Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***
*** *** and her husband signed a legally binding Texas Apartment Association(TAA) Lease Contract with *** ***, their landlord and owner of *** ***
*** ***Paragraph 13.1, page 2, of their TAA Lease Contract states, “You must promptly pay or reimburse us for loss, damage, consequential damages,government fines or charges, or cost of repairs or services in the dwelling because of a lease or rules violation; improper use; negligence; other conductby you, your invitees, your occupants, or your guests; or any other cause not due to our negligence or fault as allowed by law, except for damages by acts of God to the extent theycouldn’t be mitigated by your action or inaction.” The damage to their home’s central air conditioning drain line and subsequent leakage into the dwelling was unquestionably caused by an animal that chewed the drainline until it became crimped closedThis damage was not caused by *** ***. *** ***’s lease contract clearly states that the cost of repairing thedamage is her responsibility *** *** initially denied any responsibility for the damage because the HVAC technician’s digital photo did not have a time/date stampNow that I haveprovided irrefutable proof of the validity of the digital photo, she has simply chosen to deny any responsibility for the damage Again, I am not alleging that *** *** is keeping an unauthorized animal in her homeHowever, the animal that caused the damage to the drain line anddefecated in the yard was not authorized by *** *** or *** ***, which means it was unauthorized.There is no denying that the damage to the drain line and subsequent water leak in the dwelling was caused by an animalWe have a lease contract that legally placesthe responsibility for the cost to repair the drain line with *** ***As I stated earlier, if *** *** feels she isn’t responsible for the cost torepair the drain line and would like me to approach her landlord and request that he pay for the service, I need a plausible explanation from her as to howthe damage occurredIt doesn’t have to be complicatedJust a reasonable, rational, persuasive explanation that I can present to the property owner forhis considerationI get it that she doesn’t want to pay for the repairShe’s made that abundantly apparentSimply not wanting to pay does not constitute acompelling argument to sway the property owner to eat the repair cost. Respectfully,*** ***Broker
Hunter Rentals & Property Management goes to great lengths to ensure that all its residents are familiar with the requirements of their lease contract and what is expected of them at the time they surrender their home when moving out. In this case, the renter and/or her Power of Attorney (POA)...
received and signed for a copy of the Hunter Rentals & Property Management cleaning requirements at the commencement of her initial lease contract. The cleaning guidelines, if followed, enable our residents to vacate with no cleaning deficiencies. The cleaning guidelines are essentially a resident’s roadmap to passing the cleaning portion of the move-out inspection. The renter in this case also received and signed for a second copy of the cleaning guidelines at the time she submitted her written notice to vacate. Approximately one week after receiving the renter’s notice to vacate, Hunter Rentals provided her with yet a third copy of the cleaning guidelines and a letter acknowledging her notice to vacate. The move-out acknowledgement letter provided her with step-by-step instructions specifically intended to assist her with passing her cleaning inspection and maximizing her security deposit refund. Hunter Rentals did not schedule the renter’s move-out inspection. The renter selected the exact date and time that she desired her move-out inspection to be performed, which was July 29, 2016, at 8:45 AM. She specifically selected this date as the time the dwelling would be returned to Hunter Rentals in clean, ready-to-surrender condition. The move-out acknowledgement letter the renter received several weeks prior to vacating specifically states, “Begin preparing for your final inspection now. Allow yourself enough time to properly prepare your home and yard for your move-out inspection. No cleaning is allowed at or during the move-out inspection.” The Hunter Rentals property inspectors have a set amount of time allocated for each inspection performed, which is why inspection appointments are scheduled in advance. We strive to provide a detailed and thorough inspection for each renter within the allotted time. It is for this reason that we do not allow cleaning during the move-out inspection. Our property inspectors do not have sufficient time to conduct an inspection if they must stand idle while waiting for the resident to complete his or her cleaning or go back through the property to re-inspect items that were initially noted as dirty. By her own admission, the renter in this case stated that she was still cleaning her home when the inspector arrived. She simply didn’t follow our cleaning guidelines and was ill prepared for the inspection date and time she herself scheduled. The move-out inspection performed by our inspector included four legal sized pages of written notes and hundreds of photos. On her written notes, the inspector identified (circled) in excess of fifty deficient surfaces, such as floors, base boards, appliances, blinds, ceiling fans, etc. To further document these deficiencies, she wiped every deficient surface with a Clorox wipe and cataloged each item by taking photos. In this case, we provided the renter with over one hundred digital cleaning photos taken by the inspector. In the photos we provided to the renter, dead bugs could be seen in the light fixture globes, the ceiling fans were coated with heavy black silt and dust, the inside of the dishwasher was excessively soiled, the stove hood vent was caked with heavy grease, there was pet hair on the tile floors, the kitchen sink faucet was caked with food residue, there was heavy hair and discolorations on the exterior of the commodes as well as dirty streaks in the commode basins. Every blind and window inspected was dirty, every base board, every door, the refrigerator crisper covers were covered with heavy food residue, the refrigerator kick plate was dirty as were the refrigerator door seals. There were walls with food splatters, light switches that were soiled and smeared with dirty finger prints. In short, virtually every surface, appliance, and item in the renter’s home was in need of cleaning. In this case, the renter failed to follow our valuable guidelines and cleaning instructions in spite of our proactive attempts to assist her. She clearly did not allow herself enough time to prepare the property for her move-out inspection as evidenced by the numerous cleaning deficiencies we documented and the fact that she was still cleaning her home when our inspector arrived. The renter set the date and time of her move-out inspection and Hunter Rentals provided a property inspector to perform a fair, detailed, and thorough inspection of the property. We could have rescheduled the renter’s move-out inspection had she given us the courtesy of a phone call prior to the morning of July 29, 2016, to tell us her home was not ready for the inspection. The renter has stated that our property inspector soiled her home and caused the cleaning deficiencies while performing her move-out inspection, which is false. Our photos tell a much different story. We have spent countless hours corresponding with the renter over this matter and have provided her with photos and documentation. It is clear from her persistence that she is not interested in the facts or anything we have to say. She refuses to take any personal responsibility for the condition in which she relinquished her home. The cleaning charges to the renter’s security deposit are fair and without error. There is nothing further we can do for the renter in this case.
