Greengate

Hi ***,Total rent credit to be offered fro MAY rent, not April rent is $70.65The owner would like to offer days rent credit at $ divided by days = at $$x days rent = $70.65.The kitchen was not able to be utilized March 6th and 7th during construction.Total rent credit to be offered fro MAY rent, not April rent, is $70.65I appreciate you taking the time to speak with me today.-- Respectfully,

GreenGate learned of a non compliant fire code issue January 31, The kitchen was remodeled and returned to current fire code standards March 8, 2017.The owner offered the Ms***, through *** *** (GreenGate office manager) to exit the lease & property without repercussions, if tenant chose to leave by March 31, The tenant has chosen not to leaveAs of this date, the owner is not willing to offer a rent credit for the reasonable time frame it took to get the kitchen to codeAll other items were addressed previously in my initial response to the tenant's complaints.GreenGate, *** *** have acted within the law. Stanislauss Mediation Center (Project Sentinel) has confirmed this regarding the multiple times reaching out for their direction, regarding the delicate nature of non compliant fire code issues, notices "to enter" property, missing an item on a contract that is typically present All other items areMs***' opinion of Ms, *** a nothing moreThere has been no malicious intent only the acts to get the fire code issue addressed to the best of my ability.All other comments are character assassinations by *** *** toward Ms, ***I chose not to respond to them.If the page email communication sent from Ms*** to *** *** would help clarify actual words and not paraphrased comments by Ms*** , I can send the pages immediately

3/17/To all concerned at the Revdex.com, I am *** L***, a licensed agent with Department of Real Estate (#***) since I am also the office manager at GreenGate Property Management since I contact Stanislaus Mediation Center for consultation on how to approach Ms*** while
addressing the fire / ventilation code issue after learning the kitchen stove/oven placement was not to fire code standardsI followed Stanislaus Mediation Center’s direction when Ms*** became difficult to communicate with and for the contractor’s to work withStanislaus Mediation Center has been a resource I have utilized for years when in question on how to handle property management situations that require a delicate approachAfter receiving a letter by Ms*** posted on her door February 18, 2017, implying I was threatening her by entering her property without her permission, via a “hour notice to enter” notice, I formally filed an Intake form with Stanislaus Mediation Center on February 22, for their assistance in all matters regarding this tenant moving forwardStanislaus Mediation did not ever hear back from Ms***I appreciate the opportunity to share my side of the story in this cover letter and the response to Ms***’ complaint in the pages to followRespectfully, *** *** Office manager B.R.E#***

Hi [redacted],Total rent credit to be offered fro MAY 2017 rent, not April 2017 rent is $70.65The owner would like to offer 2 days rent credit at $1099  divided by 31 days = at $35.3225. $35.33 x 2 days rent = $70.65.The kitchen was not able to be utilized March 6th and 7th during construction.Total rent credit to be offered fro MAY 2017 rent, not April 2017 rent, is $70.65I appreciate you taking the time to speak with me today.-- Respectfully,

