Life Force Accupressure Center

Although Mrs [redacted] is only asking for one concession, she has made several damaging assertions in her complaint, so I feel compelled to be thorough in this response Mrand Mrs [redacted] had leased and occupied a condo unit at [redacted] and vacated approximately 9-30- I then inspected the property on 10-2-wrote up a report and took move out photos I found that the property had been poorly left by the vacating residents Therefore, I notified the property owner, that the property deposit would likely not cover the damages and the other needed services, such as cleaning etc The owner, who has owned the property less than three years wanted to do a personal inspection also Among several condition issues, the vacating residents had done their own (in violation of the lease) and very poor quality touch up painting, requiring a full wall repaint There was also damage to the trim boards and baseboards around the front door area The owner, having a painter friend, was able to get the needed wall painting, trim repair and painting done at a very good discounted price Prime Properties, through our service providers then completed the remainder of the make ready process, much of which was charged back to the vacated residents That work is listed below: General housekeeping Replacing a missing lavatory pop up stopper Bleaching, removing discolored grout and re-grouting the tub due to poor tenant care Order, pick up and replace a missing refrigerator jab bar and missing refrigerator floor vent grill Relocate the stacking washer and dryer unit into proper location in the WD closet When Ms [redacted] first contacted us by email she denied that they had done any personal painting, claiming in her words “the interior was not repainted” and that any wall issues were caused by “wear and tear” This was the same explanation for baseboard/trim board damage Regarding cleaning she stated “We made sure that the apartment was cleaner than when we moved in And I assure you it was We made multiple walkthroughs to ensure everything was clean” She did admit that they were responsible for the missing refrigerator vent, but said that the jar bar was missing at their move in and the cost should not be charged back She disputed any responsibility for cleaning and re-grouting related to the moldy tub grout, again blaming the issue on “wear and tear” and “hard water” issues at the condo complexThe water service is provided through The City of Austin, which does not supply “hard water” When I inspected the property I noted that the full sized, but very heavy stacked washer and dryer had been moved from the original location in the closet I had our vendors reposition the units, connecting same, in the closet Ms [redacted] questioned that this had occurred and disputed any charge back Mrs [redacted] also questioned a 15% administrative surcharge, which is based as a percentage of the total of the deposit deduction and charged by Prime Properties for supervising tenant damage services This charge back provision is part of “Special Provisions” in the lease At this time I feel it should be pointed out that Mrand Mrs [redacted] were only our second occupants prior to the property being remodeled and then sold to our client The first occupants stayed approximately one year and left the condo in excellent condition As a result, when the [redacted] ’s occupancy started the property had been very newly remodeled and equipped with newly installed appliances To complicate the refund process, the [redacted] ’s also failed to complete and return the provided “Inventory and Condition Form”, that if returned, could possibly have been used to verify if there was actually a missing jar bar in the refrigerator at the time of their move in Due to the fact of other missing parts, the appliance very new age, only one prior lease occupant and the lack of supporting proof, we had to assume that the jar bar was present at move in Our fiduciary responsibility is to look after the best interests of our client, the property owner, but also be careful to not to take advantage of the residents After Mrs [redacted] ’s initial email, on November 3rd, Prime Properties sent her a folder and link to view the inspection photos, copies of billings for the work in dispute and a copy of her lease to verify the clause related to the 15% administrative surcharge For your review that link is [redacted] *** Mrs [redacted] then replied back on November 6th , “Thank you! We reviewed the pictures and can agree with most of the charges However, the jar bar for the refrigerator was missing and we should not be held responsible I am still unclear about the fee-reinstall for the washer and dryer The re-grouting of the tub is wear and tear The water in the complex is very hard.” She again asked about the 15% surcharge and her inability to find a copy of her lease for verification The link had just been sent to her with a copy of the leaseBy policy, when we receive a deposit refund complaint we first send the former resident condition photos and bill copies Then if they still have concerns I personally respond back with my explanation, which I did on November 6th I explained my rational for the remaining deductions in question and also mentioned what items we could have, but we did not charge back for As follows, the interior of the metal front door had five noticeable dents in the metal This is the same door area that had damage to door trim and baseboards Replacing a functioning door would have been very expensive and not having actual proof that the dents were not possibly preexisting, I chose not to make a deduction We also did not charge for lost rent potential due to the needed delays in repainting the unit, making minor repairs and general cleaning, all caused by tenant action or inaction On November 7th Mrs [redacted] responded back to me again mentioning being unfairly charged for the missing jar bar, explaining her confusion about our policies, and claimed no knowledge of why the washer/dryer was out of place and gave more explanation of why she had no responsibility for the moldy tub because of water issues at the condo complex She again asked for a revised deposit statement reflecting a reduction in charges related to her explanation Also on November 7th I again responded back to Mrs [redacted] in the general order of her email related to the jar bar, moved washer/dryer and the necessary tub service In this email I explained that I would not continue to respond back to her unless she could produce some proof of any mistakes on my part At that point Mrs [redacted] emailed back and forth, primarily because she did not see clear evidence in our photos that the washer/dryer needed to be moved or reinstalled into the proper position To her point, although at inspection I saw the appliances out of place, I either failed to take a specific photo or the photo was not conclusive evidence to her of the needed service We had however previously provided her a bill copy from our vendor for this service work I had previously mentioned to her by email that perhaps her cleaners had moved the washer/dryer to remove debris around the units She did not reply to this possibility, but if you are looking at inspection photos taken you will see a large amount of trash and small child’s toys left under the refrigerator To verify for myself, I called our vendor and asked about the washer/dryer situation He said that the appliances were up against the left side wall, but pulled back from the back wall to inches and that the dryer vent was disconnected, with a vent part missing The actual charge he had quoted to us was $ I reduced it on the deposit statement to $50.00, because it seemed excessive to me until I got the full explanation from Jorge, for the actual work involved On November 15th Mrs [redacted] sent Prime Properties an email basically stating that if Prime Properties did not provide her credit for the washer/dryer issue she would make a Revdex.com complaint Subsequently, we received the Revdex.com complaint.She seems to have conceded all of her original complaints about the deductions, possibly because of our proof of the reasonableness of the charges and our complete responses, but she still wants a $credit from our client for the repositioning and re-installing of the very heavy washer and dryer In actuality she was only charged $for this service, plus the 15% surcharge Other than our simply paying her a fee to avoid bad reviews, I do not feel justified in changing the charge backs, all backed up by verifiable photo and billed invoice proof We nonetheless strive to do the right thing in all instances In this case, it appears we have correctly processed the deposit refund

