Mission Realty

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [ The response contained untrue and misleading informationI had applied in the first week of September with the owner's buyer agentShe and the owner had approved and provided a modate of the 15th of SeptemberMission Realty then took over, after I had applied, visited the property times to meet the owner and realtorI was provided both in writing by the owner, in person by the owner, and in person by the owner's buyer agent who had advertised the property for rentMission Realty is fully aware of this information as it was forwarded to him in September upon requestIn fact, the advertising of $to $to then $is a violation of California LawAlso stated by the owner's buyers agent was that Mission Realty had approached the owner on the property and not the other way aroundWhile Mission Realty had not explicitly advertised the property, the owner and/or buyers agent had listed it for rent before I had first made contact with the buyer's agent who was acting as the property management company on behalf of the owner.The information had been provided to Mission Realty including Official Company Checks, contact information for both companies, and [redacted] checking deposits for both direct and manual deposits over a period of over one yearThis included photocopies of the checks, along with their stubs, and the bank information provided from account statementsMission Realty was also provided business information for companies that I do business with, and make income fromAlso, Mission Realty was provided with contact information for rental information including [redacted] handled by the [redacted] Firm located in Irvine, CAIn addition, family residences were also provided to Mission Realty.Even on the Internet today, there is still posted advertisements from the owner and/or buyer's agentI have complete records of both the advertising listing sitesThe original lease amount was for $4300, then $in an email from the buyer's agent, and after being approved, and provided with a modate, Mission Realty later took over and delayed the process for over a monthon each request, Mission Realty was provided with relevant bank information, credit history information, consumer information, income verification, residential history, etcMission Realty first attempted to raise the lease amount to $and requested a check made out to Mission Realty for $18,This property was advertised, and I was provided information as to the move in dateI had lost my full value of tickets for Hawaii for a planned vacation with time off from work, due to the events which transpired by Mission Realty, and also moved positions for my primary work (for which he was provided updated information for even a more senior engineering role from the previous place of employmentI had decided to move to another position based on information provided by Mission Realty as well, and lost my vacation due to this.Additionally, Mission Realty was flagged by ***'s security team on posting reviews after he was alerted to the fact that at the time of the issue, the reviews on numerous sites were extremely negativeEventually, these were removed but still are retrievable via [redacted] 's caching technology.This matter is not resolvedSome of the information is provided in the attached pdfThis contradicts the fact that the property was advertised and also confirms that Mission Realty was provided with all necessary information above and beyond what even was requiredTo this date, the property is even advertised on other websites.Also, Mission Realty used scare tactics to even increase the rent further from the advertised price and threatened to put it on the market, even after the owner (see attached text message as well from owner) confirmed living in the residence This is clearly a case of advertising and other agencies in the government have also been contacted including the California Bureau of Real Estate.This has caused serious hardships including residence for both myself and fiance, switching positions without the residence being provided although offered the position on several occasions from the owner both in writing in person and recorded conversations from my office line.] Regards,

