Dear Revdex.com, This letter is in response to the Revdex.com complaint filed by [redacted] *** We are very sorry for the error concerning the air conditioning in the homeThe owner of the property had understood his home was equipped with a central air conditioning system when he purchased the home Mainlander Property Management advertised the property based upon this informationIt appears that is not the caseWe understand this issue to the tenantThe owner of the home has purchased two portable A/C units, which are to be shipped to the home A $monthly rent credit for the entire term of the lease has also been offered to Ms*** Sincerely, Bette D [redacted] Broker/Operations Manager
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meSincerely, [redacted] ***
To Whom It May Concern,I am responding to the Revdex.com complaint filed by [redacted] I believe I was not very clear in my explanations of the process in determining the charges which can be claimed against a tenant’s security deposits I am hopeful Mr [redacted] has now received the copies of the reports and the pictures of the property throughout the tenanciesThis property has a total of different tenants occupying the property from to The first tenants moved into the property on 11/The second tenants moved into the property on 3/and the third tenants moved into the property on 5/I noted the carpet did have some staining and pet odor prior to the first tenant moving into the propertyBased upon the original condition of the carpet/home “existing wear” was noted by the owner as well The owner would like the last tenant to be charged for the stains in the carpetThe last tenant did provide Mainlander with proof of professional carpet cleaning as per their move-out instructions At the time of the move-out inspection there were signs of preexisting stainsSince there were stains and odor noted prior to the first tenancy and pictures noting some stains throughout the additional tenancies it is not equitable to charge the final tenant for the wear and tear to the property Angie R [redacted] was not relying on the Realtor at the time to inspect the propertyShe was noting another person had viewed the property and thought everything looked as she had noted in her move-out inspection I wanted to also clarify the issue with the dog poop on the carpet as noted in Mr [redacted] email in October It was not there when Angie did her inspection in JulyShe would certainly have taken a picture of the poop and had the carpets cleaned and charged the past tenants had that been the case.Concerning the yard, I have reviewed all the pictures of yard with special attention to the pictures prior to the last tenancy compared to the move-out inspection picturesThe yard looks very similar with the exception of the lawn area which was not green Tenants are responsible for returning the yard to the standard in which they received it with the exception of trimming trees and shrubs This is an owner responsibility since typically tenants don’t have the knowledge of how to trim and can damage the bushes or trees It is not a tenant responsibility to make the yard or home “sale market ready”Mainlander has no problem holding tenants responsible for damage to propertiesDamage is considered anything above wear and tearMainlander has a high level of expectation for the condition of the property at move-out A very thorough move-out check list is provided to the tenant prior to their move-out An inspection is done prior to the tenancy and after the tenancy In this particular case I do not see the tenants damaged the propertyThe property did show wear and tear after three tenanciesI am very sorry Mr [redacted] is unhappy with condition of the property at the end of the third tenancyI am also sorry the supporting documents were not sent in a timely manner All the documents which have been sent are dated and have not been alteredRegards, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker/ Operations Manager
When the tenant's at this property moved out on May 31, Mainlander completed a move-out inspection and charged the tenant's the following charges: Cleaning (in excess of $cleaning fee) Carpet Cleaning Turnover Maintenance Charges Landscaping Charges $ Mainlander was holding $in security deposit in addition to a $cleaning fee After using all of the deposit money and cleaning fee to pay off these charges a return the home to the condition it was received in the tenants were left with a balance of $ The tenants were informed that they needed to pay this balance as soon as possible As of today the tenants have not paid their remaining balance We will be sending them to collections in order to receive the remaining funds Mainlander does not assume responsibility for unpaid charges from former tenantsHowever in this case with the balance of only $we will agree to refund the money at Mainlander's expense in order to resolve this issue and we will go after the tenants ourselves to recover the unpaid balanceWe will mail out the balance of $to our former client [redacted] directly at her home address Please let us know if you have any questions or require additional information in resolving this manner Sincerely, Tom F [redacted] Mainlander Property Management
The response given on 9/9/is true, and factual and fully documentedIn addition accounting statements were sent monthly and are always available upon requestThe lockbox was removed from the property on September 12th Regards, [redacted]
