Five Star Store It

I am rejecting this response because: They made absolutely no effort to resolve or address our issues informally

The tenant claims we are negligent because our Site Manages never checked the unit during the tenure of the tenant, but our Manager doesn't have the key and it's the tenant's responsibility to check on their own unitThis is unfortunate, yes, but again, not our responsibilityThe area is
rural which means there are rodentsThe lease at Section 12, in Bold and CAPITAL letters informs the Tenant that the Tenant is responsible to protect and insure their stored goods not the Owner and the tenant signed the leaseThe Lease signed by the Tenant is attached as Exhibit AThe lease does not say we will provide traps or poisonAlso, it is significant to note there are no other tenants complaining leaks and mold, or our failure to check their unit!Besides rodent droppings the Complainant said leaks and mold ruined much of her stored goods. No one has complained of leaks or mold at the one hundred plus unit storage facility, and although there have been some comments about rodent droppings, we have responded by hiring a professional exterminatorIf the tenant had stepped up and checked on their unit at any point and took note of rodent droppings or moisture, we could have recommended or provided traps and moisture tubs or given them another unitBut, they DID NOT check their unit and their loss is NOT OUR FAULT.There was no evidence of a leak in the buildingOur Manager checked the unit after it was vacated and there were no signs of leaksThe Manager leased the unit out immediately afterward and that tenant has had no complaintsAs for traps, that has always been the tenant's responsibility (it's tenants responsibility per Section o f the Lease)We maintain the mold was caused by the way the unit was packed by the tenant - tightly with little to no air circulation - which caused sweatingAgain, we cannot take responsibility for how the unit was packedPlus, if there was food residue on the boxes or furniture, it does not take much to attract rodents; again, no responsible hereUnless and until we start packing tenant's units for them or inspecting their belongings and how they are packed, we cannot take responsibility."We must add that in the attached documents, the Complainant agreed that she had insurance and that her insurance kept the risk of losses with her.Our insurance form signed by the Complainant, attached as Exhibit B, documents that the Complainant made her insurance primary and she did or should have made a claim with her insurance company and that is where her remedy should be.Thank you for your cooperation

This is our response to Ms. [redacted]'s claim. Please keep in mind that from the beginniig, Ms.[redacted] made it clear to us she was going to find a way to get money from us. Our defense againsther claim has been consistent with the following statement. BethWhen Ms. [redacted] rented units 0[redacted]...

and 0[redacted] at our Zanesville facility, she signed the standard leaseall tenants sign prior to moving any possessions into the units. Our lease states: 'You release us of anyliability for property damage. All personal property stored within or upon the storage space by you shallbe at your sole risk." Further, our lease states 'You agree not to store personal property with a total valuein excess of $5,000." "You agree not to store collectibles, heirlooms or works of art or other propertyhaving a special or sentimental value to you." Ms. Pemington agreed to the terms when she rented herunit.In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] says there was a "lack of regard" for her recovery. First, consistentwith the terms of the lease, Five Star Store It does not reimburse tenants for any loss or damage and thatwas what Ms. [redacted] wanted. Second, Ms. [redacted] filed a claim with StorSmart Insurance andwas awarded $2,000. If she wanted to know, from the beginning, if higher amounts of coverage wereavailable, she could have contacted StorSmart Insurance directly at any time for more information; we areprohibited by the State of Ohio to "sell" insurance so it is up to the insured to contact the insurer. That weknow of, no insurer provides unlimited coverage for personal property. Third Ms. [redacted] states thebuilding "had a defective roof, as described by the Five Star Store It manager". Our managers are notqualified roofers and inspections have not found defects. Further, gutters are not always installed onstorage buildings, as a rule, due to their design.The condition of items stored depends on other factors other than leaking. If tenants transport their itemswhen it is raining or snowing and do not dry those items as they are stored, those items can mildew,especially if they are packed tightly together. Also, when units are packed tightly with items up againstthe walls, sweating can occur which, again, can lead to mildew. These conditions are out of the facility'scontrol as we are not involved in storing items in the units.Ms. [redacted] did receive a payment of $2,000 from StorSmart Insurance but she made it clear, fromthe beginning, she wanted more. Although we regret any damage that may have occurred, we are notresponsible for the loss. Ms. [redacted] agreed not to store valuable or heirloom items but she stored hermother's furniture and family photos. Also, she claims the loss of books but unless those books wereofficially collectible, their actual value is small. Ms. [redacted] was angry she could not dispose of herfurniture on site but that is also a service not available and outlined in the lease.Five Star Store It regrets Ms. [redacted]'s loss. She could have requested more coverage fromStorSmart but she did not; she is the one who set the limit of her potential loss by not doing so. Ms.[redacted]'s claim is based entirely on her desire for more money and we will not pay her to avoid anegative review.Please feel free to contact me should you have further questions.Beth E. S[redacted]Executive Company ManagerBS:bsCc: F S[redacted]

You have asked why there are two insurance election forms for Ms. [redacted].  If you look at the forms, in the section for Facility Information, you will see each form is for a particular storage unit – one for 0[redacted] and the other for [redacted].  However, Ms. [redacted] was only paying for one policy ([redacted]) which is the one with the $9.00 premium checked.  As for the signature, I am not a handwriting expert and cannot make a determination as to the authenticity of Ms. [redacted]’s signature on the forms.  I know with my own signature, it can vary depending on how the paper is positioned, the type of pen or by how quickly I am signing a document.  I will point out, however, that whether the signature is Ms. [redacted]’s or not, she did accept and cash the claim check she was awarded by StorSmart.  It is my understanding that her acceptance of that check also indicates her agreement to the coverage and settlement.  Legally, she cannot secure more money from StorSmart which is why she is hoping to get an additional settlement from FSSI. If this answer is insufficient, please do not hesitate to contact me again.

I am rejecting this response because: They made absolutely no effort to resolve or address our issues informally.