H. LORIST Watch & Clock Repair

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the matter with Ms*** and the late fees that are in dispute First, I would like to say that I do believe that this may be a matter of misunderstanding on how the online payment process works, specifically with the recurring payments. I
do understand what Ms*** believes to be true, respectfully. They have been paying online, through our online payment system, that is run by a third party that works in conjunction with our property management software, to offer this amenity. Residents were provided instructions to set up online payments. They have an option to log in and pay each month or they can set up recurring payments. When the resident sets up a recurring payment, it shows them the date of starting and it shows them their lease end date being the end date for this recurring payment. When a resident renews their lease, they must log back into the payment center to set up the recurring payment again. Essentially, renew their lease, renew their online payment When we did not receive rent payment for *** *** **, a late letter was delivered to their door and late fees were assessed starting with the 4th, as outlined in their lease agreement ($on the 4th, $per day until paid). Ms*** called the office and spoke with Lauren K***, AsstMgr., regarding this issue. Lauren was trying to determine what could have occurred and Ms*** explained to her that they always pay, it is automatically deducted from their account. It was explained to her at that time that we did not make any changes to her online rent payment. In that same conversation, Lauren was trying to explain to Ms*** that if she had everything entered correctly in the system, that she could talk to her bank if it was a bank error for not drafting. There seemed to be a misunderstanding on whether Ms*** thought it was a bank error or our error, and when Lauren mentioned the above referencing bank error, I believe that not all of the conversation may have been heard or understood clearly. If it was a bank error, they discussed that she may be able to get a refund, not from us, but from her bank. Lauren indicated to me that she tried to explain and discuss the whole situation, unfortunately but naturally, the resident was upset and she was not able to affectively explain to her how the recurring payments work, though she did try. Lauren told her she would discuss with me. I reviewed their ledger and also their online account for payments. What I found was that while rent payments had always been paid online and on time, the new recurring payment was not set up to start until August 3, 2016. Their lease ended on July 2, so that is when their recurring payment stopped that they had previously set up. This date again is visible when they set up their recurring paymentsPayments are drafted on the 3rd of the month, so with their lease expiration of July 2nd, that is why the July payment was missed. It is set up right now, as I stated earlier, to be drafted on August 3rd with their end date reflected in 2017. I contacted Ms*** and left her a message of my findings and due to the circumstances not being a property error, but in fact, a user error, that eliminated the concern of a bank error, and I would not be able to do anything about the late fees. Fair Housing does not permit us to waive late fees. I simply am unable to do thatIt is against company policy as well. When I ended the message, I asked her to call me should she have any further questions What I can do, as I understand Ms***'s concern of having documents to review, is to reach out to our provider and see if they can provide me with further details on documentation of recurring payment set up, so we can review together, if she would like. I will go ahead and reach out to them to see what is available and wait for a response, both from them, and from Ms*** or the Revdex.com, to see if a more thorough understanding can resolve this issue Best Regards, Janel N*** Carmel Landing Apartments Phone: (317) 581-Fax: (317) 581-East 151st StCarmel, IN www.bhmanagement.com

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. There was not a misunderstanding on my part.  Lauren had stated that it was a bank error and just needed management approval to refund the fees.  So if Lauren doesn't understand it how can a resident understand it.  The bigger issue here is why the apartment complex waited until multiple days of fees had accumulated before saying anything at all.  There was no letter delivered as Janel claims.  As I stated earlier, as well as Janel, we have always paid on time. When I asked Lauren why we were just hearing about it on July 13th, I was told by Lauren that they were just getting around to auditing payments.  So that tells me there was no letter left on the door as Janel stated in her response.  The phone call to me from the office was on July 13th and the payment was made that same day.  When would the letter have been left if this all took place on July 13th?  Sounds to me like gouging and then hiding behind "fair housing laws" to justify I can accept the fact that we needed to go online to extend the dates, if that's the case.  (My apartment complex sends me notification that an automatic payment is expiring and asks me to log in to update it if necessary).  What I can not accept is the fact that the proof of existence of the initial automatic payment request ever even existed on the website prior to me establishing a new one July 13th (the day I was told there was an issue).  What I also can not accept is that this is a "fair housing law" issue when it is clear that there was no notification to me or my father until 13 days into a month.  On my call with Lauren on July 13th I asked why we were just hearing about the non payment and I was told because they were just "getting around to it" on auditing payments but then in the company reply above, Janel says a notice was put on the door (when could that have been if they were just getting around to auditing payments?). Something just doesn't sound right to me.  I think there is error on both sides and I am willing to accept the charge of the first $50 initial late fee because if there were a notice Rowe would have been notified sooner, it would have been taken care of immediately as all our payment history shows payments were made on the 3rd of each month when my father gets his social security.  BMH management should not, in good conscience, feel they are entitled to the additional $10 per day late fee by hiding behind "fair housing laws". 
Regards,
[redacted]