McClure Trapping

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response....

If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Hello, thank you for the reply.  I called the Long and Foster HQ office on 7/21/17 and I explained my concerns with L&F's selling process and asked for the CEO's email address.  I was provided the email address of an assistant (initials C.R.) who would forward the email to the CEO.  I sent a detailed email on the morning of 7/24.  I followed-up with a phone call on 7/26 to make sure the email was received.  I would like a reply to the 7/24 email to the Long and Foster CEO. If a phone call or meeting would be better for the Company, I'd be happy to discuss my concerns.
Regards,
[redacted]

Response of Long & Foster and Susan H[redacted] and Mindy B[redacted] regarding Revdex.com complaint by Steven Dowell and Liang Li (jointly as the “Prospective Tenants”). 
 
The property located at [redacted], Alexandria VA [redacted] (“Property”) was first shown...

to the Prospective Tenants by [redacted] of [redacted] Realty, on Saturday, February 6 at 3:03pm. [redacted] called Susan H[redacted] (Susan H[redacted] and Mindy B[redacted] comprise The Susan and Mindy Team of Long & Foster and had co-listed the Property) at 6:12 pm that same evening to float the idea of a lease/purchase arrangement for his tenant clients.  He and Ms. H[redacted] talked for a few minutes, she told him to send her a proposal, which was received on 2/9 at 10:22 am, in the form of an email.
 
The e-mail from [redacted] contained a rental application on behalf of his clients, indicating they were interested in working out an option for purchase sometime in the future. There were no supporting documents such as Leave and Earning Statement (“LES”), copies of identification or copy of military orders accompanying the application, nor were any checks submitted.
 
Ms. B[redacted] left a phone message shortly thereafter for the condo owners to let them know we had an inquiry about a potential lease purchase offer. On Tuesday, 2/9, at 5:35 pm, we received another email from [redacted], asking if we had heard anything.  At that point, we had not heard back from the owners, but did hear from them within the next half hour.
 
On Tuesday, 2/9 at 6:12 pm, Ms. H[redacted] responded to [redacted] that we had talked to the wife, but her husband was out and she would need to talk to him so they would get back in touch the following day.  At that point we were discussing not only the purchase option, but the lease terms. On Wednesday, 2/10, at 9:54 am, Susan emailed the agent with the response from the owners. Within minutes, [redacted] responded the sales price was unacceptable to his clients, the Prospective Tenants, but they would like to move forward on the lease. 
 
On Wednesday 2/10 at 4:46 pm Ms. B[redacted] received a voice message from the prospective tenant indicating (Ms. B[redacted] did not request the Prospective Tenants to contact her directly).  In the message he stated the application had been done per his agent and that he was told by his agent he “needed to come by with his payment and sign the lease.”  Ms. B[redacted], concerned that the Prospective Tenants were not aware that there were several additional steps required, told [redacted] that his application could not be processed without the application fee, first month’s rent and supporting documentation.  [redacted] told her he wanted to move in by the weekend;
 
Mindy explained that his application first had to be sent to the Leasing Services Department of Long & Foster to be processed, and after it was processed, the owners then had to approve the application.  Once that was done, then we would proceed to preparing and signing the lease. She also explained that the condominium association restricted move in times and if the lease was signed, he would have to contact their representatives to schedule a move-in date and time. She further explained what checks he needed to provide; he wanted to pay by cash, but was told he would need to provide a personal, bank check, or money order.
 
On Thursday, Feb 11 at 1:28, [redacted] texted Mindy that he had just dropped off checks at our office and still hoped to move-in over the weekend.  Mindy replied that she would try to get the application processed as soon as possible BUT he still needed to provide a copy of his LES, his orders and copies of their driver’s licenses.  She stressed again that his application must be processed before anything else could be done and we could not send it for processing without supporting documentation. (Screensaver of text correspondence is attached).
 