Tell us why here...Dear Consumer, Theft is a crime. Steeling is illegal. In your complaint, you have accused me of theft. Since I have not committed...
theft and have never stolen anything from any customer in over thirty years of managing property in the Fort Hood area, you have defamed me and have caused harm to my business and reputation. Defamation and libel are illegal and I will be taking legal action against you.In Cause # [redacted], Hunter Rentals V. [redacted] and [redacted], a case in which I sued the former renters in the Bell County Court, the presiding judge found the [redacted]s guilty of defamation, tortious interference with prospective relations, and fraud. Like you, the [redacted]s defamed me via the Revdex.com, a platform that is viewed by thousands of people. Either you retract your complaint in its entirety, or rest assured my attorney will initiate our lawsuit this week. With regard to your complaint, you state that you were required to pay a $1,200 security deposit on a house that, “was definitely not worth the $875 in rent we were paying per month.” Hunter Rentals requires a security deposit that is equal to one month of rent. We only require a higher security deposit for prospective renters that have, for example, a bad mark on their credit report for owing a large sum of money to their former landlord. You state that you only rented the house because you were staying in a motel with your infant son and needed a house. Your statement leads one to believe that the house you rented was your only option, which is an inaccurate. There are over 350 property management companies in the Fort Hood area. At the time you rented the house, we had a total of thirty properties available, with seven houses renting for $875 or less, and four houses at $975 or less. You had plenty of housing options. In your complaint, you state that you made improvements to the house, but fail to mention a single improvement. Having personally viewed the house last week, I found no improvements to the property. I checked all of our records for the last year, and found no e-mails or communications from you requesting permission to make improvements. I found no communications between my office and your landlords, the property owners, regarding proposed improvements you wished to make. Ironically, the entire premise of your complaint is that you are being ripped off. Yet, Hunter Rentals has charged you nothing! The only action we have taken is the move-out inspection we performed on May 22, 2017. At that time, my inspector simply recorded the condition of the house you surrendered, nothing more. The adjudication of your security deposit will not take place for several weeks. If the house was cleaner at the time you surrendered it versus when you accepted it last year, there is no need for concern. Attached are several of close to 300 photos I personally took last week after you vacated. Respectfully, [redacted]Broker
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: We are not at fault for the damage equipment. I quickly tried to resolve this matter as requested in the email sent to us ( please see quote)..."We will need you to address the unauthorized pet issue with our office as soon as possible".As I stated in my previous email I went to the company on 9/2/15 to address this matter and was denied three times. My husband and I had the chance to review the attached pictures, and we are still not in aggreance with the technician findings. The pictures reflect that damages were done, it just doesn't reflect that were are to be at fault for them. My husband and I did not find any feces in the yard on 9/2/15, as the worker and [redacted] stated they both did. At this point the home owner may need to get involved as we don't own a dog and should not be responsible for this bill. The company stated the following... Please see the quote "With these findings, expect to receive a maintenance bill for this repair as this was not fair wear and tear and was caused by an unauthorized dog".My husband and I hope that the appropriate action(s) will be taken when resolving this matter.Regards,
Regards,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:First and foremost, I responded promptly to the charges that were deducted from my deposit. Instead of responding with "Mrs. [redacted] please allow us time to research this and we will get back to you" I got no response. Leading me to be even more upset then I initially was. The statement I sent the Revdex.com was the exact same as what I posted as my reviews go for this company. I added some additional information to my complaint with the Revdex.com. Please do not insinuate that I made up additional accusations and plastered them all over social media, as this is exactly what I sent the Revdex.com as well. When I paid my rent for October 2017, I paid through the payment network in which online it showed my balance of $485, which was paid in full. I have always based my amount due on whatever bill was reflected through the network. I would greatly appreciate to see what additional cleaning needed to be done so that I can have a peace of mind as to where my additional $300 went. Next, in multiple emails I explained how unhappy I was with this home, and everything that has been going on, and also explained that I travel for my job and spent most nights in a hotel versus in this home. This would explain as to why I never changed the filter in my unit as 80% of my 12 month stay I was physically not in the unit, and had my AC turned off while I was traveling. I am requesting to see pictures of the AC Filter you guys claimed to install before move in October of 2016, as I can insure you I never purchased a replacement filter because prior to moving in there were 2 provided, both cut. You are charging me because the filter was not the proper side, yet that was what was provided to me. I am a little curious with this one though.. Because to my knowledge you guys preformed an inspection a few months prior to move out, and I am wondering as to why the filter wasn't brought to my attention at that point in time. I even emailed your office to receive an update from the inspection and was told that you guys have not received the report yet. Had I known at this point in time about the filter, it would've been rectified. In my dispute I did not dispute the drip pans, the crayons or the light bulbs. I disputed the AC Filters and the charge to clean additionally. There is absolutely no reason to bring up these charges when that is something I agreed with. Through out my stay with Hunter Rentals, and the multiple correspondence back in forth I have kept my composure. I do not apologize for getting upset over these additional charges. It is clear that your definition of "Move-In Ready" and my definition are two different ones, and I am okay with that. You mentioned in your response that you needed to have adequate time for the ceiling to dry before repair. I emailed July 25, 2017 at 8:07 AM about the leak with the bath tub. The technician came out July 26th, and left me a note. On August 12th, I sent the following email - "The leak in my bathroom has yet to be fixed. There is absolutely no sense of urgency for a ceiling that is leaking from a toilet upstairs. This is beyond frustrating and I'm so fed up. I turned my notice in today" The following day, August 13th at 5:13 PM, I sent a follow up email. On August 14th, Ida Gayton responded to my email that stated they are requesting an estimate to see about the cost of the hole being fixsed. On September 4, 2017 at 2:11 PM I sent an additional email requesting someone to please come repair the hole. This is a month and a half past the time that the hole was created. This is more than enough time to let the damage "dry." Back In September when I inquired about an additional stay it was due to the fact that I was not going to be in town to move my belongings. It was not because I loved staying at this residence. The reason and sole purpose of selecting this home is because I was newly divorced and needed to get back on my feet. Understand, that this was my choice to select this home and I told my self It would only be a year until I can get into a home that was best fit for me and my two daughters. Back In September I was gone 20 days out of the month traveling for my job. I wasn't entirely too sure if I would be out by October 31st (The date I put my move out notice for) Or if I would need more time. I am not entirely too sure why an inquiring mind is being used against me. Lastly, I was searching for a home on Trulia and stumbled across a home that I thought looked nice. I did not know who the company was that leased the property, I simply hit the "Contact Now" button to inquire about the property. Had I known it was your property, I would've moved alone. I did politely get a response that the property was no longer available and I moved right along. You are taking the one time I inquired about another property, and the one time I inquired about possibly extending my stay as me actually appreciating your company, and what you guys have to offer. Since you seem to have all the emails and correspondence between each other, do you have the email where I asked about having someone take over my lease? That right there is how unhappy I was, that I was willing to pay the additional deposit, and have a "Room mate" to take over my lease. Now it is clear that we aren't going to see eye to eye, or that you are even willing to help or assist in anyway possible about my frustrations. I would think that the multiple emails sent back in forth to each other, and the multiple times I spoke about being unsatisfied that you guys would understand the situation and think about a different solution versus being a money hungry property management company. Is it possible to reimburse for the air filters and half of what I paid to clean the property? A total of $100 is what I am requesting at this point in time, as well as the details of the additional cleaning that needed to be done.I as well have pictures, and emails that I would be more than happy to send in response to what is needing to be addressed.
Regards,
[redacted]
Dear [redacted] Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to reply. On Wednesday, September 2, 2015, my HVAC technician went to [redacted]...
