Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 7, 2014/02/07) */ When a tenant gives notice to move, our office mails the tenant a packet providing instructions on our move out proceduresMr [redacted] was sent this packet on December 5, This packet informs the tenant the property is to be returned in the same condition as receivedThe property should not have any conditions/damages which were not noted on the original check in form provided the tenant at move in We are providing a copy of the packet sent to Mr [redacted] highlighting sections related to his responsibilities at move out When we began management of this property, Mr [redacted] was already residing in the houseTherefore the original move in form with the prior management company was what we based our decisions for charges against his security depositTo insure accuracy of the deductions, all charges were confirmed with the property owner who had firsthand knowledge of the condition of the house In the beginning, Mr [redacted] was not upset about the charges made against his deposit, he was upset he was charged for items he was not allowed to correct before his move outIn the interest of compromise, we recently offered Mr [redacted] the opportunity to re-enter the property and make the necessary corrections to receive a full refund of his security depositMr [redacted] refused our offer Throughout this entire process Mr [redacted] has been very difficult to work withHe has made good on his threats to damage our credibility by posting negative reviews about our company on numerous web sites included the Revdex.com We have tried to work with Mr [redacted] to resolve this situation, but have been unsuccessfulAs such, we are requesting a mediation meeting between Mr [redacted] , ourselves and the Revdex.comIt is our hope that through this forum we can come to amicable agreement Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 15, 2014/03/04) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) They are lying Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 13, 2014/03/03) */ Mr [redacted] would like you to believe that we have acted in bad faith when in fact we have tried to help himFor example, Mr [redacted] claims he had the home professionally cleaned yet the oven and refrigerator were dirty, drawers in the bathroom and kitchen were also dirtyMr [redacted] was not however charged for this as he had written on his move in form that the house was dirty when he moved inWe did this on several items written down and because they were on the original check in he was not charged Mr [redacted] has not been charged for any items that were on his original check in formWe have explained this to Mr [redacted] over and over with no willingness on his part to understandMr [redacted] has not been "Duped." The materials sent to Mr [redacted] clearly states that the pre-check out is not the final check out and that Mr [redacted] was still in position of the property after we left the pre check out and anything could of happen while he was still in position of the homeie: scratches on the door, smoke detector taken downMr [redacted] turned in the keys the following day Mr [redacted] claims I have not tried to work with himI had to beg Mr [redacted] to put in writing what he disagrees with so we could go to the home owner and ask what they wanted to doAfter several request for him to do so he finally didI personally went to the home owner to see how he felt about allowing Mr [redacted] to go back into the property and fix the things he was charged forIt was my mere coincidence that the homeowners answer was given to us when they did and had absolutely nothing to do with his filing with the Revdex.comMr [redacted] was offered the opportunity to return to the property and correct the items he was charge for but he refusedOak Tree would like to find a resolution for thisIt appears Mr [redacted] is not interested in resolving anything, but instead just wants to smear our good record Mr [redacted] was only charged for items not on his original check in form stating the condition of the propertyIt was Mr [redacted] responsibility to go over his original check in form and make sure there were no discrepancies between what the home looked like when he moved in as to how it looked when he moved outAs he lived in the home this should have been easy for him to do Oak Tree Property Management would be happy to have mediation with the Revdex.com and Mr [redacted] at any time
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/18) */
Mr *** signed the rental contract on March 26th at 9:00amMr *** was informed at that time we had received authorization to have the property cleanedHowever, The cleaning company was not able to clean the property prior to
his signing of the rental agreementSince Mr*** was not moving in right away he gave us a written letter authorizing us to give the cleaning company a key to allow them to go into the propertyThe home was cleaned on March 28th In the interest of compromise the home owner is willing to refund Mr*** $(one hundredI am attaching a copy of the work order and bill for the cleaning, the letter from Mr*** authorizing a key to be given to the cleaning company prior to him moving in and Mr *** additions to the check in list which makes no mention of the house being dirty
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2014/05/19) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
In good faith, I will also compromise and agree that the homeowner will keep $of the $cleaning deposit that was not refunded
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2014/02/07) */
When a tenant gives notice to move, our office mails the tenant a packet providing instructions on our move out procedures. Mr. [redacted] was sent this packet on December 5, 2013. This packet informs the tenant the property is to be...
returned in the same condition as received. The property should not have any conditions/damages which were not noted on the original check in form provided the tenant at move in.
We are providing a copy of the packet sent to Mr. [redacted] highlighting sections related to his responsibilities at move out.
When we began management of this property, Mr. [redacted] was already residing in the house. Therefore the original move in form with the prior management company was what we based our decisions for charges against his security deposit. To insure accuracy of the deductions, all charges were confirmed with the property owner who had firsthand knowledge of the condition
of the house.
In the beginning, Mr. [redacted] was not upset about the charges made against his deposit, he was upset he was charged for items he was not allowed to correct before his move out. In the interest of compromise, we recently offered Mr. [redacted] the opportunity to re-enter the property and make the necessary corrections to receive a full refund of his security deposit. Mr. [redacted] refused our offer.