At no time were the Prospective Tenants told that they have been successful in their attempt to lease the Property.  To the contrary, they were explicitly told, both verbally and in writing, that they still had to clear the application process.  In fact, the application specifically provides, among other things, that the applicant understands and agrees that: 
 
1. This Application, each occupant and each pet are subject to acceptance and approval by Landlord.
2. Listing Broker is obligated to present all Applications to Landlord until a lease is signed.
3. Landlord and Listing Broker may rescind acceptance and resume marketing the Premises at any time until a lease is signed.
4. Proof of current income is required. For example:
a. Latest Pay Statements/Stubs
b. Last 2 years’ Form W-2 for hourly or weekly pay persons
c. Last 2 years’ Form 1040 and Schedule C (if applicable) of self-employed or persons with tip income
d. Copy of LES and orders for military.
 
On February 11, at 2:53 pm, all supporting documents had finally been delivered to the office and were given to Randa Morrison in our office, who forwarded them on to Long & Foster Leasing Services Department.
 
On February 11, at 3:57 pm, Susan received a call from an agent representing potential buyers who were interested in making an offer to purchase the Property.  It is worth noting that the Property was listed for sale or rent at this time and no lease or prior purchase agreements had been signed by the owners of the Property.  Mindy called the owners and notified them of the interest in the purchase of the Property.
 
On February 11, at 4:24 pm, when it looked as if the potential purchase of the Property was a possibility (but not definite, as the owners wished to have the evening to discuss their decision), Long & Foster was told to hold-off on processing the application given the potential interest in a purchase.  This was specifically done to avoid any unnecessary expense for the rental application if the Property was to be sold. In fact, the Prospective Tenant’s processing checks and application had already been sent to Leasing Services, but were never deposited given the developments after the application was made.
 
At 9:43 am on February 12, Friday morning, the owners indicated that they would accept the offer that had been discussed. By that afternoon, the written offer was received and the owners indicated they were agreeable.  Shortly after that at 5:23 pm, Ms. H[redacted] called [redacted] to let him know the owners had decided to accept an offer for sale and were withdrawing the unit for rental.
 
Conclusion:
In their complaint, the Prospective Tenants take the position that since they provided checks relating to the rental, that they had been awarded the rental.  This position is contrary to what was explicitly and repeatedly told to them verbally and in writing.  At no time were they led to believe that the transaction was completed. This is most clear in that a lease was never presented or executed. 
 
By way of background, the checks were supplied at the time of application so that there was no delay in the event that the rental application is accepted.  This was especially true given [redacted]’s request for urgency.  Further, in keeping with Long & Foster’s duties to its own landlord client(s), providing the checks at that stage assists in confirming the ability of prospective tenants to pay the first month’s rent before processing a rental application.  The check for the first month’s rent and (if applicable) the security deposit is NOT deposited until and unless a lease is executed.  This was clearly communicated to the Prospective Tenants as well.
 
The timeline supplied above makes it clear that at no time were Long & Foster and its licensees allowing two deals to occur at the same time.  However, to the extent it had, it would be well within Long & Foster’s ethical obligations to do so.  Long & Foster has a statutory duty to serve the interests of its clients.  It is not uncommon for multiple offers to be made on a property and Long & Foster, as a real estate broker, would be remiss (and ethically culpable) if it did not allow its clients to consider all offers. In this case, the Property was not subject to a lease or agreement of sale at the time the offer to purchase was presented.  The Property was listed for both sale or lease and the Prospective Tenants should have realized that until they had signed a lease for the Property, they were subject to being outbid by other potential offers. 
Long & Foster sent back the checks for the processing fee and the first month’s rent to [redacted].  Accordingly, the cost to cancel the checks was unnecessary.  However, in an effort to resolve this matter, Long & Foster is willing to pay the sum of $64.00 in consideration for a full release of any additional liability.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
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 me.  Please follow up with details on how best to acquire the $64.00 offered.Thank you for the response.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I still would like to know the property preservation company. It is apparent, when looking up the property that was foreclosed on, the shed was clearly not on the bank's property. I understand mistakes happen and wrong thefts occur. I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