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: ***, ***'s business partner called and left a voicemailHe stated that the fee refund I was requesting was not unreasonable as the photos provided were not clear, regarding the washer and dryer I later called him back and spoke to him regarding the re-grouting and jar barHe was on board with getting the fees updatedThey are on different pages regarding how to treat customers and what fees are reasonableThis response stated that their cleaners moved the refrigerator and possibly washer/dryer but am being charged for the washer/dryer and not the refrigeratorI had not received any feedback after my last couple emails and proceeded to file the complaint since [redacted] stated he would not be responding to me further Regards, ***a [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I cleaned the unit, better than it was before I moved in I also took pictures when I moved out To my knowledge the move out inspection should be done with the tenant, which it was not It appears that this company does this extra work even if the unit is cleaned Regards, [redacted] ***

Prime Properties has to deal with facts as we and other witnesses know them The fact photos were not available do not change what actually occurred Obviously it would be easier to just give money to whoever disagrees; however, when such contradicts the known facts, in spite of claims to the contrary, we have to go with what the facts reflect as we owe that legal duty to our clients We nonetheless with the complainant the best

We do not do unnecessary work as such is illegal We do not perform inspections with tenants present as such is not legally required As long as we only do the work needed, and document the condition requiring the work, this is what appears to be the basic dynamic As far as we can see, this is all that was done, in spite of assertions to the contrary ignoring the photographic and documentary evidence Photos and paid invoices were already provided and apparently have been ignored We can't ignore factual evidence to the detriment of the owner we represent This violates ethical guidelines and legal duties owed We nonetheless understand many folks want 100% of their deposit regardless of how they left their rented unit The only issue are whether or not a mistake was made in what was ordered and paid In the case before us, it appears there's been no mistakes