[redacted] to repair the air conditioning system drain line, which was obstructed and leaking inside of the dwelling. [redacted] had requested this service. The technician discovered that the exterior portion of the drain line (outside of the house) had been severely chewed by an animal to the point that it was crimped and preventing water to drain from the evaporator unit. My technician further observed dog feces in the yard. [redacted] doesn’t feel she should have to pay for the service call to repair the damaged line because the service technician’s photo of the dog feces doesn’t have a time/date stamp. All digital photos contain encrypted data.I have attached a copy of the digital photo taken by my maintenance technician along with a display of the photo’s encrypted data, which clearly shows that the photo was taken on Wednesday, September 2, 2015, at 9:05 AM. I have also attached a copy of my maintenance technician’s service log for that entire day. The service log clearly reflects that my maintenance technician was present at [redacted]. I have also attached a photo of the portion of the damaged drain line my technician repaired, which clearly reflects damage caused by an animal chewing on it. Additionally, I toowent to [redacted] about 2:00 PM on Wednesday, September 2, 2015, and also observed dog feces in the yard.We have not accused [redacted] of keeping an unauthorized animal nor are we charging her any fees for keeping an unauthorized pet. However, the animal that defecated in her yard and severely chewed her A/C drain line is not a pet that I or the property owner authorized. It is worth noting that [redacted]’s rear yard is entirely fenced and secure and she keeps the gate locked. If [redacted] would like her landlord, the owner of [redacted], to pay for the animal damage to the A/C drain line, I’m going to need something a bit more substantial than a denial based upon a photo of dog feces that lacks a time/date stamp. Respectfully, [redacted]Broker
The consumer rented an apartment from Hunter Rentals and Property Management on October 11, 2016, and subsequent to submitting her written notice to vacate, she surrendered the apartment on October 24, 2017. As required by Texas statute, we adjudicated the consumer’s security deposit within thirty...
days of her surrender of the apartment, and she received her security deposit statement along with a list of itemized deductions, on Friday, November 17, 2017, at 2:15 PM. On Friday, November 17, 2017, approximately thirty-three minutes after she received her security deposit statement, rather than allow us adequate time to audit and review her account, the consumer sent us an e-mail in which she announced her intent to write reviews about us (Hunter Rentals) on every available platform. Almost immediately, we discovered that the consumer had already written visceral, dishonest, and harmful postings about us on social media. The consumer’s lease contract expired on September 30, 2017, but she opted to accept a month-to-month agreement, and agreed to pay an additional $50 of rent for the month of October. Although the consumer failed to pay the required $50 month-to-month fee, I waived the fee, which allowed her to save the $50 and avoid late payment penalties for the month of October. The consumer paid a security deposit in the amount of $485. The consumer was required to surrender the apartment cleaned to the standards she agreed upon in her lease contract, and to provide a receipt for having the carpets professionally steam cleaned. The carpet cleaners she hired did an excellent job and the carpets passed our move-out inspection. The consumer informed us that she hired and paid a company to clean her apartment prior to her move-out inspection. However, the apartment was insufficiently cleaned and subsequently failed our move-out inspection. The consumer entered into a contract with a cleaning company, she paid them money for their services, and they accepted her money and did an extremely poor job of cleaning her apartment. I am at a loss as to why the consumer is upset with us regarding her failed cleaning inspection when she hired someone else to clean her apartment and they did an unacceptable job and took her money. The consumer had ample opportunity to properly clean and prepare her apartment for her move-out inspection. The consumer received and accepted our published guidelines for the move-out inspection and cleaning requirements on three separate occasions. The first copy she received was when she signed her lease contract. Contractually, she knew exactly what was required of her in order to pass her move-out inspection. She received a second copy of our cleaning guidelines at the time she submitted her written notice to vacate on August 12, which was approximately seventy-seven days prior to her move-out inspection. She received yet a third copy of the cleaning guidelines approximately one week after she submitted her notice to vacate along with a move-out notice acknowledgement letter from us. In the letter, we outlined what the consumer needed to do in order to receive a full security deposit refund and to pass her move-out inspection. Yet, in spite of our efforts to assist her passing her move-out inspection, she failed to follow our cleaning guidelines and didn’t even bother to show up for this extremely important inspection. The date and time of the move-out inspection was set by the consumer, not us. Although the consumer failed her cleaning inspection, we gave her a discounted cleaning rate, and reduced the normal full cleaning charge by $50. Between the month-to-month fee we waived and the discounted cleaning charge, I saved the consumer $100. In her letter, the consumer has insinuated that her apartment was filthy at the time she moved in. This is entirely false. We performed a thorough and detailed move-in inspection of the apartment and took hundreds of digital photos. The apartment was satisfactorily cleaned to our standards at the time she accepted it, with one exception. The mini blind in the living room was dusty. Per her lease contract, the consumer conducted her own condition inspection of the apartment within forty-eight hours of signing her lease agreement. On her written condition inspection, the only item she noted as being dirty was the living room mini blind, and she provided us a photo as evidence. The $50 discount she received off of the full cost of cleaning her apartment is more than adequate compensation for this one item. In addition to the cost of cleaning, the consumer had five additional deficiencies charged to her security deposit. The first involved the apartment’s air conditioning filter. At the time she moved into the apartment, the consumer was provided a new, clean 14 x 18 air filter as well as a second spare filter of the same size. At the time of her move-out inspection, we discovered the air filter was the incorrect size and had been cut along the entire edge in order to make it fit in the unit. For this reason, the consumer was charged $25 to have a technician purchase and install the proper size filter. On Friday, November 17, 2017, at 2:44 PM, the consumer sent us an e-mail in which she stated, “The AC filter that was in my unit was the exact filter I moved in with. I didn’t change or remove (expletive)!” This statement alone is justification for her to be charged for the cost of replacing the air filter. The consumer was required to replace her air filter monthly. There is no way her air filter could be clean and new after a year of use. But placing that statement aside, we have photos of the new filter that was in her apartment one year ago, and photos of the incorrect filter that she left in the unit. The latter had been cut to fit and is an entirely different filter in both color and quality. The consumer was required to replace all four stove drip pans prior to surrendering the apartment. She had brand new drip pans at the time she moved into the apartment. The photos taken during her move-out inspection clearly show they are dirty and not new. In her child’s bedroom, our inspector noted crayon drawings on the windowsill. The crayon drawings were not present when the consumer moved into the apartment. While performing her own 48-hour condition inspection of the apartment last year, the consumer even provided us with a photo of this same windowsill, with no crayon drawings on it. Lastly, the consumer was charged for two light bulbs that were found inoperative at the time of her move-out inspection. The consumer was responsible to replace all burned out light bulbs prior to surrendering the apartment. Photos taken during her move-in inspection clearly show the light bulbs were working. Photos taken during her move-out inspection show these two light bulbs out. In summary, our adjudication of the consumer’s security deposit was