MAINLANDER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC[redacted] ***LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035October 23, 2015To Whom it may concern, In April Mainlander received notice from the owners to terminate management upon the tenant vacating There was a question if we could continue to pay the utilities because the home was going on the market and the owners lived out of state At that point a note was put in the file not to close out until we heard from the owner The owner was sent and e-mail on 8/20/to ask him if he would still like us to manage or close them out He responded on 8/28/and we agreed to keep the utility bills coming to mainlander and the owner would send funds Effective 9/1/we no longer charged the minimum management fee because all we were doing was pay bills for him, his realtor was overseeing the home When the tenants vacated on 7/9/15, the Property Manager, Angie R [redacted] inspected the home on 7/10/(evening) She did note a few light stains throughout the home but the realtor at that time agreed that the home “looked good” On 7/15/the owner asked how things were and the Assistant Property Manager( Kristine C***) told him that the move out report was compared to the move in report and everything looked good and nothing stood out our needed to be repaired On 7/21/the owner sent in an e-mail saying the new realtor said the yard looked bad When the tenants vacated on 7/9/the yard was in good shape The Property Manager and Assistant Property Manager went to the home on 7/21/to see what the yard looked like and it still looked good The only thing that looked different was the front lawn had quite a bit of moss growing in it The past tenant is not responsible for the yard care beyond their tenancy On 10/13/The owner was notified that Mainlander received a very large PGE bill and was a little concerned because it was so high We had asked him to reach out to his realtor that was overseeing the home to make sure things were okay He responded back saying it was caused by someone leaving the AC on full blast during the time before he switched agents The bill was from the month of Septwhich is with the new agentOn 10/13/the owner sent an e-mail and in that e-mail stated that the carpet cleaning that was done by the tenants which was by a professional company was a temporary clean just to hide the stains & smells which did not stand out when I did my initial walk through He said that his current agent cleaned dog poop off of the carpet In the months this property has been vacant it has had multiple realtors, potential buyers and even the owner’s handy man going in and out It is hard to know what has happened When the move out inspection was done on 7/10/there was no poop, horrible stains or smell in the home It is true stains can wick back up However, when Bette D [redacted] (Principal Broker at Mainlander) first visited the home in she noted to the owner there was a pet urine smell on her first visitThe owner thought it was because the home had been vacant and closed up for awhileHe sent a carpet cleaning invoice to show the carpet had been cleanedThe invoice did note “Pet odors, stains, paint in various rooms, dyes, traffic, bleach” This was prior to any marketing for a tenant by MainlanderThe move-inspection for the first tenant did note existing stains on the carpet This is a very unfortunate situationI will send the owner all copies of the move-in/move-out inspections and all pictures of the property taken during the management of the homeIt is not the Property Management Company's responsibility to manage and over-see the home when a Realtor has been hired to over-see, market and sell the homeIt appears some very unusual things have happened at the home during this Realtor marketing period Regards, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker and Operations Manager
July 22, Attention: Revdex.com Dear Revdex.com, I am in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] to the Revdex.comMainlander Property Management has tried unsuccessfully to respond personally to Ms [redacted] ’s questions and complaints in the pastUnfortunately it appears Ms [redacted] was not satisfied with the information which included copies invoices, emails and financials provided previously I will address each complaint in the order it was presented in Ms [redacted] ’s letter The property was presented to Mainlander Property Management in not clean condition after being owner occupied A check in the amount of $800($owner reserve, $for cleaning) was received and deposited into the owner’s Client Trust Fund The cleaning and carpet cleaning were work ordered and the work was completed based upon the schedules of the vendorsI am happy to provide copies of the invoices if neededThe owner has been provided the copies in the past, as was the Oregon Real Estate Agency Concerning the pond located on the property; it is considered a liability to small children to have ponds with water which could be a downing hazardIt was recommended to Ms [redacted] to fill in the ponds to avoid the liability Mainlander started the management of this home on September 3, The property could not be shown until the carpet cleaning was done due to the pet odorThe carpet cleaning was delayed due to the amount of urine, decontamination, stains and stretching neededDocumentation of the condition of the carpet is available The original schedule for the carpet cleaning was September 9, and it was rescheduled for September 17th after receiving permission from the owner to proceed on September 16, The property was then marketed at $and shown to potential tenantsA prospective tenant saw the home and inquired if the owner would consider a lower rent of $on September 23, The owner approved the lower rentThe tenant moved into the property on October 14, It is reasonable to expect a property to take days to rent with the amount of work which needed to be done prior to marketing the home As per the Mainlander Real