Throughout this entire process Mr. [redacted] has been very difficult to work with. He has made good on his threats to damage our credibility by posting negative reviews about our company on numerous web sites included the Revdex.com.
We have tried to work with Mr. [redacted] to resolve this situation, but have been unsuccessful. As such, we are requesting a mediation meeting between Mr. [redacted], ourselves and the Revdex.com. It is our hope that through this forum we can come to amicable agreement.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 15, 2014/03/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They are lying
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2014/03/03) */
Mr. [redacted] would like you to believe that we have acted in bad faith when in fact we have tried to help him. For example, Mr. [redacted] claims he had the home professionally cleaned yet the oven and refrigerator were dirty, drawers in the bathroom and kitchen were also dirty. Mr. [redacted] was not however charged for this as he had written on his move in form that the house was dirty when he moved in. We did this on several items written down and because they were on the original check in he was not charged.
Mr. [redacted] has not been charged for any items that were on his original check in form. We have explained this to Mr. [redacted] over and over with no willingness on his part to understand. Mr. [redacted] has not been "Duped." The materials sent to Mr. [redacted] clearly states that the pre-check out is not the final check out and that Mr. [redacted] was still in position of the property after we left the pre check out and anything could of happen while he was still in position of the home. ie: scratches on the door, smoke detector taken down. Mr. [redacted] turned in the keys the following day.
Mr. [redacted] claims I have not tried to work with him. I had to beg Mr. [redacted] to put in writing what he disagrees with so we could go to the home owner and ask what they wanted to do. After several request for him to do so he finally did. I personally went to the home owner to see how he felt about allowing Mr. [redacted] to go back into the property and fix the things he was charged for. It was my mere coincidence that the homeowners answer was given to us when they did and had absolutely nothing to do with his filing with the Revdex.com. Mr. [redacted] was offered the opportunity to return to the property and correct the items he was charge for but he refused. Oak Tree would like to find a resolution for this. It appears Mr. [redacted] is not interested in resolving anything, but instead just wants to smear our good record.
Mr. [redacted] was only charged for items not on his original check in form stating the condition of the property. It was Mr. [redacted] responsibility to go over his original check in form and make sure there were no discrepancies between what the home looked like when he moved in as to how it looked when he moved out. As he lived in the home this should have been easy for him to do.
Oak Tree Property Management would be happy to have mediation with the Revdex.com and Mr. [redacted] at any time.
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 7, 2014/02/07) */ When a tenant gives notice to move, our office mails the tenant a packet providing instructions on our move out proceduresMr [redacted] was sent this packet on December 5, This packet informs the tenant the property is to be returned in the same condition as receivedThe property should not have any conditions/damages which were not noted on the original check in form provided the tenant at move in We are providing a copy of the packet sent to Mr [redacted] highlighting sections related to his responsibilities at move out When we began management of this property, Mr [redacted] was already residing in the houseTherefore the original move in form with the prior management company was what we based our decisions for charges against his security depositTo insure accuracy of the deductions, all charges were confirmed with the property owner who had firsthand knowledge of the condition of the house In the beginning, Mr [redacted] was not upset about the charges made against his deposit, he was upset he was charged for items he was not allowed to correct before his move outIn the interest of compromise, we recently offered Mr [redacted] the opportunity to re-enter the property and make the necessary corrections to receive a full refund of his security depositMr [redacted] refused our offer Throughout this entire process Mr [redacted] has been very difficult to work withHe has made good on his threats to damage our credibility by posting negative reviews about our company on numerous web sites included the Revdex.com We have tried to work with Mr [redacted] to resolve this situation, but have been unsuccessfulAs such, we are requesting a mediation meeting between Mr [redacted] , ourselves and the Revdex.comIt is our hope that through this forum we can come to amicable agreement Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 15, 2014/03/04) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) They are lying Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 13, 2014/03/03) */ Mr [redacted] would like you to believe that we have acted in bad faith when in fact we have tried to help himFor example, Mr [redacted] claims he had the home professionally cleaned yet the oven and refrigerator were dirty, drawers in the bathroom and kitchen were also dirtyMr [redacted] was not however charged for this as he had written on his move in form that the house was dirty when he moved inWe did this on several items written down and because they were on the original check in he was not charged Mr [redacted] has not been charged for any items that were on his original check in formWe have explained this to Mr [redacted] over and over with no willingness on his part to understandMr [redacted] has not been "Duped." The materials sent to Mr [redacted] clearly states that the pre-check out is not the final check out and that Mr [redacted] was still in position of the property after we left the pre check out and anything could of happen while he was still in position of the homeie: scratches on the door, smoke detector taken downMr [redacted] turned in the keys the following day Mr [redacted] claims I have not tried to work with himI had to beg Mr [redacted] to put in writing what he disagrees with so we could go to the home owner and ask what they wanted to doAfter several request for him to do so he finally didI personally went to the home owner to see how he felt about allowing Mr [redacted] to go back into the property and fix the things he was charged forIt was my mere coincidence that the homeowners answer was given to us when they did and had absolutely nothing to do with his filing with the Revdex.comMr [redacted] was offered the opportunity to return to the property and correct the items he was charge for but he refusedOak Tree would like to find a resolution for thisIt appears Mr [redacted] is not interested in resolving anything, but instead just wants to smear our good record Mr [redacted] was only charged for items not on his original check in form stating the condition of the propertyIt was Mr [redacted] responsibility to go over his original check in form and make sure there were no discrepancies between what the home looked like when he moved in as to how it looked when he moved outAs he lived in the home this should have been easy for him to do Oak Tree Property Management would be happy to have mediation with the Revdex.com and Mr [redacted] at any time
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/18) */
Mr *** signed the rental contract on March 26th at 9:00amMr *** was informed at that time we had received authorization to have the property cleanedHowever, The cleaning company was not able to clean the property prior to
his signing of the rental agreementSince Mr*** was not moving in right away he gave us a written letter authorizing us to give the cleaning company a key to allow them to go into the propertyThe home was cleaned on March 28th In the interest of compromise the home owner is willing to refund Mr*** $(one hundredI am attaching a copy of the work order and bill for the cleaning, the letter from Mr*** authorizing a key to be given to the cleaning company prior to him moving in and Mr *** additions to the check in list which makes no mention of the house being dirty
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2014/05/19) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
In good faith, I will also compromise and agree that the homeowner will keep $of the $cleaning deposit that was not refunded
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2014/02/07) */
When a tenant gives notice to move, our office mails the tenant a packet providing instructions on our move out procedures. Mr. [redacted] was sent this packet on December 5, 2013. This packet informs the tenant the property is to be...
returned in the same condition as received. The property should not have any conditions/damages which were not noted on the original check in form provided the tenant at move in.
We are providing a copy of the packet sent to Mr. [redacted] highlighting sections related to his responsibilities at move out.
When we began management of this property, Mr. [redacted] was already residing in the house. Therefore the original move in form with the prior management company was what we based our decisions for charges against his security deposit. To insure accuracy of the deductions, all charges were confirmed with the property owner who had firsthand knowledge of the condition
of the house.
In the beginning, Mr. [redacted] was not upset about the charges made against his deposit, he was upset he was charged for items he was not allowed to correct before his move out. In the interest of compromise, we recently offered Mr. [redacted] the opportunity to re-enter the property and make the necessary corrections to receive a full refund of his security deposit. Mr. [redacted] refused our offer.
Throughout this entire process Mr. [redacted] has been very difficult to work with. He has made good on his threats to damage our credibility by posting negative reviews about our company on numerous web sites included the Revdex.com.
We have tried to work with Mr. [redacted] to resolve this situation, but have been unsuccessful. As such, we are requesting a mediation meeting between Mr. [redacted], ourselves and the Revdex.com. It is our hope that through this forum we can come to amicable agreement.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 15, 2014/03/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They are lying
Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2014/03/03) */
Mr. [redacted] would like you to believe that we have acted in bad faith when in fact we have tried to help him. For example, Mr. [redacted] claims he had the home professionally cleaned yet the oven and refrigerator were dirty, drawers in the bathroom and kitchen were also dirty. Mr. [redacted] was not however charged for this as he had written on his move in form that the house was dirty when he moved in. We did this on several items written down and because they were on the original check in he was not charged.
Mr. [redacted] has not been charged for any items that were on his original check in form. We have explained this to Mr. [redacted] over and over with no willingness on his part to understand. Mr. [redacted] has not been "Duped." The materials sent to Mr. [redacted] clearly states that the pre-check out is not the final check out and that Mr. [redacted] was still in position of the property after we left the pre check out and anything could of happen while he was still in position of the home. ie: scratches on the door, smoke detector taken down. Mr. [redacted] turned in the keys the following day.
Mr. [redacted] claims I have not tried to work with him. I had to beg Mr. [redacted] to put in writing what he disagrees with so we could go to the home owner and ask what they wanted to do. After several request for him to do so he finally did. I personally went to the home owner to see how he felt about allowing Mr. [redacted] to go back into the property and fix the things he was charged for. It was my mere coincidence that the homeowners answer was given to us when they did and had absolutely nothing to do with his filing with the Revdex.com. Mr. [redacted] was offered the opportunity to return to the property and correct the items he was charge for but he refused. Oak Tree would like to find a resolution for this. It appears Mr. [redacted] is not interested in resolving anything, but instead just wants to smear our good record.
Mr. [redacted] was only charged for items not on his original check in form stating the condition of the property. It was Mr. [redacted] responsibility to go over his original check in form and make sure there were no discrepancies between what the home looked like when he moved in as to how it looked when he moved out. As he lived in the home this should have been easy for him to do.
Oak Tree Property Management would be happy to have mediation with the Revdex.com and Mr. [redacted] at any time.