spot on and without error. If the Revdex.com would like to view all of the cleaning deficiency photos as well as photos that validate the five additional itemized charges, I will be happy to mail them to the Revdex.com. The Revdex.com’s current format for responding to consumer disputes does not allow me at attach all of the supporting photos and documents. The consumer states that one of her problems was that her apartment became infested with bed bugs three months after she moved in. At the time the consumer moved into her apartment, no insect infestation existed. We even had a licensed pest control company perform a courtesy treatment and inspection of her apartment at the time she signed her lease contract, which is our customary policy. As part of her lease contract, the consumer signed a bed bug addendum, in which she agreed that the apartment was insect free. Additionally, the consumer’s lease contract placed the responsibility of pest control upon her. The property owner, her landlord, had the responsibility to maintain pest control on the exterior of the apartment building. The bed bug addendum the consumer signed provided her with important information regarding everything she needed to know about these insects. It is indeed unfortunate that bed bugs were introduced into her apartment, but the consumer and/or her occupants were responsible for the infestation she experienced. This had nothing to do with us or the landlord. The consumer states that while she lived in the apartment, a leak from the apartment above her bathroom began to drip over her shower/tub. On July 25, 2017, at 8:07 AM, the consumer e-mailed us to report that she had a leak above her bathtub. She stated that she could hear the sound of dripping water. That same day, we created a work order (WO#[redacted]), and assigned a technician to go to the apartment. Within twenty-four hours, the technician entered the apartment, and with the cooperation of the upstairs renter, was able to determine the source and cause of the dripping water. The next day, a licensed plumber repaired the leak (WO#[redacted]). The technician that investigated the leak cut a small hole in the bathroom ceiling. The drywall man that eventually patched the ceiling cut a 1’ x 1’ hole in order to properly patch the damaged area. We deliberately delayed the ceiling repair in order for the ceiling to adequately dry out and to ensure that no further leaks developed. The hole that was cut in the ceiling of the bathroom did not create a roach infestation. Any roaches the consumer observed were likely already present. On Sunday, September 17, 2017, at 8:34 PM, the consumer e-mailed us to report that her water heater was leaking. The next morning, at approximately 9:30 AM, our HVAC technician went to the apartment and discovered that the air conditioner drain line was cracked below the concrete foundation. Within twenty-four hours, we had a contractor replace the cracked drain line. The air conditioner was operating properly and draining fine when the technician completed the repair. The apartment that the consumer rented from us was built in the 1970s and is approximately forty years old. It is the oldest apartment building we manage and consists of four two-bedroom, one bathroom apartments. The monthly rent for each of these apartments makes them the least expensive apartments in our inventory. Although the apartments are not new, they are in good, tenable condition. We would not manage them if they were in poor condition. People that rent these apartments do so because they are extremely affordable. The consumer was not forced to rent her apartment. She accepted it willingly at the price and terms being offered. Clearly, it suited her needs at that time. Regardless of age, new or old, any property can experience the same maintenance issues with leaks, air conditioner problems, etc. And while older properties will generally have a higher incidence of needed maintenance, we always responded to the consumer’s repair needs in a timely, professional manner. I am of the opinion that the consumer, within minutes of receiving her partial security deposit refund, assaulted us on social media (and as she stated, “every available platform.”) because she was counting on a full refund of her deposit. Rather than engage us in a civil manner and support her security deposit dispute with facts, she has instead chosen to state falsehoods and express her disdain for us via social media. Since we did not err in our resolution of her security deposit, no amount of hating and intimidation by her will compel us to alter the just and legal deductions from her security deposit. The consumer has posted many terrible and harmful statements about Hunter Rentals on social media, yet on September 17, 2017, at 4:09 PM, she inquired about extending her tenancy with us. On Wednesday, September 20, 2017, at 8:41 AM, the consumer e-mailed us and inquired about renting one of our available single-family homes. On the one hand, the consumer finds our company and services acceptable enough to extend her lease or to rent another property from us. On the other hand, she is telling prospective customers, “Please run away from this company, they will haunt you in your dreams.” The consumer’s failure to accept personal responsibility for the outcome of her security deposit resolution and multiple attacks upon the integrity and reputation of Hunter Rentals in the absence of just cause are reprehensible. Within the next twenty-four hours, I shall provide the consumer with photos of cleaning deficiencies that warranted the full cleaning of her apartment. I shall also provide her with photos that substantiate the five other itemized deficiencies for which she was held liable. Respectfully, [redacted] Broker
The owners of the property spent several thousand dollars performing make-ready repairs and painting the interior of the dwelling prior to the consumer’s occupancy in February 2013. We have detailed documentation, photos, and invoices to support this. Any claims to the contrary are simply false. I stand by my previous assertion that the consumer surrendered the house in untenable condition. The home in question is a relatively expensive rental property that falls within the parameters of what is considered high-end for the Fort Hood area. The consumer surrendered the property with the interior walls excessively soiled, smudged, worn, and marked. The leasing director that the consumer spoke with on the phone had absolutely no involvement with the resolution of his security deposit. Unable to answer the consumer’s questions, the leasing director politely reminded the consumer that e-mailing his questions and concerns was the best option for a timely and informative reply. As I stated previously, any dispute arising from the resolution of a security deposit requires a thorough audit of the consumer’s account. This process involves our examination of hundreds of photos, multiple visits to the property, reviewing our inspector’s detailed inspection notes, and interviewing contractors and maintenance personnel that have performed work on the rental dwelling. The many hours it takes to provide a detailed and thorough review cannot be accomplished over the phone, which is why we instructed the consumer to e-mail us. The consumer states that, “This whole thing could have been avoided if they would have picked up the phone to talk.” I submit that had the consumer actually read his security deposit statement when he received it, he would have realized that he was not charged for painting the kitchen and bathroom cabinets. By failing to read his security deposit statement, the consumer wrongfully accused us of charging him for painting the cabinets. Further, had the consumer followed our instructions and e-mailed me with his questions and concerns, I would have replied to him in a timely, detailed manner. I further submit that the consumer’s Revdex.com complaint could have been avoided had he not jumped to conclusions and instead followed our instructions. However, this didn’t happen because in the words of the consumer, “I don’t care if it says to respond by e-mail.” Lastly, the consumer states that he made improvements to the house such as installing a shed at his own expense. The consumer neglected to add that while engaging in direct negotiations with the property owners, it was agreed that in exchange for the shed, the property owners would forgo a scheduled rental rate increase when renewing the lease contract. The consumer and the property owners mutually benefitted from this arrangement.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The response from the company had more faults than what was included in our move out inspection. A representative at the desk of their company when we received our move out inspection told us that the home owners did not have them make the repairs to fill the nail holes in the residence from their previous tenants. We do not agree to the term of the property of being in such poor condition that it could not be rented. We were always very approachable during the duration of our stay and would just want someone to talk to us on the phone. The fact that when we called to talk to the company the person on the phone said absolutely nothing. I don't care if it says to respond by email but I had questions and wanted to talk. This whole thing would have been avoided if they would have picked up the phone to talk. You can't run a business strictly by email. We made improvements to the house such as adding a shed to the property and a garden at our own expense. We didn't ask to be paid for it, but when they make it sound we didn't take care of the property it is a complete exaggeration.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***