Property Management Agreement a charge of 50% on one month’s rent was charged and collected for the rental agreement Mainlander collected a leasing fee of $ It is unfortunate the property needed as many repairs as it did to make it rent ready In addition there were repairs which were needed to provide the tenant with working essential systems in the homePrior repairs on the home while the owner lived in the property had been done by the owner’s husbandThe owner initially gave an additional $for cleaningNo other funds were received for the various repairs which resulted in the owner’s funds being used for repairsThe owner approved repairs over $as per the management agreement and noted in emailsThe owner was provided with a monthly owner statement detailing all income and expensesI am happy to provide these statements and invoices again The owner of the home was not responsive to the emails concerning the list of repairs noted by the tenant The most urgent concerns were the time it took to receive authority to fix the shower and the repair of non-working heat vents on the upper level of the home The owner noted it had always been that way and that is just how it is The tenant noted there was no heat on the upper level in several rooms on November 19, The tenant again asked if there was anything which could be done on December 2, At this time Mainlander concluded after several emails to the owner, we had a non-compliance with Oregon Landlord/Tenant Law concerning an essential service, which the owner was unwilling to repair As the Principal Broker and I decided it was best to terminate the management agreement with a written day notice on December 4, The Property Manager for this property is still employed by Mainlander Property Management and has provided all information concerning financial reports, invoices and emails to the Oregon Real Estate Agency and Ms [redacted] sThe Oregon Real Estate Agency found “no reasonable grounds to believe that a violation of the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter may have occurred that constitutes grounds for discipline under ORS Please find attached document In conclusion Mainlander Property Management was neither unethical nor dishonest in the management of the property owned by [redacted] All supporting documentation has been presented to the Real Estate Agency and Ms [redacted] sUnfortunately Property Management may not be an easy transition for all home owners who are personally attached to their homes Sincerely, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker Mainlander Property Management
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Mainlander continues to deny the problem. So, I believe it’s appropriate to look at the evidence: Mainlander did send the reports. However, they raise more questions than they answer. As one example (image of report attached - dirtyhouse_example.PNG), the third tenant reported that the walls in one of the bathrooms was “filthy.” Why was the second tenant allowed to leave the bathroom walls filthy when they moved out? This contradicts Mainlanders claim that they hold a high standard in their walk-throughs. Mainlander claims that the yard was in the standard we left it. That is not true. Attached is a statement (grass_roots.pdf) from the vendor who did the work confirming that the yard was not kept up according to contract and that the weeds and debris were not from after the tenant moved out. It is also not true that we are holding Mainlander responsible for the yard not being “sale ready”. We are only holding them responsible for the tasks that the tenants by contract were responsible for. You can see from the attachment that the full bill for all yard work was higher than the item we are asking Mainlander to cover. Mainlander claims that there was no dog poop on the carpet. Attached is an email (mimi_email.PNG) from our agent Mimi H [redacted] confirming that the poop was found and cleaned up by her on the same day as Mainlander’s walk through. Sincerely, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: The claims Mainlander makes above can be easily refuted by multiple witnesses to the contrary: neighbors in our area, the cleaning company who almost refused the business of cleaning the house once the tenants vacated, as well as multiple Mainlander staff who, if subpoenaed, would be forced to testify to the contrary Mainlander was clearly negligent of its duties and is resorting to and misleading statements to create the appearance that the company was engaged and in constant contact withmy wife and I following the return of the property If this were truly the case, a lockbox that belongs to Mainlander, would not still be on my front door on September 11th, almost a full month and a half after Mainlander supposedly fullfilled its stewardship of the property at the end of July This is but one small demonstration that Mainlander has not been engaged and in fact avoiding contact with my wife and I As Mainlander will clearly attempt to avoid any admittance of guilt in this forum, I have no other recourse than to resort to legal means to recover damage and discomforts that my family and I have incurred to Mainlander's negligence I am sure a full revue the facts, including the billing history of Mainlander will demonstrate in a legal forum the unprofessional and negligent (as Mainlander still has not given me the opportunity of review and correct the billing) conduct of Mainlander My wife and I are reasonable people and sought to resolve this conflict with the company thru direct means with Mainlander It was only as a result of Mainlander's refusal to engage us in discussion (after July 15th) that has resulted in this result Sincerely, [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com, This letter is in response to the Revdex.com complaint filed by [redacted] *** We are very sorry for the error concerning the air conditioning in the homeThe owner of the property had understood his home was equipped with a central air conditioning system when he purchased the home Mainlander Property Management advertised the property based upon this informationIt appears that is not the caseWe understand this issue to the tenantThe owner of the home has purchased two portable A/C units, which are to be shipped to the home A $monthly rent credit for the entire term of the lease has also been offered to Ms*** Sincerely, Bette D [redacted] Broker/Operations Manager
