Manco Abbott

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/09/26) */ Owners Response: [redacted] was allowed to terminate her lease without liability for future rentThe landlord did nothing to either provoke or allow graffiti to occur [redacted] entered into an agreement with Manco Abbott via our Attorney, Mr [redacted] The Agreement states that: Tenants will vacate premises by December 20th, and deliver possession and keys at that time Tenants agree to pay landlord the sum of $representing rents and late charges through December 20th, Payment is due upon signing Tenants agree to leave premises clean and undamaged and will schedule a walk through If the Tenants vacate as promised and pay amount due, Landlord will agree to an early termination of the lease effective December 20th, and will waive any and all claims for future rent This agreement was signed by [redacted] and [redacted] both tenants residing at [redacted] XXXXX on December 13, [redacted] charges on her final move-out are the following: Final AUM Invoice (Water, Garbage & Sewer) $ Replacement of Microwave Door due to Damage $ Heavy Soil Carpet Clean $ Apartment Clean $ Labor and Paint Supplies $ Total charges: $ Security Deposit Refunded amount: $ [redacted] was furnished copies of invoices from A & R Appliances, Frazee Paint, Unique Carpet Care, American Maid and the final invoice from AUM The Lease Agreement that was entered into on [redacted] 7th, with [redacted] states that under Security Deposit: Owner [redacted] withhold from the security deposit only such amounts as are reasonably necessary to remedy Resident defaults including but not limited to, the following: i) In the payment of rent ii) To repair damages to the premises caused by Resident iii) To clean and paint such premises, if necessary, upon termination of the tenancy in order to return apartment to the same level of cleanliness it was in at the inception of the tenancy and/or iv) To restore, replace, or return personal property or appurtenances, exclusive of ordinary wear and tear We are sorry that [redacted] feels that she was treated poorly and that her move-out charges are unfair [redacted] was let out of her lease, which she agreed toAgain, [redacted] was provided all paid receipts that landlord incurredWe feel the charges are both reasonable and necessary Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 8, 2014/09/26) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) No I do not agree with you Manco Abbott Just had to roll with the punches I going to have my day and court and trust me with the evevadence I have you will see it my way You were so sure of your selfs you didn't even bother looking at what I had against you but Revdex.com will see it even if your response was not to !! See you and your unhonest employee in court Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 13, 2014/10/01) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Not satisfied going to court Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 11, 2014/10/01) */ Thank you for the video tapeThe resident was not charged for any holes in the walls, strictly touch up paint and a touch up cleanI provided Revdex.com with an itemized move-in/move-out list with area's that needed touch up paint, touch up clean, damage to Microwave door and carpet cleanThe video only shows, walls and a blind We stand by our charges

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/11/13) */ Mr [redacted] : We believe that our charges are fair and accurate, yet we are adjusting your final charges to be $per your agreement with our office earlier this week Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2015/11/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) The adjustment made to the said move out balance by Manco is sufficient

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/08/13) */ Problem 1: Theft of Personal Property Response: The items claimed to be in the unit were not thereWhen Mr [redacted] came back to the property to retrieve the items he claimed to have left behind, there was only one machine in the closetThe site staff had not starting working on turning that unit over yet so other than the manager walking the unit at move out, no one had been in the unitFurthermore, it is clearly defined in the lease that the "Resident's property is not insured by owner or agent", "Management is not responsible for fire, theft or damage to personal effects" and "Owner/Agent strongly recommends that the resident obtain renters insurance"I have attached below the actual policy from the rental agreement Insurance: Resident's property is not insured by Owner or AgentResident is not a co-insured and is expressly excluded from any insurance policy held by Owner or Agent, which is now in effect or becomes effective during the term of this AgreementManagement is not responsible for fire, theft or damage to personal effects, etcin the premises, laundry, storage lockers, garage, or any portion of the buildingFor your own protection, keep all apartment doors locked at all timesOwner/Agent strongly recommends that the Resident obtain "Renter's Insurance" covering personal possessions immediately upon occupying Problem 2: Failure to provide promised incentives (x2) Response: All flyers that are handed out to the residents listing incentives for renewing their lease clearly state on the flyer "Offer expires month from renewal"Therefore, a resident cannot come back or years later and claim they never received their incentive Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/08/14) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I do not accept the business response at allFirst, the statement that site staff had not started working on the unit is simply patently falseUpon return to the unit to remove the three items that were accidently left behind (of which were already stolen from the apartment), there were obviously things the site staff had done inside the unit, based upon miscellaneous things that had been removed from cabinets, etc., things that were obviously not in that same position when the unit was turned overFor management to give a blanket "we're not responsible" statement, when they clearly were the only ones that had access to the unit during the time period in question (e.gthere was no broken windows or other evidence that a brehad occurred), is patently absurd and defies all common sense Also, the statement that there is a disclaimer that incentives must be used within one month of renewal is also patently falsePerhaps they recently added this verbiage in the newest incentive flyers, however, the flyers we previously received (and relied upon when deciding to renew for (2) year terms), did not include such languageAlso, if the business' statements about this disclaimer were true, why didn't management at the location inform us of this when we provided our 30-day notice letter - a letter which clearly stated our intention to use these incentives if the location decided that carpet cleaning would be necessary upon our end of lease Also, it is clear from the business' response that management has no regard for its former tenants - tenants that were perfect tenants and stayed for a very long period of time for an apartment rental (almost four years), and tenants that paid on timeAnyone reading this complaint and considering doing business with this establishment should understand that being a good tenant, for an extended period of time, buys you nothing in the way of receiving proper and just customer service after your lease is overHow loyal and good long term tenants (like us) have been treated after leaving should make anyone think twice about all the business' claims about caring about providing a high level of customer serviceIn the end, if you leave, you will be treated as coldly as a person off the street Additionally, after further review of our final bill, there are three items that require immediate adjustment and credit First - we need credit for returned Mailbox keys: $(returned as discussed with the property's onsite manager on 8/7; keys were in fact returned on 8/8) Second - we need credit for invalid billing of "living room blind damaged": $There was no damage to the blind itselfThere [redacted] have been a top piece that came off, but we cannot and will not pay for a blind when the blind itself had zero damage when we left the apartment Third - we need credit for invalid billing of "freezer door rail missing": $One of the shelf rails, given its advanced age, simply cracked and fell out one dayThe rail itself was not missing - it was put inside the freezer, as it wasWe cannot be responsible for prior wear and tear of the locations' equipment Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 10, 2014/08/18) */ It is unfortunate that Mr [redacted] does not accept our response; however, we stand by our initial responseWe feel we were fair and followed all necessary legal procedures Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 12, 2014/08/19) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The business continues to demonstrate a lack of professionalism, lack of common courtesy, and most seriously has not responded to billing for items that were in fact not damaged upon turning the units over The final bill is not accurate - We will not pay for a blind that was not damaged to any real extentThe top cover that is installed at the top of the window - and not part of the blind itself - costs much less than the $they are charging on their final bill If the final bill does not remove this charge, or greatly reduce it to reflect the actual costs to fix the cosmetic portion of the top of the blind area, we will sue in Small Claims court - for all items that the business is responsible forA reasonable third party will not find in their favor