the [redacted] Owners' Association under the direction of the Board of DirectorsWe do not in fact directly provide the pool or gate maintenance services or most services for the operations of the AssociationThese services are primarily provided by contractorsIn this instance, the gate to the pool was not properly locking which represents a potential life safety issueWe called the vendor promptly, they responded in hours, and determined that they were not able to make the necessary repairAn alternative service provider was there within hours thereafter and fixed the problemUntil such time as we had a timeline from the vendors we were not able to publish a timeline or keep this pool open Complaint "FirstService is required to provide service to manage our poolsThey have opted to use a subcontractor last year and the problem with our door was never fixed" aResponse: We are not required to provide service but to subcontract for service which is what we doWe do actually provide direct pool services at some associations and would be happy to explore this option with the Board of DirectorsThe issue with the pool, however, is one with the original construction of the gate and shifting of the gate support poles and may require a more permanent fix during the off seasonWe have sent a design for this to the Board of Directors to considerAbsent a permanent fix, the gate is likely to continue to be a problem in the future Complaint "What are we paying for? They collect funds from us quarterly but we receive no timely service for the items that they are required to manage." aThe vast majority of the funds paid to the homeowner association in the form of dues is utilized to provide direct services to the AssociationWe do not agree with the assertion that the homeowners receive no timely serviceWe recognize that in this instance the homeowner was frustrated with the down time of the poolWe are also aware that this issue predated our management services at [redacted] We are at the Association three times per week during the seasonal months and will continue to monitor the operations of the Association to support the desired quality of life of the Association members and in a manner consistent with our management agreement with the Association Complaint "What are we paying them to do? It is stealing when you take money and provide no services aWe are providing an array of supervision and services to the Association and its Board of Directors and conducting site visits three times per weekWe did experience a few bumps in transition as one of our Association Managers went on maternity leave but based on most of the feedback we have received, the new team has responded to that and done very wellWe are providing services and are not stealingAccusations of same are inflammatory and defamatory as they are demonstrably false Please let me know if you need any additional information Very truly yours, FirstService Residential Minnesota, Inc Mark [redacted] President

I am rejecting this response because:Clear communication regarding where to send payments was not received Online payment was discouraged and stated to include an additional costly fee.payments mailed have taken over weeks to post to account March's payment due by 3/was not posted until 4/5/16, but was mailed and dated on 3/28/ Payment was posted without any questionsweeks later on 4/28/a threatening letter and $of additional fines were added to the account, prior to the April due date When questioned, FS residential stated it was due to Marchs payment not being received, payments posted out of order in newest to oldest fashion days later an annual late fee was added for dues despite having paid times that amount prior to this fee, implying a payment posting practice of oldest to newestFs residential has not answered questions regarding payment posting processes FS residential has added fees in addition to annual late payment fee that are not in our contract FS residential stated to me that they would remove these fees after payment plan was completed I have completed payment plan over months early for all the original balance FS residential will not answer why they now are not honoring that original agreement Fs fa residential sent letters from a debt collector third party name/using other name enticing me to contact FS residential's staff members directly for questions payments and disputes, this staff then engaged in abusive and deceptive collection practices, third party attorney debt collector was not involved or directing this process meaning FS residential is subject to fdcpa

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/12/22) */ FirstService Residential was the management company for the condominium association of which the complainant is a member of the Board of DirectorsOur management relationship with them ended on October 31, The complainant alleges improper management for ten months (Jan - Oct 2015) with minimal specifics to substantiate this claimThere was no indication from complainant regarding any dissatisfaction that may have existed until we provided a day notification (August 20) to them that we were not renewing our management agreement with the association Shortly thereafter, we received a request for a free month of service; again with no substantive specificsWe immediately responded to the request with specifics regarding performance and denied the request to waive our fee for the final month of service In response to the content of this complaint: - There was one month (August 2015) when the financial statement for the association was provided a few days late - Communication with the homeowners and Board members was timely - There was no emergency situation that was not promptly responded to - Routine property inspection visits were made to the site as well as scheduled appointments kept with service providers We do not feel that there is reason to provide the complainant with free serviceWe wish them well with their new management firm Complaint Response Date bumped because: Holiday Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/12/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The definition of timely is not 1-weeksThe manager would take 1-weeks to reply to board emails and owner emailsThe emergency that took place was responded business days after the incident occurredThere was no inspection reports provided nor did the property manager visit monthly as the contract statedYou took our monthly fee and did not provide what you said you didI hope the customer service they provide improvesgood luck in the future Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2016/01/05) */ There is no requirement in our contract for written property inspection reports nor were they ever requested by the association's Board of DirectorsWhile the complainant may not have ever been at the property during our inspection visits (they work full time days and do not reside at the property), the inspections take place routinely and action is taken on any deficiencies noted in property condition at that time We consider this matter closed

“We are continuing to work with the complainant on open, unresolved matters.”