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meSincerely, [redacted] ***
To Whom It May Concern,I am responding to the Revdex.com complaint filed by [redacted] I believe I was not very clear in my explanations of the process in determining the charges which can be claimed against a tenant’s security deposits I am hopeful Mr [redacted] has now received the copies of the reports and the pictures of the property throughout the tenanciesThis property has a total of different tenants occupying the property from to The first tenants moved into the property on 11/The second tenants moved into the property on 3/and the third tenants moved into the property on 5/I noted the carpet did have some staining and pet odor prior to the first tenant moving into the propertyBased upon the original condition of the carpet/home “existing wear” was noted by the owner as well The owner would like the last tenant to be charged for the stains in the carpetThe last tenant did provide Mainlander with proof of professional carpet cleaning as per their move-out instructions At the time of the move-out inspection there were signs of preexisting stainsSince there were stains and odor noted prior to the first tenancy and pictures noting some stains throughout the additional tenancies it is not equitable to charge the final tenant for the wear and tear to the property Angie R [redacted] was not relying on the Realtor at the time to inspect the propertyShe was noting another person had viewed the property and thought everything looked as she had noted in her move-out inspection I wanted to also clarify the issue with the dog poop on the carpet as noted in Mr [redacted] email in October It was not there when Angie did her inspection in JulyShe would certainly have taken a picture of the poop and had the carpets cleaned and charged the past tenants had that been the case.Concerning the yard, I have reviewed all the pictures of yard with special attention to the pictures prior to the last tenancy compared to the move-out inspection picturesThe yard looks very similar with the exception of the lawn area which was not green Tenants are responsible for returning the yard to the standard in which they received it with the exception of trimming trees and shrubs This is an owner responsibility since typically tenants don’t have the knowledge of how to trim and can damage the bushes or trees It is not a tenant responsibility to make the yard or home “sale market ready”Mainlander has no problem holding tenants responsible for damage to propertiesDamage is considered anything above wear and tearMainlander has a high level of expectation for the condition of the property at move-out A very thorough move-out check list is provided to the tenant prior to their move-out An inspection is done prior to the tenancy and after the tenancy In this particular case I do not see the tenants damaged the propertyThe property did show wear and tear after three tenanciesI am very sorry Mr [redacted] is unhappy with condition of the property at the end of the third tenancyI am also sorry the supporting documents were not sent in a timely manner All the documents which have been sent are dated and have not been alteredRegards, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker/ Operations Manager
When the tenant's at this property moved out on May 31, Mainlander completed a move-out inspection and charged the tenant's the following charges: Cleaning (in excess of $cleaning fee) Carpet Cleaning Turnover Maintenance Charges Landscaping Charges $ Mainlander was holding $in security deposit in addition to a $cleaning fee After using all of the deposit money and cleaning fee to pay off these charges a return the home to the condition it was received in the tenants were left with a balance of $ The tenants were informed that they needed to pay this balance as soon as possible As of today the tenants have not paid their remaining balance We will be sending them to collections in order to receive the remaining funds Mainlander does not assume responsibility for unpaid charges from former tenantsHowever in this case with the balance of only $we will agree to refund the money at Mainlander's expense in order to resolve this issue and we will go after the tenants ourselves to recover the unpaid balanceWe will mail out the balance of $to our former client [redacted] directly at her home address Please let us know if you have any questions or require additional information in resolving this manner Sincerely, Tom F [redacted] Mainlander Property Management
The response given on 9/9/is true, and factual and fully documentedIn addition accounting statements were sent monthly and are always available upon requestThe lockbox was removed from the property on September 12th Regards, [redacted]