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: the washer/dryer were not moved or disconnectedThere's photos for all the other chargesHowever, there is only eyewitnesses to thisWhich has not been suitable for my requests to update the charges based on my observationsThey have failed to provide proof to this allegation and thus would like the statement updated to reflect this errorThey do not have a photo of the refrigerator proving it was not missing the bar prior to move in but there is one showing it's missingThat was my mistake for assuming they were honest in business dealings I have been completely honest in all my communications.
Regards,
*** ***

I am *** and am responding here as allegations in Ms***' reply primarily pertain to me.I said if the washer/dryer were indeed not moved, and attached, as Ms*** indicated prior, it would appear charging to connect and move the washer/dryer would be in error. After speaking with the eyewitnesses, *** who inspected and our vendor who reconnected the washer/dryer and moved it back against the wall, it appears such did in fact occur and as such charging for same appears proper. We have no idea why the washer/dryer was disconnected and away from the wall; we only addressed the matter. The refrigerator was in its proper spot properly functioning when *** inspected; accordingly, there was no reason to charge anything for the frig. I did not say I was on board with refunding charges for tub mold grout and the missing jar bar in the frig as I was not personally involved in the inspection or deposit charges. If Prime Properties had made errors in this matter, we would gladly refund the charges; however, the photos and eyewitnesses appear to support the charges.Prime Properties' basic protocol here is to examine to see if any mistake(s) were made, and if such occurred, to refund charges associated; however, in this matter, it appears there were not errors based on photos and the eyewitnesses. We nonetheless strive to do the best we can to please everyone as best possible

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: The facts are the washer and dryer where not movedIt is a matter of providing proof that they wereThe photos provided show the units in placeIt is about accurate documentation and nothing shows they were movedOther than eyewitnesses there is no physical proof and as my eye witness statements about the other fees did not suffice, I assume the same applies to your statements. I would like the fee updated to reflect the revised fees.
Regards,
*** ***

We do not do unnecessary work as such is illegal.   We do not perform inspections with tenants present as such is not legally required.  As long as we only do the work needed, and document the condition requiring the work, this is what appears to be the basic dynamic.  As far as we can see, this is all that was done, in spite of assertions to the contrary ignoring the photographic and documentary evidence.   Photos and paid invoices were already provided and apparently have been ignored.  We can't ignore factual evidence to the detriment of the owner we represent.  This violates ethical guidelines and legal duties owed.  We nonetheless understand many folks want 100% of their deposit regardless of how they left their rented unit.  The only issue are whether or not a mistake was made in what was ordered and paid.  In the case before us, it appears there's been no mistakes.

Prime Properties has to deal with facts as we and other witnesses know them.  The fact photos were not available do not change what actually occurred.  Obviously it would be easier to just give money to whoever disagrees; however, when such contradicts the known facts, in spite of claims to the contrary, we have to go with what the facts reflect as we owe that legal duty to our clients.    We nonetheless with the complainant the best.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: [redacted]'s business partner called and left a voicemail. He stated that the fee refund I was requesting was not unreasonable as the photos provided were not clear, regarding the washer and dryer.  I later called him back and spoke to him regarding the re-grouting and jar bar. He was on board with getting the fees updated. They are on different pages regarding how to treat customers and what fees are reasonable. This response stated that their cleaners moved the refrigerator and possibly washer/dryer but am being charged for the washer/dryer and not the refrigerator. I had not received any feedback after my last couple emails and proceeded to file the complaint since [redacted] stated he would not be responding to me further. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted]'s request to review his complaint submitted to us 11/4/16 was, unfortunately, not addressed as promptly as we otherwise typically do.  Having spoken at length with Mr. [redacted] and his concerns, a full set of photographs evidencing the condition of his rented unit, after he vacated,...