FirstService Residential is the management company for the condominium association of which the complainant is a member As the managing agent for the association, it is our duty to administer the association’s responsibilities, including the collection of the monthly assessment payments for the association from each of the homeowners We are, at all times, acting under the provisions of association’s Declaration and at the direction of the association’s Board of DirectorsThe complainant’s dwelling unit sustained damage from a water leak from the dwelling unit aboveThe Sexton Lofts Condominium Association filed a claim for damages under the association’s master insurance policy; however, the claim was deniedThe complainant asserted that the HVAC unit within his unit was damaged by the water leak on despite waiting nearly days to report this matter to the management officeThe complainant’s tenant requested service and provided access to the dwelling unit for the service provider The service provider completed the HVAC service and noted that the HVAC unit was found not to be operational, in part, due to someone “self-performing” electrical workThe HVAC unit is, per the Association’s Declaration, a Limited Common Element with the cost of this repair being exclusive to the unit The amount charged for this repair, $1,818.32, is a correct charge and is due and owing to the Association

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/12/16) */ FirstService Residential is the management company for the homeowners association of which the complainant is a memberIt is our responsibility to collect the monthly assessment payments for the association from each of the homeowners The complainant has contacted our office numerous times over the past several weeks calling into question the process by which payments that are made via third party service providers are handledTimely responses have been made to all inquiries providing information regarding these processes Payments that are not made timely, i.e., received no later than the 15th day of each month, are, per the association's collection policy, to be charged a late feeFor the association assessment payment due in October 2015, the complainant's payment was initiated through Paylease on October 14th, her bank released the funds to Paylease on October 15th, Paylease transferred the funds to the association's bank on October 16th, the funds were deposited to the association's bank account and the payment posted to the complainant's association account on October 17thAs the payment was not received by the 15th, a late fee was added to the accountAs a courtesy, the late fee was subsequently removed on November As a third party service provider, Paylease is not within our control nor can we count funds that are paid through this process as received until they are actually deposited to the association's bank accountIn making payments through this process, making an allowance for the three day processing time, as indicated on the Paylease website, will ensure timely payments and avoid the necessity of future late fees being assessed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/12/17) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The information provided on the Paylease website describes, a little, the process by which payments are accepted by the website and processed, but, in fact, does not contain information concerning how and/or when, exactly, payments have been noted are to be considered received by the HOAAs I chatted with my bank and also with Paylease, I discovered that my bank would process the transactions it receives from Paylease AS OF THE DATE INDICATED BY PAYLEASE ON THE ELECTRONICALLY-FILED NOTICE OF E-ECHECK TRANSACTION IT RECEIVES FROM PAYLEASEIf Paylease indicates, on this form, the date that member transacts the payment online (which Paylease receipts on that date), then that's the date that my bank would deduct the paymentIf Paylease indicates a subsequent date on the transaction, then the subsequent date is the date that my bank would deduct the transaction from my account The Paylease website indicates, as well, under its description of "Processing Status Descriptions," that the status of a transaction as 'Paid Out' indicates that a payment has officially reached the HOA's account, which means that it is officially nonrefundable to the homeowner, as Paylease defines this statusIf Paylease were to indicate, to banks, the date on which transactions were completed AND RECEIPTED by Paylease as the transaction dates to banks, then banks would deduct the amounts owed ON or AS OF THOSE DATES, which would mean that the receipt dates would, in fact, be the 'PAID OUT' datesI see, from reading other complaints against FSR, that this is NOT an uncommon complaint against FSR, and that others have the same complaintALL of my transactions occurred and were deducted from my account ON OR BEFORE THE 15TH OF THE MONTH, and have been since I began using the Paylease system in June All my prior check payments to FSR have also been timely and I am current with my HOA duesNeither Paylease nor FSR is willing to provide information defining EXACTLY when the 'Paid Out' date the website indicates actually is in the payment process timelineI have asked and am asking both for an explanation of this and I feel that neither will respond because the response would indicate problems for FSR and Paylease, as I indicate, above In emails and letters from FSR's representative, who put me off bantering with me for at least days when I asked for more information on this subject, FSR's representative failed to answer my questions directly, indicated that it had taken at least five days (instead of the widely published three-day-standard for the HOA/FSR) to recognize some of my payments in its accounting department and, in fact, in its paper statement to me for November or December, indicated that I was TWO MONTHS in arrears with my HOA duesIf the letter that this FSR account rep forwarded to me by email to "correct" my HOA dues payment history were to make it to my HOA Board of Directors, this BOD could conceivably take vitriolic action against me for PERCEIVED late payments which were timelySuch action could CONCEIVABLY include foreclosure action THIS IS WHY I AM ASKING FSR to correct my payment history in a formal letter to me and to undertake to correct Paylease process so that the receipted transaction dates are dates indicated on e-transaction notifications to financial institutions, so that there is correlation of 'paid out' status dates and transaction receipted dates As I indicated to FSR and Paylease, I would NOT be able to lay claim to my funds AFTER THEY LEAVE MY ACCOUNT, BECAUSE AFTER THEY LEAVE MY ACCOUNT, THEY ARE NO LONGER IN MY POSSESSION AND WOULD HAVE TO BE REFUNDED BY THE HOA / FSR I need the letter correcting my payment historyI and others appreciate the ability to use online transactions and, in general, all my conversations with Paylease have been cordial and Paylease has provided good information and customer service to me regarding its processPaylease also keeps a payment history, which appears to be accurateI highly value this information and the system, in general, is a good one, but for the apparent gratuitous nastiness of FSR's account representative, which I take to be a misguided attempt to cover up and "protect" FSR's interests in its relationship with its client HOA(s)If undertaking the view that "we're all on the same team," is too difficult in these matters, then, perhaps what we need is more regulation and accountability by FSR and its representatives That's it Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 17, 2016/01/05) */ Our records of the complainant's history of association assessment payments accurately reflects the timing of the receipt of the payments and has been provided to themThough this may differ from the timing of when funds were taken from their checking account by Paylease, we will not be amending our records to close the time lag that occurs in the transfer of funds We consider this matter closed