MAINLANDER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC[redacted] ***LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035October 23, 2015To Whom it may concern, In April Mainlander received notice from the owners to terminate management upon the tenant vacating There was a question if we could continue to pay the utilities because the home was going on the market and the owners lived out of state At that point a note was put in the file not to close out until we heard from the owner The owner was sent and e-mail on 8/20/to ask him if he would still like us to manage or close them out He responded on 8/28/and we agreed to keep the utility bills coming to mainlander and the owner would send funds Effective 9/1/we no longer charged the minimum management fee because all we were doing was pay bills for him, his realtor was overseeing the home When the tenants vacated on 7/9/15, the Property Manager, Angie R [redacted] inspected the home on 7/10/(evening) She did note a few light stains throughout the home but the realtor at that time agreed that the home “looked good” On 7/15/the owner asked how things were and the Assistant Property Manager( Kristine C***) told him that the move out report was compared to the move in report and everything looked good and nothing stood out our needed to be repaired On 7/21/the owner sent in an e-mail saying the new realtor said the yard looked bad When the tenants vacated on 7/9/the yard was in good shape The Property Manager and Assistant Property Manager went to the home on 7/21/to see what the yard looked like and it still looked good The only thing that looked different was the front lawn had quite a bit of moss growing in it The past tenant is not responsible for the yard care beyond their tenancy On 10/13/The owner was notified that Mainlander received a very large PGE bill and was a little concerned because it was so high We had asked him to reach out to his realtor that was overseeing the home to make sure things were okay He responded back saying it was caused by someone leaving the AC on full blast during the time before he switched agents The bill was from the month of Septwhich is with the new agentOn 10/13/the owner sent an e-mail and in that e-mail stated that the carpet cleaning that was done by the tenants which was by a professional company was a temporary clean just to hide the stains & smells which did not stand out when I did my initial walk through He said that his current agent cleaned dog poop off of the carpet In the months this property has been vacant it has had multiple realtors, potential buyers and even the owner’s handy man going in and out It is hard to know what has happened When the move out inspection was done on 7/10/there was no poop, horrible stains or smell in the home It is true stains can wick back up However, when Bette D [redacted] (Principal Broker at Mainlander) first visited the home in she noted to the owner there was a pet urine smell on her first visitThe owner thought it was because the home had been vacant and closed up for awhileHe sent a carpet cleaning invoice to show the carpet had been cleanedThe invoice did note “Pet odors, stains, paint in various rooms, dyes, traffic, bleach” This was prior to any marketing for a tenant by MainlanderThe move-inspection for the first tenant did note existing stains on the carpet This is a very unfortunate situationI will send the owner all copies of the move-in/move-out inspections and all pictures of the property taken during the management of the homeIt is not the Property Management Company's responsibility to manage and over-see the home when a Realtor has been hired to over-see, market and sell the homeIt appears some very unusual things have happened at the home during this Realtor marketing period Regards, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker and Operations Manager
July 22, Attention: Revdex.com Dear Revdex.com, I am in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] to the Revdex.comMainlander Property Management has tried unsuccessfully to respond personally to Ms [redacted] ’s questions and complaints in the pastUnfortunately it appears Ms [redacted] was not satisfied with the information which included copies invoices, emails and financials provided previously I will address each complaint in the order it was presented in Ms [redacted] ’s letter The property was presented to Mainlander Property Management in not clean condition after being owner occupied A check in the amount of $800($owner reserve, $for cleaning) was received and deposited into the owner’s Client Trust Fund The cleaning and carpet cleaning were work ordered and the work was completed based upon the schedules of the vendorsI am happy to provide copies of the invoices if neededThe owner has been provided the copies in the past, as was the Oregon Real Estate Agency Concerning the pond located on the property; it is considered a liability to small children to have ponds with water which could be a downing hazardIt was recommended to Ms [redacted] to fill in the ponds to avoid the liability Mainlander started the management of this home on September 3, The property could not be shown until the carpet cleaning was done due to the pet odorThe carpet cleaning was delayed due to the amount of urine, decontamination, stains and stretching neededDocumentation of the condition of the carpet is available The original schedule for the carpet cleaning was September 9, and it was rescheduled for September 17th after receiving permission from the owner to proceed on September 16, The property was then marketed at $and shown to potential tenantsA prospective tenant saw the home and inquired if the owner would consider a lower rent of $on September 23, The owner approved the lower rentThe tenant moved into the property on October 14, It is reasonable to expect a property to take days to rent with the amount of work which needed to be done prior to marketing the home As