along with copies of the paid invoices to the vendors we hired to perform the needed work, have been emailed to him so he can see what we had to deal with. Mr. [redacted] will review the data, and reply to us if he still feels we made a mistake in the deposit refund charges assessed.  Mr. [redacted] is aware that, if we did in fact err, that we will promptly resolve such with whatever refund may be applicable.  However, it appears our charges were consistent with the work needed to address the condition of the property which Mr. [redacted] left us to deal with. I've  uploaded the copies of the paid invoices; however, the photos are too numerous to load as the limit restricts such.   We have to address whatever work is needed in order to rent the unit again.  To the extent funds spent to achieve this were related to tenant items, the tenant was charged.  To the extent the work pertained to non-tenant related items, the tenant was not charged.   We apologize to Mr. [redacted] for the late response and hope we all have mutual understandings in resolving whatever issues may exist.

Although Mrs. [redacted] is only asking for one concession, she has made several damaging assertions in her complaint, so I feel compelled to be thorough in this response.  Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] had leased and occupied a condo unit at [redacted] and vacated approximately 9-30-17....

 I then inspected the property on 10-2-17 wrote up a report and took move out photos.   I found that the property had been poorly left by the vacating residents.   Therefore, I notified the property owner, that the property deposit would likely not cover the damages and the other needed services, such as cleaning etc.   The owner, who has owned the property less than three years wanted to do a personal inspection also.  Among several condition issues, the vacating residents had done their own (in violation of the lease) and very poor quality touch up painting, requiring a full wall repaint.  There was also damage to the trim boards and baseboards around the front door area.    The owner, having a painter friend, was able to get the needed wall painting,  trim repair and painting done at a very good discounted price.  Prime Properties, through our service providers then completed the remainder of the make ready process, much of which was charged back to the vacated residents.  That work is listed below: 1.       General housekeeping. 2.       Replacing a missing lavatory pop up stopper. 3.       Bleaching, removing discolored grout and re-grouting the tub due to poor tenant care. 4.       Order, pick up and replace a missing refrigerator jab bar and missing refrigerator floor vent grill.     5.       Relocate the stacking washer and dryer unit into proper location in the WD closet.  When Ms. [redacted] first contacted us by email she denied that they had done any personal painting, claiming in her words “the interior was not repainted” and that any wall issues were caused by “normal wear and tear”.  This was the same explanation for baseboard/trim board damage.  Regarding cleaning she stated “We made sure that the apartment was cleaner than when we moved in.  And I assure you it was.  We made multiple walkthroughs to ensure everything was clean”.  She did admit that they were responsible for the missing refrigerator vent, but said that the jar bar was missing at their move in and the cost should not be charged back.  She disputed any responsibility for cleaning and re-grouting related to the moldy tub grout, again blaming the issue on “normal wear and tear” and “hard water” issues at the condo complex. The water service is provided through The City of Austin, which does not supply “hard water”.  When I inspected the property I noted that the full sized, but very heavy stacked washer and dryer had been moved from the original location in the closet.  I had our vendors reposition the units, connecting same, in the closet.  Ms. [redacted] questioned that this had occurred and disputed any charge back.  Mrs. [redacted] also questioned a 15% administrative surcharge, which is  based as a percentage of the total of the deposit deduction and charged by Prime Properties for supervising tenant damage services.  This charge back provision is part of “Special Provisions” in the lease.     At this time I feel it should be pointed out that Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] were only our second occupants prior to the property being remodeled and then sold to our client.  The first occupants stayed approximately one year and left the condo in excellent condition.  As a result, when the [redacted]’s  occupancy started the property had been very newly remodeled and equipped with newly installed appliances.  To complicate the refund process, the [redacted]’s also failed to complete and return the provided  “Inventory and Condition Form”, that if returned, could possibly have been used to verify if there was actually a missing jar bar in the refrigerator at the time of their move in.  Due to the fact of other missing parts, the appliance very new age, only one prior lease occupant and the lack of supporting proof, we had to assume that the jar bar was present at move in.  