From: Long & Foster Property Management To: Kenneth Perryman, The Revdex.com SUBJECT: COMPLAINT # [redacted] Dear [redacted], Long & Foster received the above-reference customer complaint and appreciates the opportunity to respond. We are deeply regretful for the comments...

expressed by the customer. As with every client, the management division strives to meet the needs of the clients. Long & Foster values every client’s opinion, but unfortunately there will be times where there will be differences and an agreement cannot be reached. No further comments will be made.

Good morning! We do have a response for this complaint and will respond by July 5.Thank you!

[redacted], Ellicott City, MD [redacted].  But please do not post this address on a public website.

[redacted] is correct in stating that Long & Foster previously managed the property located at 1614 Corcoran Street NW, Washington DC [redacted].  At the time when Long & Foster managed the property, an initial survey was completed with the tenant and vendor present.  An estimate was...

submitted to the [redacted] Company, which was approved and the work was started.  Under the management agreement, Long & Foster is not required to supervise the work, unless the property owner agrees to an additional non-management service fee for project management.  As per the management agreement signed by the [redacted] Company, they did not agree to that term.
 
The next challenge was access into the property for the lower level unit (Unit *).  The tenant had 2 dogs.  In order for Long & Foster to access the property, the tenant would have to be present or the dogs kenneled.  This is to ensure that no harm comes to the animals, vendors or employees.  The tenant did not comply with the request for access or was only available after hours (after 5pm, weekends), which would have been considered “Premium” time and billed to the owner. 
 
On May 18, 2014 The [redacted] Company gave notice to terminate management due to accounting challenges.  The account closeout was completed by June 30, 2014 when the new management company took over the account.  During the transition, the new management company had the opportunity to bring up any discrepancies, including uncompleted work or repairs to the attention of Long & Foster Property Management.  At that time, Long & Foster would have determined whether the discrepancies were valid and needed to be resolved.  We would then bring back the vendor to complete any outstanding repairs. 
 
Long & Foster received notice about the repairs one year after the closeout of the account.  From the documentation sent by the [redacted] Company, the work estimate submitted by the new management company in July 2014 was not completed at the time the tenant scheduled a DCRA (Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs) Inspection September 24, 2014.  This was 3 months after the closeout of the account with Long & Foster.  This shows that any maintenance issues brought to our attention could have been resolved at the time of closeout when the owner, new management company, Long & Foster and the vendor may have had access to the property.
 
Our business is based on superior customer service.  We strive to provide a service where clients & customers refer our organization as the leading real estate company in the area.  Part of that customer service is based on resolving issues such as the situation with the [redacted] Company account.  I am sure if Long & Foster was aware of the discrepancies during the transition of management, it would have been resolved at that time. 
 
Thank you in advance and please let me know if you have any other questions. 
 
Jean P[redacted]
Regional Manager
Long & Foster Property Management

[redacted] was notified on December 27th, 2016 the owner would not be renewing the lease and she would need to vacate the property no later than February 28th, 2017.  Our office contacted [redacted]...

