Heartwood Properties

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 14, 2015/08/27) */
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
First and foremost, we have apologized to the claimant, our client, for the perceived poor communication and have subsequently emailed back and forth directly with our client about...

some of the questions raised.
This is a summary of our correspondence and of our position on these complaints:
1. In regards to the leasing fee that we charged our client: while we do on occasion permit our clients to advertise their own units concurrent with our marketing efforts, in this case, the qualified tenant who applied, who was screened, and who subsequently signed a lease for our client's rental, was secured and screened by our agents, not by our client. I have the emails, which I've shared with my client, to remind our client of this. We therefore charged our client the leasing fee in accordance with our management agreement.
2. In regards to the locks: the tenant reported that the lock/deadbolt was malfunctioning at our client's rental property. Our maintenance team inspected the [redacted] lock in question, assesed that the lock needed replacement, and then purchased and installed a new lock/deadbolt. We invoiced our client [redacted] (2 hours) for labor, including the initial inspection, and [redacted] for the cost of the lock itself, for a total of [redacted] This is considered routine maintenance, and it falls below the [redacted] maintenance threshold which permits us to repair/replace without specific owner approval (as outlined in our management agreement). This project was completed in the utmost of good faith and benefit to our client and their tenant, at a great value.
3. in regards to the water heater: we solicited and secured a very thorough and appropriate replacement bid from one of our trusted vendors, and our client chose to seek out their own plumber to do the replacement, which is their right, because it seems that this project wasn't happening fast enough for our client. The investigation, bidding, approval, and subsequent installation of any large piece of mechanical equipment is not a task that we take lightly; while we move expeditiously, especially when it affects the tenant's comfort in the home, we are thoughtful and diligent in our approach as we consider best practices, value, quality, and scheduling. There was no 'forcing;' no client is obligated to use our vendors, but we stand by our pool of contractors who we believe offer some of the highest quality and best value work in the area.
4. In regards to tenant contact: our client chose to exchange information with the tenant, which is our client's right.
5. In regards to the holdback: due to the occasional delay of timely invoice submission from our vendors - who might submit invoices for work performed on our client's rental after our management agreement ends- we typically withhold [redacted] from our client's final distribution (note: this is in lieu of establishing a reserve for our clients at the commencement of the management agreement, which is standard industry practice). The tenant moved out on [redacted] and we sent our client's final income distribution via direct deposit (less a [redacted] holdback) on [redacted] Two months later, on [redacted] we sent our client the [redacted] holdback, plus [redacted] from the tenant's security deposit, and less [redacted] (for certified postage for the security deposit) for a total of [redacted]
5a. We are allowed 60 days to return our tenant's security deposit, per the lease terms, and again, due to the occasional delay of our vendors submitted timely invoices, we usually delay the return of the deposit within this timeframe to ensure that all property/damage-related invoices are covered. The potential charges might not be damage from a move-out per se, but for example, it could be a utility bill, previously in the tenant's name, which finds its way to the property manager to pay on the tenant's behalf. Please note that the Revdex.com received its complaint from our client 55 days after the tenant moved out, which in light of the above information, we believe is an unfair and overly-aggressive action on the part of our client.
While I'm disappointed to learn of our client's dissatisfaction with our services, I can assure the Revdex.com and the general public that despite our client's claims to the contrary, we operated with the highest regard, integrity, and safekeeping for our client's investment property, their funds, and their overall best interests, as we do for all of our clients.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this with you. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to reach out directly to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
President
Heartwood Properties
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 17, 2015/08/31) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I would like to know how it is reasonable to review a lock for two hours before determined the lock was no longer good and needed to be replaced. I would have been more than happy to drive down to the apartment and fix the lock myself for less than what I was charged.
There has also been no response as to why my tenants went without hot water for a week. Based on the verbiage from [redacted], it sounds like this is a reasonable time for tenants to be without hot water.
I am also sorry to hear that [redacted] feels I am being aggressive with this posting. I would like to state that this was only responded to when I pointed out to him directly that there was no response-even after the second notice was sent.
As I explained to [redacted], the past cannot be changed. I am looking for a formalized record of my experience and I would like to move on.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 19, 2015/09/03) */
Thanks for the follow up and the opportunity to clarify those items.
1. The two hours was not spent reviewing the condition of the lock only; the two hours included the assessment of the broken lock, travel time to/from [redacted] to purchase the new lock, and the time to install the new lock.
2. I apologize again that the tenants were without hot water and for the delay. During this time, there was some back and forth between our team, our client and our contractor, who was able to relight the pilot light, which had gone out due to some inadequate venting. There was also discussion about getting a replacement unit that could fit the space and price, and then subsequent advisement from our client that they would be talking to a contractor or two of their own choosing.
3. I responded immediately upon the notice that I received from the Revdex.com on Aug 26, 2015. As I wrote the case manager, I never received any notice prior to that, even searching through junk mail. I asked the Revdex.com to check what contact email/phone number they had for me and to update accordingly. I think as you can tell from my timely response to this recent counter-response, I take these complaints seriously and would never sit on this.
4. We too would like to move on. Your complaint has been recognized and as I wrote previously, we are grateful for the feedback.
Thank you.
[redacted]
Heartwood Properties, Inc.
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 21, 2015/09/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I am choosing to move on. I would like it noted that I also did not receive keys to the new lock until I moved back into my condo months later.