*** *** and her husband signed a legally binding Texas Apartment Association(TAA) Lease Contract with *** ***, their landlord and owner of *** ***
*** ***Paragraph 13.1, page 2, of their TAA Lease Contract states, “You must promptly pay or reimburse us for loss, damage, consequential damages,government fines or charges, or cost of repairs or services in the dwelling because of a lease or rules violation; improper use; negligence; other conductby you, your invitees, your occupants, or your guests; or any other cause not due to our negligence or fault as allowed by law, except for damages by acts of God to the extent theycouldn’t be mitigated by your action or inaction.” The damage to their home’s central air conditioning drain line and subsequent leakage into the dwelling was unquestionably caused by an animal that chewed the drainline until it became crimped closedThis damage was not caused by *** ***. *** ***’s lease contract clearly states that the cost of repairing thedamage is her responsibility *** *** initially denied any responsibility for the damage because the HVAC technician’s digital photo did not have a time/date stampNow that I haveprovided irrefutable proof of the validity of the digital photo, she has simply chosen to deny any responsibility for the damage Again, I am not alleging that *** *** is keeping an unauthorized animal in her homeHowever, the animal that caused the damage to the drain line anddefecated in the yard was not authorized by *** *** or *** ***, which means it was unauthorized.There is no denying that the damage to the drain line and subsequent water leak in the dwelling was caused by an animalWe have a lease contract that legally placesthe responsibility for the cost to repair the drain line with *** ***As I stated earlier, if *** *** feels she isn’t responsible for the cost torepair the drain line and would like me to approach her landlord and request that he pay for the service, I need a plausible explanation from her as to howthe damage occurredIt doesn’t have to be complicatedJust a reasonable, rational, persuasive explanation that I can present to the property owner forhis considerationI get it that she doesn’t want to pay for the repairShe’s made that abundantly apparentSimply not wanting to pay does not constitute acompelling argument to sway the property owner to eat the repair cost. Respectfully,*** ***Broker
Hunter Rentals & Property Management goes to great lengths to ensure that all its residents are familiar with the requirements of their lease contract and what is expected of them at the time they surrender their home when moving out. In this case, the renter and/or her Power of Attorney (POA)...
received and signed for a copy of the Hunter Rentals & Property Management cleaning requirements at the commencement of her initial lease contract. The cleaning guidelines, if followed, enable our residents to vacate with no cleaning deficiencies. The cleaning guidelines are essentially a resident’s roadmap to passing the cleaning portion of the move-out inspection. The renter in this case also received and signed for a second copy of the cleaning guidelines at the time she submitted her written notice to vacate. Approximately one week after receiving the renter’s notice to vacate, Hunter Rentals provided her with yet a third copy of the cleaning guidelines and a letter acknowledging her notice to vacate. The move-out acknowledgement letter provided her with step-by-step instructions specifically intended to assist her with passing her cleaning inspection and maximizing her security deposit refund. Hunter Rentals did not schedule the renter’s move-out inspection. The renter selected the exact date and time that she desired her move-out inspection to be performed, which was July 29, 2016, at 8:45 AM. She specifically selected this date as the time the dwelling would be returned to Hunter Rentals in clean, ready-to-surrender condition. The move-out acknowledgement letter the renter received several weeks prior to vacating specifically states, “Begin preparing for your final inspection now. Allow yourself enough time to properly prepare your home and yard for your move-out inspection. No cleaning is allowed at or during the move-out inspection.” The Hunter Rentals property inspectors have a set amount of time allocated for each inspection performed, which is why inspection appointments are scheduled in advance. We strive to provide a detailed and thorough inspection for each renter within the allotted time. It is for this reason that we do not allow cleaning during the move-out inspection. Our property inspectors do not have sufficient time to conduct an inspection if they must stand idle while waiting for the resident to complete his or her cleaning or go back through the property to re-inspect items that were initially noted as dirty. By her own admission, the renter in this case stated that she was still cleaning her home when the inspector arrived. She simply didn’t follow our cleaning guidelines and was ill prepared for the inspection date and time she herself scheduled. The move-out inspection performed by our inspector included four legal sized pages of written notes and hundreds of photos. On her written notes, the inspector identified (circled) in excess of fifty deficient surfaces, such as floors, base boards, appliances, blinds, ceiling fans, etc. To further document these deficiencies, she wiped every deficient surface with a Clorox wipe and cataloged each item by taking photos. In this case, we provided the renter with over one hundred digital cleaning photos taken by the inspector. In the photos we provided to the renter, dead bugs could be seen in the light fixture globes, the ceiling fans were coated with heavy black silt and dust, the inside of the dishwasher was excessively soiled, the stove hood vent was caked with heavy grease, there was pet hair on the tile floors, the kitchen sink faucet was caked with food residue, there was heavy hair and discolorations on the exterior of the commodes as well as dirty streaks in the commode basins. Every blind and window inspected was dirty, every base board, every door, the refrigerator crisper covers were covered with heavy food residue, the refrigerator kick plate was dirty as were the refrigerator door seals. There were walls with food splatters, light switches that were soiled and smeared with dirty finger prints. In short, virtually every surface, appliance, and item in the renter’s home was in need of cleaning. In this case, the renter failed to follow our valuable guidelines and cleaning instructions in spite of our proactive attempts to assist her. She clearly did not allow herself enough time to prepare the property for her move-out inspection as evidenced by the numerous cleaning deficiencies we documented and the fact that she was still cleaning her home when our inspector arrived. The renter set the date and time of her move-out inspection and Hunter Rentals provided a property inspector to perform a fair, detailed, and thorough inspection of the property. We could have rescheduled the renter’s move-out inspection had she given us the courtesy of a phone call prior to the morning of July 29, 2016, to tell us her home was not ready for the inspection. The renter has stated that our property inspector soiled her home and caused the cleaning deficiencies while performing her move-out inspection, which is false. Our photos tell a much different story. We have spent countless hours corresponding with the renter over this matter and have provided her with photos and documentation. It is clear from her persistence that she is not interested in the facts or anything we have to say. She refuses to take any personal responsibility for the condition in which she relinquished her home. The cleaning charges to the renter’s security deposit are fair and without error. There is nothing further we can do for the renter in this case.