To Whom It May Concern:My prior reply to Ms. [redacted]'s comments was a simple statement of facts and direct quotes from her various email communication as well as official government websites, and not an attempt at character assassination as she is trying to imply.  If anything, Ms. [redacted] is the one who wrote multiple falsehoods and paraphrased various comments of mine, attempting to paint me as an "unwilling” tenant as she implies.  When in actuality I was the one who was continually trying to communicate with them and coordinate schedules in advance, rather than at the very last minute, which is the approach Ms. [redacted] and Greengate chose to take, that in my view is quite unprofessional. Given the lack of response from Ms. [redacted] and Greengate regarding various issues, I was simply informing them of my rights as a tenant and exercising those rights.  All information I informed Ms. [redacted] of regarding California Civil Code 1954 and 1940.2(a)(4) was obtained directly from official government websites – from the California Department of Consumer Affairs website (http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/living-in.shtml) and California Legislative Information website (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/).  In addition, I have been in communication with an actual tenant rights attorney with a formal background and law degree, trained in California law and tenants' rights.  The organization Project Sentinel and associated individual that Ms. [redacted] mentions she received guidance from is not a legal organization or a trained attorney with jurisdiction to provide legal advice.  Even in my conversation with another staff member from Project Sentinel by the name of [redacted], she herself commented that staff of Project Sentinel are not attorneys authorized to give legal counsel.  If Ms. [redacted] was under this impression, then she was misguided in her thinking and should have better researched actual California legal codes regarding warranty of tenant habitability and tenant rights to privacy regarding landlord entry prior to her illegal entry on the weekend of Saturday, February 18, 2017.  When I emailed her to give her correct legal information taken directly from the official government websites mentioned, she completely ignored those emails as well as the signed letter I posted on my door prior to her entry.  I also have all communications with Ms. [redacted] saved in my emails and in addition, I also have the text message saved from the second contractor she mentioned, which shows he only contacted me last minute and not a whole entire week as she wrongfully states in her prior reply.The date Ms. [redacted] writes that “Greengate learned of a non compliant fire code issue January 31, 2017” is incorrect.  I moved in on January 16, 2017 and she was informed of this issue and various other concerns shortly upon my move-in on January 20, 2017 – both via in-person conversation in the office as well as via email notification.  However, she did not reply to any concerns until nearly a week later on January 26, 2017.  The kitchen had no proper ventilation from the date I moved in on January 16, 2017 until the final repair was completed March 8, 2017, and therefore I could not adequately use the kitchen to cook for this duration of time given my concerns regarding the lack of ventilation and the property not being up to code due to violation of California state ventilation codes and regulations. In addition, I am not the first tenant who has lived in this rental property, which means that Greengate was renting a property that was not up to code to prior tenants even before me.  Therefore, it should be investigated whether this kitchen ventilation issue and any other concerns were brought to Greengate’s attention by any other prior tenants, and what actions (if any) the company took to resolve these concerns. Sincerely,[redacted], MD