November 5, Via Fax: 858-496-2***Revdex.com Viewridge Ave #San Diego, CA 92123-1688Attn: [redacted] Re: ID [redacted] Dear [redacted] ,We have received your letter dated Tuesday October 27, We understand that you do not want us to mention any individual's names as this response will be posted on your website.Mission Realty has been providing residential property management for over yearsWe are willing to provide as much information as needed regarding this matter and we are willing to meet and/or discuss these issues further with anyone who is interested.Regarding iD [redacted] ; the person who registered the complaint did not become our customerThis person never paid any monies to Mission Realty for servicesThis person was in a pre-application phase and was unable to move further in that process by his actions (see below).Regarding the property that this is in reference to, this property owner had recently approached our firm and expressed the desire to have a professional property management company handle this estate homeThis property is still under construction and is not yet available for rentMission Realty has not advertised this property for rent as of this letter.The basis for not moving forward with this applicant's application and the reason the property owner turned down this applicant - is that this applicant refused to submit relevant information required within the application process.• The first minor issue was that this applicant placed information on the application that could not be verified and appears to be misleadingThis alone would not have been a major issue and possibly could have been resolved.• The first of two major issues was that this applicant refused to provide income verificationThis was very confusing for us as this is extremely simple to provide and is kept confidential.• The second major issue was that this applicant refused to provide recent rental information for verificationThis also is extremely simple to provide and again this was very unsettling to the property [redacted] This property owner has asked for us to express here that, this property owner is willing to testify she never entered into any type of any agreement with any individual to rent this residence prior to our tenure, especially with this individualThis applicant is not a lessee or customer with this property owner.Please let us know should you need any further information.Sincerely, [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[ The response contained untrue and misleading information. I had applied in the first week of September with the owner's buyer agent. She and the owner had approved and provided a move-in date of the 15th of September. Mission Realty then took over, after I had applied, visited the property 4 times to meet the owner and realtor. I was provided both in writing by the owner, in person by the owner, and in person by the owner's buyer agent who had advertised the property for rent. Mission Realty is fully aware of this information as it was forwarded to him in September upon request. In fact, the false advertising of $4300 to $5000 to then $6000 is a violation of California Law. Also stated by the owner's buyers agent was that Mission Realty had approached the owner on the property and not the other way around. While Mission Realty had not explicitly advertised the property, the owner and/or buyers agent had listed it for rent before I had first made contact with the buyer's agent who was acting as the property management company on behalf of the owner.The information had been provided to Mission Realty including Official Company Checks, contact information for both companies, and [redacted] checking deposits for both direct and manual deposits over a period of over one year. This included photocopies of the checks, along with their stubs, and the bank information provided from account statements. Mission Realty was also provided business information for 5 companies that I do business with, and make income from. Also, Mission Realty was provided with contact information for rental information including [redacted] handled by the [redacted] Firm located in Irvine, CA. In addition, family residences were also provided to Mission Realty.Even on the Internet today, there is still posted advertisements from the owner and/or buyer's agent. I have complete records of both the advertising listing sites. The original lease amount was for $4300, then $5000 in an email from the buyer's agent, and after being approved, and provided with a move-in date, Mission Realty later took over and delayed the process for over a month. on each request, Mission Realty was provided with relevant bank information, credit history information, consumer information, income verification, residential history, etc. Mission Realty first attempted to raise the lease amount to $6000 and requested a check made out to Mission Realty for $18,000. This property was false advertised, and I was provided false information as to the move in date. I had lost my full value of tickets for Hawaii for a planned vacation with time off from work, due to the events which transpired  by Mission Realty, and also moved positions for my primary work (for which he was provided updated information for even a more senior engineering role from the previous place of employment. I had decided to move to another position based on information provided by Mission Realty as well, and lost my vacation due to this.Additionally, Mission Realty was flagged  by [redacted]'s security team on posting reviews after he was alerted to the fact that at the time of the issue, the reviews on numerous sites were extremely negative. Eventually, these were removed but still are retrievable via [redacted]'s caching technology.This matter is not resolved. Some of the information is provided in the attached pdf. This contradicts the fact that the property was advertised and also confirms that Mission Realty was provided with all necessary information above and beyond what even was required. To this date, the property is even advertised on other websites.Also, Mission Realty used scare tactics to even increase the rent further from the advertised price and threatened to put it on the market, even after the owner (see attached text message as well from owner) confirmed living in the residence.  This is clearly a case of false advertising and other agencies in the government have also been contacted including the California Bureau of Real Estate.This has caused serious hardships including residence for both myself and fiance, switching positions without the residence being provided although offered the position on several occasions from the owner both in writing in person and recorded conversations from my office line.]
Regards,

November 5, 2015 Via Fax: 858-496-2[redacted]Revdex.com 4747 Viewridge Ave #200 San Diego, CA 92123-1688Attn: [redacted]Re: ID [redacted]Dear [redacted],We have received your letter dated Tuesday October 27, 2015. We understand that you do not want us to mention any individual's...