per the Mainlander Real Property Management Agreement a charge of 50% on one month’s rent was charged and collected for the rental agreement Mainlander collected a leasing fee of $ It is unfortunate the property needed as many repairs as it did to make it rent ready In addition there were repairs which were needed to provide the tenant with working essential systems in the homePrior repairs on the home while the owner lived in the property had been done by the owner’s husbandThe owner initially gave an additional $for cleaningNo other funds were received for the various repairs which resulted in the owner’s funds being used for repairsThe owner approved repairs over $as per the management agreement and noted in emailsThe owner was provided with a monthly owner statement detailing all income and expensesI am happy to provide these statements and invoices again The owner of the home was not responsive to the emails concerning the list of repairs noted by the tenant The most urgent concerns were the time it took to receive authority to fix the shower and the repair of non-working heat vents on the upper level of the home The owner noted it had always been that way and that is just how it is The tenant noted there was no heat on the upper level in several rooms on November 19, The tenant again asked if there was anything which could be done on December 2, At this time Mainlander concluded after several emails to the owner, we had a non-compliance with Oregon Landlord/Tenant Law concerning an essential service, which the owner was unwilling to repair As the Principal Broker and I decided it was best to terminate the management agreement with a written day notice on December 4, The Property Manager for this property is still employed by Mainlander Property Management and has provided all information concerning financial reports, invoices and emails to the Oregon Real Estate Agency and Ms [redacted] sThe Oregon Real Estate Agency found “no reasonable grounds to believe that a violation of the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter may have occurred that constitutes grounds for discipline under ORS Please find attached document In conclusion Mainlander Property Management was neither unethical nor dishonest in the management of the property owned by [redacted] All supporting documentation has been presented to the Real Estate Agency and Ms [redacted] sUnfortunately Property Management may not be an easy transition for all home owners who are personally attached to their homes Sincerely, Bette D [redacted] Principal Broker Mainlander Property Management
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Mainlander continues to deny the problem. So, I believe it’s appropriate to look at the evidence: Mainlander did send the reports. However, they raise more questions than they answer. As one example (image of report attached - dirtyhouse_example.PNG), the third tenant reported that the walls in one of the bathrooms was “filthy.” Why was the second tenant allowed to leave the bathroom walls filthy when they moved out? This contradicts Mainlanders claim that they hold a high standard in their walk-throughs. Mainlander claims that the yard was in the standard we left it. That is not true. Attached is a statement (grass_roots.pdf) from the vendor who did the work confirming that the yard was not kept up according to contract and that the weeds and debris were not from after the tenant moved out. It is also not true that we are holding Mainlander responsible for the yard not being “sale ready”. We are only holding them responsible for the tasks that the tenants by contract were responsible for. You can see from the attachment that the full bill for all yard work was higher than the item we are asking Mainlander to cover. Mainlander claims that there was no dog poop on the carpet. Attached is an email (mimi_email.PNG) from our agent Mimi H [redacted] confirming that the poop was found and cleaned up by her on the same day as Mainlander’s walk through. Sincerely, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: The claims Mainlander makes above can be easily refuted by multiple witnesses to the contrary: neighbors in our area, the cleaning company who almost refused the business of cleaning the house once the tenants vacated, as well as multiple Mainlander staff who, if subpoenaed, would be forced to testify to the contrary Mainlander was clearly negligent of its duties and is resorting to and misleading statements to create the appearance that the company was engaged and in constant contact withmy wife and I following the return of the property If this were truly the case, a lockbox that belongs to Mainlander, would not still be on my front door on September 11th, almost a full month and a half after Mainlander supposedly fullfilled its stewardship of the property at the end of July This is but one small demonstration that Mainlander has not been engaged and in fact avoiding contact with my wife and I As Mainlander will clearly attempt to avoid any admittance of guilt in this forum, I have no other recourse than to resort to legal means to recover damage and discomforts that my family and I have incurred to Mainlander's negligence I am sure a full revue the facts, including the billing history of Mainlander will demonstrate in a legal forum the unprofessional and negligent (as Mainlander still has not given me the opportunity of review and correct the billing) conduct of Mainlander My wife and I are reasonable people and sought to resolve this conflict with the company thru direct means with Mainlander It was only as a result of Mainlander's refusal to engage us in discussion (after July 15th) that has resulted in this result Sincerely, [redacted]