Tell us why here...Dear Consumer, Theft is a crime. Steeling is illegal. In your complaint, you have accused me of theft. Since I have not committed...
theft and have never stolen anything from any customer in over thirty years of managing property in the Fort Hood area, you have defamed me and have caused harm to my business and reputation. Defamation and libel are illegal and I will be taking legal action against you.In Cause # [redacted], Hunter Rentals V. [redacted] and [redacted], a case in which I sued the former renters in the Bell County Court, the presiding judge found the [redacted]s guilty of defamation, tortious interference with prospective relations, and fraud. Like you, the [redacted]s defamed me via the Revdex.com, a platform that is viewed by thousands of people. Either you retract your complaint in its entirety, or rest assured my attorney will initiate our lawsuit this week. With regard to your complaint, you state that you were required to pay a $1,200 security deposit on a house that, “was definitely not worth the $875 in rent we were paying per month.” Hunter Rentals requires a security deposit that is equal to one month of rent. We only require a higher security deposit for prospective renters that have, for example, a bad mark on their credit report for owing a large sum of money to their former landlord. You state that you only rented the house because you were staying in a motel with your infant son and needed a house. Your statement leads one to believe that the house you rented was your only option, which is an inaccurate. There are over 350 property management companies in the Fort Hood area. At the time you rented the house, we had a total of thirty properties available, with seven houses renting for $875 or less, and four houses at $975 or less. You had plenty of housing options. In your complaint, you state that you made improvements to the house, but fail to mention a single improvement. Having personally viewed the house last week, I found no improvements to the property. I checked all of our records for the last year, and found no e-mails or communications from you requesting permission to make improvements. I found no communications between my office and your landlords, the property owners, regarding proposed improvements you wished to make. Ironically, the entire premise of your complaint is that you are being ripped off. Yet, Hunter Rentals has charged you nothing! The only action we have taken is the move-out inspection we performed on May 22, 2017. At that time, my inspector simply recorded the condition of the house you surrendered, nothing more. The adjudication of your security deposit will not take place for several weeks. If the house was cleaner at the time you surrendered it versus when you accepted it last year, there is no need for concern. Attached are several of close to 300 photos I personally took last week after you vacated. Respectfully, [redacted]Broker
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: We are not at fault for the damage equipment. I quickly tried to resolve this matter as requested in the email sent to us ( please see quote)..."We will need you to address the unauthorized pet issue with our office as soon as possible".As I stated in my previous email I went to the company on 9/2/15 to address this matter and was denied three times. My husband and I had the chance to review the attached pictures, and we are still not in aggreance with the technician findings. The pictures reflect that damages were done, it just doesn't reflect that were are to be at fault for them. My husband and I did not find any feces in the yard on 9/2/15, as the worker and [redacted] stated they both did. At this point the home owner may need to get involved as we don't own a dog and should not be responsible for this bill. The company stated the following... Please see the quote "With these findings, expect to receive a maintenance bill for this repair as this was not fair wear and tear and was caused by an unauthorized dog".My husband and I hope that the appropriate action(s) will be taken when resolving this matter.Regards,
Regards,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:First and foremost, I responded promptly to the charges that were deducted from my deposit. Instead of responding with "Mrs. [redacted] please allow us time to research this and we will get back to you" I got no response. Leading me to be even more upset then I initially was. The statement I sent the Revdex.com was the exact same as what I posted as my reviews go for this company. I added some additional information to my complaint with the Revdex.com. Please do not insinuate that I made up additional accusations and plastered them all over social media, as this is exactly what I sent the Revdex.com as well. When I paid my rent for October 2017, I paid through the payment network in which online it showed my balance of $485, which was paid in full. I have always based my amount due on whatever bill was reflected through the network. I would greatly appreciate to see what additional cleaning needed to be done so that I can have a peace of mind as to where my additional $300 went. Next, in multiple emails I explained how unhappy I was with this home, and everything that has been going on, and also explained that I travel for my job and spent most nights in a hotel versus in this home. This would explain as to why I never changed the filter in my unit as 80% of my 12 month stay I was physically not in the unit, and had my AC turned off while I was traveling. I am requesting to see pictures of the AC Filter you guys claimed to install before move in October of 2016, as I can insure you I never purchased a replacement filter because prior to moving in there were 2 provided, both cut. You are charging me because the filter was not the proper side, yet that was what was provided to me. I am a little curious with this one though.. Because to my knowledge you guys preformed an inspection a few months prior to move out, and I am wondering as to why the filter wasn't brought to my attention at that point in time. I even emailed your office to receive an update from the inspection and was told that you guys have not received the report yet. Had I known at this point in time about the filter, it would've been rectified. In my dispute I did not dispute the drip pans, the crayons or the light bulbs. I disputed the AC Filters and the charge to clean additionally. There is absolutely no reason to bring up these charges when that is something I agreed with. Through out my stay with Hunter Rentals, and the multiple correspondence back in forth I have kept my composure. I do not apologize for getting upset over these additional charges. It is clear that your definition of "Move-In Ready" and my definition are two different ones, and I am okay with that. You mentioned in your response that you needed to have adequate time for the ceiling to dry before repair. I emailed July 25, 2017 at 8:07 AM about the leak with the bath tub. The technician came out July 26th, and left me a note. On August 12th, I sent the following email - "The leak in my bathroom has yet to be fixed. There is absolutely no sense of urgency for a ceiling that is leaking from a toilet upstairs. This is beyond frustrating and I'm so fed up. I turned my notice in today" The following day, August 13th at 5:13 PM, I sent a follow up email. On August 14th, Ida Gayton responded to my email that stated they are requesting an estimate to see about the cost of the hole being fixsed. On September 4, 2017 at 2:11 PM I sent an additional email requesting someone to please come repair the hole. This is a month and a half past the time that the hole was created. This is more than enough time to let the damage "dry." Back In September when I inquired about an additional stay it was due to the fact that I was not going to be in town to move my belongings. It was not because I loved staying at this residence. The reason and sole purpose of selecting this home is because I was newly divorced and needed to get back on my feet. Understand, that this was my choice to select this home and I told my self It would only be a year until I can get into a home that was best fit for me and my two daughters. Back In September I was gone 20 days out of the month traveling for my job. I wasn't entirely too sure if I would be out by October 31st (The date I put my move out notice for) Or if I would need more time. I am not entirely too sure why an inquiring mind is being used against me. Lastly, I was searching for a home on Trulia and stumbled across a home that I thought looked nice. I did not know who the company was that leased the property, I simply hit the "Contact Now" button to inquire about the property. Had I known it was your property, I would've moved alone. I did politely get a response that the property was no longer available and I moved right along. You are taking the one time I inquired about another property, and the one time I inquired about possibly extending my stay as me actually appreciating your company, and what you guys have to offer. Since you seem to have all the emails and correspondence between each other, do you have the email where I asked about having someone take over my lease? That right there is how unhappy I was, that I was willing to pay the additional deposit, and have a "Room mate" to take over my lease. Now it is clear that we aren't going to see eye to eye, or that you are even willing to help or assist in anyway possible about my frustrations. I would think that the multiple emails sent back in forth to each other, and the multiple times I spoke about being unsatisfied that you guys would understand the situation and think about a different solution versus being a money hungry property management company. Is it possible to reimburse for the air filters and half of what I paid to clean the property? A total of $100 is what I am requesting at this point in time, as well as the details of the additional cleaning that needed to be done.I as well have pictures, and emails that I would be more than happy to send in response to what is needing to be addressed.
Regards,
[redacted]
Dear [redacted] Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to reply. On Wednesday, September 2, 2015, my HVAC technician went to [redacted]...