Our fiduciary responsibility is to look after the best interests of our client, the property owner, but also be careful to not to take advantage of the residents.    After Mrs. [redacted]’s  initial email, on November 3rd, Prime Properties sent her a folder and link to view the inspection photos, copies of billings for the work in dispute and a copy of her lease to verify the clause related to the 15% administrative surcharge.   For your review that link is [redacted].   Mrs. [redacted] then replied back on November 6th , “Thank you!  We reviewed the pictures and can agree with most of the charges.  However, the jar bar for the refrigerator was missing and we should not be held responsible…..  I am still unclear about the fee-reinstall for the washer and dryer…. The re-grouting of the tub is normal wear and tear…. The water in the complex is very hard.”  She again asked about the 15% surcharge and her inability to find a copy of her lease for verification.  The link had just been sent to her with a copy of the lease. By policy, when we receive a deposit refund complaint we first send the former resident condition photos and bill copies.  Then if they still have concerns I personally respond back with my explanation, which I did on November 6th.  I explained my rational for the remaining deductions in question and also mentioned what items we could have, but we did not charge back for.  As follows, the interior of the metal front door had five noticeable dents in the metal.  This is the same door area that had damage to door trim and baseboards.  Replacing a functioning door would have been very expensive and not having actual proof that the dents were not possibly preexisting, I chose not to make a deduction.  We also did not charge for lost rent potential due to the needed delays in repainting the unit, making minor repairs and  general cleaning, all caused by tenant action or inaction.  On November 7th Mrs. [redacted] responded back to me again mentioning being unfairly charged for the missing jar bar, explaining her confusion about our policies, and claimed no knowledge of why the washer/dryer was out of place and gave more explanation of why she had no responsibility for the moldy tub because of water issues at the condo complex.  She again asked for a revised deposit statement reflecting a reduction in charges related to her explanation.  Also on November 7th I again responded back to Mrs. [redacted] in the general order of her email related to the jar bar, moved washer/dryer and the necessary tub service.  In this email I explained that I would not continue to respond back to her unless she could produce some proof of any mistakes on my part.  At that point Mrs. [redacted] emailed back and forth, primarily because she did not see clear evidence in our photos that the washer/dryer needed to be moved or reinstalled into the proper position.  To her point, although at inspection I saw the appliances out of place, I either failed to take a specific photo or the photo was not conclusive evidence to her of the needed service.  We had however previously provided her a bill copy from our vendor for this service work.  I had previously mentioned to her by email that perhaps her cleaners had moved the washer/dryer to remove debris around the units.  She did not reply to this possibility, but if you are looking at inspection photos taken you will see a large amount of trash and small child’s toys left under the refrigerator.  To verify for myself, I called our vendor and asked about the washer/dryer situation.  He said that the appliances were up against the left side wall, but pulled back from the back wall 12 to 18 inches and that the dryer vent was disconnected, with a vent part missing.  The actual charge he had quoted to us was $75.00.   I reduced it on the deposit statement to $50.00, because it seemed excessive to me until I got the full explanation from Jorge, for the actual work involved.  On November 15th Mrs. [redacted] sent Prime Properties an email basically stating that if Prime Properties did not provide her credit for the washer/dryer issue she would make a Revdex.com complaint.  Subsequently, we received the Revdex.com complaint.She seems to have conceded all of her original complaints about the deductions, possibly because of our proof of the reasonableness of the charges and our complete responses, but she still wants a $100.00 credit from our client  for the repositioning and re-installing of the very heavy washer and dryer.  In actuality she was only charged $50.00 for this service, plus the 15% surcharge.  Other than our simply paying her a fee to avoid bad reviews, I do not feel justified in changing the charge backs, all backed up by verifiable photo and billed invoice proof.  We nonetheless strive to do the right thing in all instances.  In this case, it appears we have correctly processed the deposit refund.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I cleaned the unit, better than it was before I moved in.  I also took pictures when I moved out.  To my knowledge the move out inspection should be done with the tenant, which it was not.  It appears that this company does this extra work even if the unit is cleaned.
Regards,
[redacted]