on February 14th via email requesting to schedule her move-out in order to guarantee a time if she wish to be present.  We received no response from that email.   On February 17th, I called [redacted] after hours in hopes to reach her.  She did answer my call, however, was very rude when I inquired to schedule her move-out inspection. She stated she would be out by February 28th.    On February 21st, I received an email from the listing agent, who also happens to live across the street, letting me know [redacted]’s father was at the property that day clearing most of the items out of the home.  In her conversation with the father, he stated she would be out by the 28th.   The agent also asked him if she could get started on some landscaping as part of the renovations and prep work to get the property on the market for sale.  [redacted] was charged for only materials (mulch) as it relates to yard work and no labor.    Long & Foster followed up via email on February 24th trying again to schedule the move out inspection.  [redacted]’ response was: “she would like to schedule any time after February 28th, as she is in the last stages of cleaning.”   A representative from Long & Foster went out to the property on March 1st to complete the move-out inspection.  Due to the chain lock being on, the L&F representative could not access the property.   [redacted] was sent an email on March 2nd at 7:15am requesting she be present at the property on March 3rd at 1pm as we needed to complete her inspection as soon as possible and she needed to turn in keys and allow access.  [redacted] replied to that email on March 3rd at 11:25 pm stating she has a full-time job and cannot take off on a whim.  She stated in the same email she would leave the key under the mat for our convenience.  [redacted] was seen accessing the property on March 2nd removing trash from the property.   Long & Foster completed the move-out inspection on March 3rd with the listing agent present.  There were still tires stored in the garage on March 3rd.    On March 6th, I receive an email from the listing agent stating [redacted] accessed the property and removed the tires from the garage.   She approached [redacted] and at that time [redacted] turned over the keys.   [redacted] was accessing and removing items from the property six days after the lease expired.   Please note she was only charged for two days of rent (no utilities) beyond February 28th, 2017. [redacted] was in possession of the property six days after lease expired.    She was also charged for additional prep work as it relates to painting as she had used plastic secured by duct tape on most of the windows.  Once the tape was removed, it left behind a sticky residue which required additional sanding.   During the final inspection, it was found the windows were being improperly shut causing a draft.       At this time, we feel charges accessed to the tenant’s security deposit are fair.    J. Nicholas D[redacted] Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc.

August 20, 2015
 
[redacted]
Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC & Eastern PA
1411 K St. NW, 10th Floor
Washington DC, 20005-3404
 
RE: Complaint ID [redacted]
 
[redacted]:
 
Attached are pictures of the property in question.  As you will notice in the pictures...

the tenant attempted to touch-up the paint throughout the entire home which clearly did not match. This required the entire house to be repainted of which the tenant was not charged the entire amount. There were also several stains on the floors and carpeting as well has having the fire place and chimney cleaned.  That is the reason the entire security deposit was not returned and only a portion was refunded.
 
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at ###-###-####.
 
Sincerely,
                                        ...⇄
J. Nicholas D[redacted], CRB, CRS, GRI
Broker of Record
Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
We were not told this information. We were told that the owner handed the paperwork to the wrong person and we're given the run around after that.  Not satisfied with their response. 
Regards,
[redacted]

From: Long & Foster Property Management To: [redacted], The Revdex.com SUBJECT: COMPLAINT # [redacted] Dear [redacted], Long & Foster received the above-reference customer complaint and appreciates...

the opportunity to respond. We are deeply regretful for the comments expressed by the customer. This is a dispute about a security deposit refund which was processed and the dispute was resolved. Long & Foster values every client’s opinion, but unfortunately there will be times where there will be differences and a meeting of the minds cannot be reached. No further comments will be made.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the...

response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  Long & Foster only provided enough money to cover 52% of the cost of refinishing the wood floors.  They provided the $650 that was withheld from the tenant's security deposit, plus an additional $580 for a total of $1230.  The cost of refinishing the floor is $2344.  The scratches on the wood floor are extensive covering much of the floor in both the kitchen and dining room.  We would be happy to obtain a statement from the company that conducted the survey and provided the estimate.  Only refinishing a portion of the floor would look very odd as it would not match the rest of the flooring.  An additional $1114 will cover the entire cost of repair.   Regards,
[redacted]

Regarding complaint ID [redacted], The Long & Foster Home Warranty is administered by a third party and we have contacted the provider to resolve this situation.   They have responded directly to the customer and have agreed to the requested resolution.  The customer will no longer be...

required to pay the additional amounts owed as we have adjusted due to our delay in providing service.