[redacted] to repair the air conditioning system drain line, which was obstructed and leaking inside of the dwelling. [redacted] had requested this service. The technician discovered that the exterior portion of the drain line (outside of the house) had been severely chewed by an animal to the point that it was crimped and preventing water to drain from the evaporator unit. My technician further observed dog feces in the yard. [redacted] doesn’t feel she should have to pay for the service call to repair the damaged line because the service technician’s photo of the dog feces doesn’t have a time/date stamp. All digital photos contain encrypted data.I have attached a copy of the digital photo taken by my maintenance technician along with a display of the photo’s encrypted data, which clearly shows that the photo was taken on Wednesday, September 2, 2015, at 9:05 AM. I have also attached a copy of my maintenance technician’s service log for that entire day. The service log clearly reflects that my maintenance technician was present at [redacted]. I have also attached a photo of the portion of the damaged drain line my technician repaired, which clearly reflects damage caused by an animal chewing on it. Additionally, I toowent to [redacted] about 2:00 PM on Wednesday, September 2, 2015, and also observed dog feces in the yard.We have not accused [redacted] of keeping an unauthorized animal nor are we charging her any fees for keeping an unauthorized pet. However, the animal that defecated in her yard and severely chewed her A/C drain line is not a pet that I or the property owner authorized. It is worth noting that [redacted]’s rear yard is entirely fenced and secure and she keeps the gate locked. If [redacted] would like her landlord, the owner of [redacted], to pay for the animal damage to the A/C drain line, I’m going to need something a bit more substantial than a denial based upon a photo of dog feces that lacks a time/date stamp. Respectfully, [redacted]Broker
The consumer rented an apartment from Hunter Rentals and Property Management on October 11, 2016, and subsequent to submitting her written notice to vacate, she surrendered the apartment on October 24, 2017. As required by Texas statute, we adjudicated the consumer’s security deposit within thirty...
days of her surrender of the apartment, and she received her security deposit statement along with a list of itemized deductions, on Friday, November 17, 2017, at 2:15 PM. On Friday, November 17, 2017, approximately thirty-three minutes after she received her security deposit statement, rather than allow us adequate time to audit and review her account, the consumer sent us an e-mail in which she announced her intent to write reviews about us (Hunter Rentals) on every available platform. Almost immediately, we discovered that the consumer had already written visceral, dishonest, and harmful postings about us on social media. The consumer’s lease contract expired on September 30, 2017, but she opted to accept a month-to-month agreement, and agreed to pay an additional $50 of rent for the month of October. Although the consumer failed to pay the required $50 month-to-month fee, I waived the fee, which allowed her to save the $50 and avoid late payment penalties for the month of October. The consumer paid a security deposit in the amount of $485. The consumer was required to surrender the apartment cleaned to the standards she agreed upon in her lease contract, and to provide a receipt for having the carpets professionally steam cleaned. The carpet cleaners she hired did an excellent job and the carpets passed our move-out inspection. The consumer informed us that she hired and paid a company to clean her apartment prior to her move-out inspection. However, the apartment was insufficiently cleaned and subsequently failed our move-out inspection. The consumer entered into a contract with a cleaning company, she paid them money for their services, and they accepted her money and did an extremely poor job of cleaning her apartment. I am at a loss as to why the consumer is upset with us regarding her failed cleaning inspection when she hired someone else to clean her apartment and they did an unacceptable job and took her money. The consumer had ample opportunity to properly clean and prepare her apartment for her move-out inspection. The consumer received and accepted our published guidelines for the move-out inspection and cleaning requirements on three separate occasions. The first copy she received was when she signed her lease contract. Contractually, she knew exactly what was required of her in order to pass her move-out inspection. She received a second copy of our cleaning guidelines at the time she submitted her written notice to vacate on August 12, which was approximately seventy-seven days prior to her move-out inspection. She received yet a third copy of the cleaning guidelines approximately one week after she submitted her notice to vacate along with a move-out notice acknowledgement letter from us. In the letter, we outlined what the consumer needed to do in order to receive a full security deposit refund and to pass her move-out inspection. Yet, in spite of our efforts to assist her passing her move-out inspection, she failed to follow our cleaning guidelines and didn’t even bother to show up for this extremely important inspection. The date and time of the move-out inspection was set by the consumer, not us. Although the consumer failed her cleaning inspection, we gave her a discounted cleaning rate, and reduced the normal full cleaning charge by $50. Between the month-to-month fee we waived and the discounted cleaning charge, I saved the consumer $100. In her letter, the consumer has insinuated that her apartment was filthy at the time she moved in. This is entirely false. We performed a thorough and detailed move-in inspection of the apartment and took hundreds of digital photos. The apartment was satisfactorily cleaned to our standards at the time she accepted it, with one exception. The mini blind in the living room was dusty. Per her lease contract, the consumer conducted her own condition inspection of the apartment within forty-eight hours of signing her lease agreement. On her written condition inspection, the only item she noted as being dirty was the living room mini blind, and she provided us a photo as evidence. The $50 discount she received off of the full cost of cleaning her apartment is more than adequate compensation for this one item. In addition to the cost of cleaning, the consumer had five additional deficiencies charged to her security deposit. The first involved the apartment’s air conditioning filter. At the time she moved into the apartment, the consumer was provided a new, clean 14 x 18 air filter as well as a second spare filter of the same size. At the time of her move-out inspection, we discovered the air filter was the incorrect size and had been cut along the entire edge in order to make it fit in the unit. For this reason, the consumer was charged $25 to have a technician purchase and install the proper size filter. On Friday, November 17, 2017, at 2:44 PM, the consumer sent us an e-mail in which she stated, “The AC filter that was in my unit was the exact filter I moved in with. I didn’t change or remove (expletive)!” This statement alone is justification for her to be charged for the cost of replacing the air filter. The consumer was required to replace her air filter monthly. There is no way her air filter could be clean and new after a year of use. But placing that statement aside, we have photos of the new filter that was in her apartment one year ago, and photos of the incorrect filter that she left in the unit. The latter had been cut to fit and is an entirely different filter in both color and quality. The consumer was required to replace all four stove drip pans prior to surrendering the apartment. She had brand new drip pans at the time she moved into the apartment. The photos taken during her move-out inspection clearly show they are dirty and not new. In her child’s bedroom, our inspector noted crayon drawings on the windowsill. The crayon drawings were not present when the consumer moved into the apartment. While performing her own 48-hour condition inspection of the apartment last year, the consumer even provided us with a photo of this same windowsill, with no crayon drawings on it. Lastly, the consumer was charged for two light bulbs that were found inoperative at the time of her move-out inspection. The consumer was responsible to replace all burned out light bulbs prior to surrendering the apartment. Photos taken during her move-in inspection clearly show the light bulbs were working. Photos taken during her move-out inspection show these two light bulbs out. In summary, our adjudication of the consumer’s security deposit was spot on and without error. If the Revdex.com would like to view all of the cleaning deficiency photos as well as photos that validate the five additional itemized charges, I will be happy to mail them to the Revdex.com. The Revdex.com’s current format for responding to consumer disputes does not allow me at attach all of the supporting photos and documents. The consumer states that one of her problems was that her apartment became infested with