Our firm is the management company for the East Farmington Homeowners Association (Association). As such, we are responsible for the collection of the association’s homeowner assessments which are levied annually at the beginning of each year. Ms. [redacted] purchased her home and became a... member of the Association in September 2009. She successfully made payment on her first annual assessment in 2010. No additional payments were received for the following six years. In 2016 the Board of Directors of the Association resolved to commence lien foreclosure due to the owner’s failure to remit payment. The lien foreclosure process was put on hold while a payment plan was discussed with Ms. [redacted] . On February 3, 2016 a payment plan was established beginning in February 2016. The terms of the payment plan provided Ms. [redacted] complete flexibility with regards to how she remitted her payment(s) with the only stipulation being that her payments must post to her account in the month that they are due. Ms. [redacted] has several remittance options which include remitting payment online via eCheck or credit card, mailing a check, setting up the Association as a payee through her bank or hand-delivering a check directly to our Bloomington, MN office. The mailing address in Los Angeles is directly to a lockbox within the US Bank payment processing facility. The payments received through the lockbox are deposited to the Association bank account daily and posted to the homeowner’s account on the date received. The Association Board of Directors has been reasonable in their approach to offer payment plans, but have been strict with deadlines given the six years of non-payment. After it was determined the payment plan was defaulted, the action to pursue lien foreclosure recommenced. As Ms. [redacted] has noted, the flat $50.00 late fee was not being charged in accordance with the Association’s Declaration. The Declaration imposes an 8% interest charge on delinquent accounts. This error was to the benefit of Ms. [redacted] , as the 8% per anum this charge would result in substantially higher late fees versus the flat fee that was charged annually to her account. Ms. [redacted] has asserted that FirstService Residential has violated various provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Act (FDCPA); however, a professional management company providing management services for a homeowners association is not considered a “debt collector” under the FDCPA. The Association’s attorney was notified and has been handling the collection action requested by the Board of Directors of the Association. FirstService Residential will continue to respond to owner inquiries and set up payment plans as outlined by the Association Board of Directors. The costs due to the delinquency are charged to the Association pursuant to the governing documents and management agreement. These fees, legal and management, are properly assessed to Ms. [redacted] ’s account pursuant to the terms of the association’s Declaration. The Association will honor the flat $50 annual late fee and will not recalculate the 8% interest. As a result of the payments made on the account in May the drafted lien was never recorded against Ms. [redacted] ’s property. There have been no reports made to any credit agencies. We Ms. [redacted] is encouraged to reach out to FirstService Residential to arrange a payment plan or request a payoff for the remaining account balance.

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/06/23) */ First, the complainant is a member of the [redacted] and complaints about service, or any other matter involving his association, should be directed to his elected Board of DirectorsSecond, we did in fact respond to the complainant and this light fixture has in fact been repairedWe inspected the building again today and all light fixtures are operationalThe association will not be issuing a refund of the complainant's June association dues Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 10, 2015/07/01) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) They FINALLY did fix the issue but after a week delayThe fact of the matter is for the amount of money that I pay, they are supposed to provide a service in a timely mannerFixing a light bulb after weeks is not in a timely mannerTheir service is abysmalI am a member of the association and I have brought my complaints to the board as well(hoping that we can find a new management company since First Service Residential) cant do complete the service part that is in their nameUnfortunately this has become a recurring issue with delayed maintenance items not being fixed timelyI just want the public to know that this company should not have a good Revdex.com rating and to not use them