names as this response will be posted on your website.Mission Realty has been providing residential property management for over 30 years. We are willing to provide as much information as needed regarding this matter and we are willing to meet and/or discuss these issues further with anyone who is interested.Regarding iD [redacted]; the person who registered the complaint did not become our customer. This person never paid any monies to Mission Realty for services. This person was in a pre-application phase and was unable to move further in that process by his actions (see below).Regarding the property that this is in reference to, this property owner had recently approached our firm and expressed the desire to have a professional property management company handle this estate home. This property is still under construction and is not yet available for rent. Mission Realty has not advertised this property for rent as of this letter.The basis for not moving forward with this applicant's application and the reason the property owner turned down this applicant - is that this applicant refused to submit relevant information required within the application process.• The first minor issue was that this applicant placed information on the application that could not be verified and appears to be misleading. This alone would not have been a major issue and possibly could have been resolved.• The first of two major issues was that this applicant refused to provide income verification. This was very confusing for us as this is extremely simple to provide and is kept confidential.• The second major issue was that this applicant refused to provide recent rental information for verification. This also is extremely simple to provide and again this was very unsettling to the property [redacted]This property owner has asked for us to express here that, this property owner is willing to testify she never entered into any type of any agreement with any individual to rent this residence prior to our tenure, especially with this individual. This applicant is not a lessee or customer with this property owner.Please let us know should you need any further information.Sincerely,[redacted]

Review: False and Misleading Advertising and Defamation No business may make false, misleading, or deceptive claims about regarding its services. Property Management Company made false and misleading claims about his business on websites. Libel is a method of defamation expressed in writing communication that was injurious to the Leasee's reputation, and exposed Leasee to ridicule.Users adhere to the recommendations/reviews on Internet sites, including [redacted]!, [redacted], in order to manipulate reviews, even at the expense of violating relevant laws.This resulted in a financial loss and other forms of damage.[redacted] artificially inflating lease amount as Leasee was already approved at $5K/month from Owner and then later subjected to high pressure tactics to pay $6K/month. Later false and misleading statements were also made in both e-mail correspondence and via telephone. Leasee was approved from September 5, 2015 to October 18, 2015 in writing, in-person, and via telephone by Owner. Leasee had waited until property had become available for 45 days (due to property repairs and painting).Desired Settlement: Resolution must include the following:Compensation for monetary damagesInjunctions ordering Mission Realty Properties to stop running the false reviews/advertisementsInjunctions ordering Mission Realty Properties to stop engaging in deceptive practices

Business

Response:

November 5, 2015 Via Fax: 858-496-2[redacted]Revdex.com 4747 Viewridge Ave #200 San Diego, CA 92123-1688Attn: [redacted]Re: ID [redacted]Dear [redacted],We have received your letter dated Tuesday October 27, 2015. We understand that you do not want us to mention any individual's names as this response will be posted on your website.Mission Realty has been providing residential property management for over 30 years. We are willing to provide as much information as needed regarding this matter and we are willing to meet and/or discuss these issues further with anyone who is interested.Regarding iD [redacted]; the person who registered the complaint did not become our customer. This person never paid any monies to Mission Realty for services. This person was in a pre-application phase and was unable to move further in that process by his actions (see below).Regarding the property that this is in reference to, this property owner had recently approached our firm and expressed the desire to have a professional property management company handle this estate home. This property is still under construction and is not yet available for rent. Mission Realty has not advertised this property for rent as of this letter.The basis for not moving forward with this applicant's application and the reason the property owner turned down this applicant - is that this applicant refused to submit relevant information required within the application process.• The first minor issue was that this applicant placed information on the application that could not be verified and appears to be misleading. This alone would not have been a major issue and possibly could have been resolved.• The first of two major issues was that this applicant refused to provide income verification. This was very confusing for us as this is extremely simple to provide and is kept confidential.• The second major issue was that this applicant refused to provide recent rental information for verification. This also is extremely simple to provide and again this was very unsettling to the property [redacted]This property owner has asked for us to express here that, this property owner is willing to testify she never entered into any type of any agreement with any individual to rent this residence prior to our tenure, especially with this individual. This applicant is not a lessee or customer with this property owner.Please let us know should you need any further information.Sincerely,[redacted]