To Whom It May Concern:  I am quite surprised and appalled in reading the various falsehoods contained in Ms. [redacted]’s reply.  It is ironic that she states I was “difficult to communicate with and for the contractors to work with” when in reality I was the one who was consistently emailing and trying to communicate with GreenGate about various issues, especially the kitchen ventilation not following California state code regulations, and [redacted] and GreenGate were the ones who had not been responding to my various requests for nearly a month.  Even when bringing up my initial concerns upon move-in on January 20, 2017, it took them nearly one week to even reply to that initial email, and communication with Ms. [redacted] thereafter was quite inadequate with her giving me the run around and not providing timely concrete resolutions to the various concerns I brought to her attention.When Ms. [redacted] writes: "February 9–15 – Second contractor attempting to access property, Ms. [redacted] will not allow unless she is present" -- this is a complete and utter lie.  That second contractor (who went by the name of “[redacted]” and did not provide his professional information) only contacted me at the last minute on February 16, 2017 before the weekend entry took place on February 18, 2017.  In addition, that contractor was quite unprofessional and only communicated via text message, which I actually have saved and shows he only contacted me at the last minute and not an entire week prior as Ms. [redacted] falsely writes.  When I had asked him some follow up questions, he failed to reply to my messages.  As such, obviously I would not feel comfortable having a complete stranger with lack of transparency in my rental property for an entire weekend with all my valuables and belongings completely accessible.  In addition, I would like to note that in prior conversations I had with [redacted] upon move-in regarding maintenance and repairs, when I asked if persons are able to enter when I'm not on the premise, she specifically said that GreenGate does not allow that and respects tenant's privacy allowing tenants to coordinate with handymen/contractors a time that is appropriate for everyone's schedules.  The lack of consistency in her words and actions is quite concerning.  Ms. [redacted] wrote that on “February 17, 2017 3:59 pm – Ms. [redacted] emails a list of questions that “must be answered” in order for her to allow entry in the unit of property management and contractor.”  This is also a lie, as not once did I use that terminology nor that phrasing.  My exact words were the following: “If you could please reply with the requested information so I can prepare accordingly, I would greatly appreciate it.”  In a prior email, she had mentioned that the repair would require tearing up floors and changing appliances.  Therefore, I had emailed her that if they were to complete these major repairs without me present, naturally I would like to know if I need to move any of my belongings stored in the kitchen drawers, cabinets, refrigerator, etc.  The fact that Ms. [redacted] chooses to misrepresent my words, again shows her unprofessional and dishonest conduct.Ms. [redacted] also failed to mention in her letter how I had emailed her the evening of Friday February 17th prior to her illegal weekend entry to inform her that I was made aware of my tenant rights and provided her the details of California Civil Code 1954 regarding landlord entry, which states the following: "Except in cases of emergency or when the tenant has abandoned or surrendered the premises, entry may not be made during other than normal business hours unless the tenant consents to an entry during other than normal business hours at the time of entry.  The landlord may not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant."  She chose to ignore that and until now has never replied.  When Ms. [redacted] refers to “Stanislaus Mediation Center,” I never received any communication from that organization.  I am not sure if this is the same organization as “Project Sentinel” that she had referenced in her email to me dated February 16, 2017 stating that she consulted them as an “owner’s rights advocacy” organization.  I actually tried to contact Project Sentinel multiple times that day (February 16, 2017) and the days following with no response.  I left multiple voicemail messages and finally got in contact with someone from that organization some days later on February 23, 2017, and spoke on the phone with a woman by the name of [redacted] who transferred me to another person to discuss information regarding mediation.  In the middle of that conversation, I was told a client had walked into the office for a consult and therefore that conversation was cut short with no further communication thereafter.In her reply, Ms. [redacted] writes that refusing to repair appliances was not retaliatory and an oversight.  I understand that an oversight can happen on occasion, but this oversight was multiple times over as there were multiple opportunities for this information to be mentioned but never was: 1.    When she initially showed me the place on 12/14/16.2.    When the contract was signed 12/22/16.3.    When I emailed her the morning of 1/20/17 to inform her of the issue with the broken dryer. 4.    When I spoke to her in person the afternoon of 1/20/17 when I passed by the office to drop off the walk-through form and informed her of the broken dryer.Not once in the above aforementioned situations was this ever addressed, and was only mentioned nearly one week later when she finally replied six days later on 1/26/17 after the email I sent on 1/20/17 detailing my various concerns.  When I signed the contract on 12/22/16, this issue should have been discussed and made transparent prior to me signing a legally binding document.  If the owner and GreenGate are going to advertise that the property comes with stove, refrigerator, washer/dryer, it is usually assumed that maintenance and repair are included as well.  If not, then that should have been more transparent and included in writing prior to signing my lease contract and not simply mentioned as an afterthought over a month later with her essentially asking me to sign an addendum relinquishing my rights to repair and maintenance of appliances.  Furthermore, sending an email instructing the tenant to fix the appliance myself because it is “Not necessary to pay a handyman $45 an hour for that” is quite unprofessional.  These were her exact words in her email, which I thought was very condescending.Under California Civil Code 1942.5 detailing tenant rights against retaliation, California state law presumes retaliation if the landlord acts in a negative way within 180 days of the date that a tenant has exercised a legal right, such as complaining to the landlord about an unsafe or illegal condition.  A retaliatory act covered under this statute includes decreasing services (e.g., landlord proposing to exempt itself of responsibility for appliance maintenance and repairs after a contract was already signed which did not include this language in the original contract).  It may be coincidence, however I find it interesting timing that Ms. [redacted] only mentioned this addendum regarding the maintenance repair clause only after I brought up concerns about improper ventilation in the kitchen and other property concerns.When Ms. [redacted] writes that she offered me to exit my lease early “due to her level of complaints and unwillingness to work with the landlord/owner,” this is also false.  Again, I would like to emphasize, I was the one who was consistently emailing asking about when the kitchen repairs would take place while she was the one not providing concrete answers.  It was only when I mentioned that a tenant has a right to withhold rent if repairs are not done in a timely manner did GreenGate choose to take action on my repeated unresolved requests.  It appears that [redacted] and GreenGate do not want a tenant who is aware of their tenant rights and chooses to exercise them, and that is the real reason for them offering to have me exit my lease early.It is quite upsetting that Ms. [redacted] is trying to paint me as an "uncooperative and unwilling" tenant when in reality I was the one who was consistently emailing and trying to communicate with them about various issues, and they were the ones who had not been responding to my various requests for nearly a month.  Then to give me a last minute notice that they plan to do repairs over the weekend when they knew specifically I would be gone for that weekend, rather than be professional enough to provide adequate information in advance and coordinate an appropriate schedule, is indicative of the hostile and antagonistic behavior of Ms. [redacted]. With her recent reply to Revdex.com containing multiple falsehoods and misconstrued information, it is apparent that Ms. [redacted] and GreenGate continue to be dishonest in their conduct and should not be allowed to conduct business in such an unprofessional manner.Sincerely,[redacted], MD