bed bugs three months after she moved in. At the time the consumer moved into her apartment, no insect infestation existed. We even had a licensed pest control company perform a courtesy treatment and inspection of her apartment at the time she signed her lease contract, which is our customary policy. As part of her lease contract, the consumer signed a bed bug addendum, in which she agreed that the apartment was insect free. Additionally, the consumer’s lease contract placed the responsibility of pest control upon her. The property owner, her landlord, had the responsibility to maintain pest control on the exterior of the apartment building. The bed bug addendum the consumer signed provided her with important information regarding everything she needed to know about these insects. It is indeed unfortunate that bed bugs were introduced into her apartment, but the consumer and/or her occupants were responsible for the infestation she experienced. This had nothing to do with us or the landlord. The consumer states that while she lived in the apartment, a leak from the apartment above her bathroom began to drip over her shower/tub. On July 25, 2017, at 8:07 AM, the consumer e-mailed us to report that she had a leak above her bathtub. She stated that she could hear the sound of dripping water. That same day, we created a work order (WO#[redacted]), and assigned a technician to go to the apartment. Within twenty-four hours, the technician entered the apartment, and with the cooperation of the upstairs renter, was able to determine the source and cause of the dripping water. The next day, a licensed plumber repaired the leak (WO#[redacted]). The technician that investigated the leak cut a small hole in the bathroom ceiling. The drywall man that eventually patched the ceiling cut a 1’ x 1’ hole in order to properly patch the damaged area. We deliberately delayed the ceiling repair in order for the ceiling to adequately dry out and to ensure that no further leaks developed. The hole that was cut in the ceiling of the bathroom did not create a roach infestation. Any roaches the consumer observed were likely already present. On Sunday, September 17, 2017, at 8:34 PM, the consumer e-mailed us to report that her water heater was leaking. The next morning, at approximately 9:30 AM, our HVAC technician went to the apartment and discovered that the air conditioner drain line was cracked below the concrete foundation. Within twenty-four hours, we had a contractor replace the cracked drain line. The air conditioner was operating properly and draining fine when the technician completed the repair. The apartment that the consumer rented from us was built in the 1970s and is approximately forty years old. It is the oldest apartment building we manage and consists of four two-bedroom, one bathroom apartments. The monthly rent for each of these apartments makes them the least expensive apartments in our inventory. Although the apartments are not new, they are in good, tenable condition. We would not manage them if they were in poor condition. People that rent these apartments do so because they are extremely affordable. The consumer was not forced to rent her apartment. She accepted it willingly at the price and terms being offered. Clearly, it suited her needs at that time. Regardless of age, new or old, any property can experience the same maintenance issues with leaks, air conditioner problems, etc. And while older properties will generally have a higher incidence of needed maintenance, we always responded to the consumer’s repair needs in a timely, professional manner. I am of the opinion that the consumer, within minutes of receiving her partial security deposit refund, assaulted us on social media (and as she stated, “every available platform.”) because she was counting on a full refund of her deposit. Rather than engage us in a civil manner and support her security deposit dispute with facts, she has instead chosen to state falsehoods and express her disdain for us via social media. Since we did not err in our resolution of her security deposit, no amount of hating and intimidation by her will compel us to alter the just and legal deductions from her security deposit. The consumer has posted many terrible and harmful statements about Hunter Rentals on social media, yet on September 17, 2017, at 4:09 PM, she inquired about extending her tenancy with us. On Wednesday, September 20, 2017, at 8:41 AM, the consumer e-mailed us and inquired about renting one of our available single-family homes. On the one hand, the consumer finds our company and services acceptable enough to extend her lease or to rent another property from us. On the other hand, she is telling prospective customers, “Please run away from this company, they will haunt you in your dreams.” The consumer’s failure to accept personal responsibility for the outcome of her security deposit resolution and multiple attacks upon the integrity and reputation of Hunter Rentals in the absence of just cause are reprehensible. Within the next twenty-four hours, I shall provide the consumer with photos of cleaning deficiencies that warranted the full cleaning of her apartment. I shall also provide her with photos that substantiate the five other itemized deficiencies for which she was held liable. Respectfully, [redacted] Broker
The owners of the property spent several thousand dollars performing make-ready repairs and painting the interior of the dwelling prior to the consumer’s occupancy in February 2013. We have detailed documentation, photos, and invoices to support this. Any claims to the contrary are simply false. I stand by my previous assertion that the consumer surrendered the house in untenable condition. The home in question is a relatively expensive rental property that falls within the parameters of what is considered high-end for the Fort Hood area. The consumer surrendered the property with the interior walls excessively soiled, smudged, worn, and marked. The leasing director that the consumer spoke with on the phone had absolutely no involvement with the resolution of his security deposit. Unable to answer the consumer’s questions, the leasing director politely reminded the consumer that e-mailing his questions and concerns was the best option for a timely and informative reply. As I stated previously, any dispute arising from the resolution of a security deposit requires a thorough audit of the consumer’s account. This process involves our examination of hundreds of photos, multiple visits to the property, reviewing our inspector’s detailed inspection notes, and interviewing contractors and maintenance personnel that have performed work on the rental dwelling. The many hours it takes to provide a detailed and thorough review cannot be accomplished over the phone, which is why we instructed the consumer to e-mail us. The consumer states that, “This whole thing could have been avoided if they would have picked up the phone to talk.” I submit that had the consumer actually read his security deposit statement when he received it, he would have realized that he was not charged for painting the kitchen and bathroom cabinets. By failing to read his security deposit statement, the consumer wrongfully accused us of charging him for painting the cabinets. Further, had the consumer followed our instructions and e-mailed me with his questions and concerns, I would have replied to him in a timely, detailed manner. I further submit that the consumer’s Revdex.com complaint could have been avoided had he not jumped to conclusions and instead followed our instructions. However, this didn’t happen because in the words of the consumer, “I don’t care if it says to respond by e-mail.” Lastly, the consumer states that he made improvements to the house such as installing a shed at his own expense. The consumer neglected to add that while engaging in direct negotiations with the property owners, it was agreed that in exchange for the shed, the property owners would forgo a scheduled rental rate increase when renewing the lease contract. The consumer and the property owners mutually benefitted from this arrangement.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The response from the company had more faults than what was included in our move out inspection. A representative at the desk of their company when we received our move out inspection told us that the home owners did not have them make the repairs to fill the nail holes in the residence from their previous tenants. We do not agree to the term of the property of being in such poor condition that it could not be rented. We were always very approachable during the duration of our stay and would just want someone to talk to us on the phone. The fact that when we called to talk to the company the person on the phone said absolutely nothing. I don't care if it says to respond by email but I had questions and wanted to talk. This whole thing would have been avoided if they would have picked up the phone to talk. You can't run a business strictly by email. We made improvements to the house such as adding a shed to the property and a garden at our own expense. We didn't ask to be paid for it, but when they make it sound we didn't take care of the property it is a complete exaggeration.
Regards,
[redacted]