Potter-Taylor &

I am rejecting this response because: Again, Potter-Taylor looks to me like a drowning victim flailing his arms to stay above water but if theyd put their feet down they would realized the water is only a couple feet deepPT did not properly review this matter and has done a poor job of managing this property---ALL of my tenants will testify to this.The problem with Potter Taylor is not just the construction project where though not directly stated in the language but from what I'm advised BOTH PT and DIL will shared liability for my losses here and this is why our conversation still existsNot to mention the fact that Potter-Taylor REFUSED to provide a breakdown of the CAMs for our property when I asked them in MarchThat said, some tenants are paying the CAMs because theirs are cheaper now because of improper billing for water useageAlso, our businesses have been without FIRE PROTECTION for the last days and Potter Taylor has put restaurants and all our other businesses at risk.The personel problems they have experienced does not excuse their liabilityIt is their contracted responsibility to DIL and ALL TENANTS to protect our businesses to a greater extent than what they did.I really do not have time to keep going back and forth with PTThis reporting should be made public and an unresolved matterPT merely firing DIL does not allow them to escape responsibly for their mismanagement of our centerIn fact, it's cowardly to fire the company to escape the hard work to help my center get our businesses back on track and recoop losses that are potentially in the $10's of thousands!!

***: First, I was mistaken that the notice did go out of this office at the request of the owner advising the tenants that work was to comment (see attached email). At the time it was sent, my company was between property managers overseeing this project and the property management assistant acted upon my direction. The document was not the correct document to use in this case and should not have gone out of this office as the document is lacking a clear discerption of the work being done and the time frame in which it would be completed. I have discussed this with my staff such that it won’t happen again. As a follow up to the email I did meet with the owner at the project and the contractor was in the process of jack hammering out the sidewalk in front of all the spaces. Also included in with this email is a copy of the property management agreement by and between Dil Investments LLc and Potter-Taylor & Co establishing the relationship between the owner and the property manager . Section of the agreement sets forth the responsibility of Potter-Taylor as agent for the owner. Specifically subsections 1(a) and 1(d) deal with our limited abilities in dealing with the tenants without the owners approval Lastly, I have attached a copy of the lease by and between Dil Investments, LLC and Sam’s Town Cyclery which establishes the relationship between the owner and tenant I understand the tenants issue with his business being interrupted but unfortunately I was not in the position then or am I in a position now to provide him with any rent relief The owner is the only person that can make this decision. Please let me know if I can answer any further questions *
*** ** ***President

We are writing in response to several complaints filed by tenants at the Cambridge Plaza center, located at *** * *** *** *** Cambridge Park, CA We work with ownership normally, and the owner decided to initiate the project without involving us, meaning that we were unable to
inform the tenants of the workIn the big picture, we feel compelled to remind you that we have no authority or control over the property when ownership decides to take action or initiate work, and such is the case hereThe owner decided to take action and started this project without running it through us, which is the owner's right, but also removes us of any and all responsibility as relates to the projectBy handling this separately from us, ownership assumes all responsibility for the project and its fallout, and subsequently Potter-Taylor is not held liable in any way, shape, or form.Even so, we wish to formally apologize for all failure of communication which occurred on our end, and have been attempting to remedy the situation as best we can, acting as a line of communication between ownership and the tenantsHowever, we must reiterate that the ultimate responsibility for rectifying the situation lies with ownershipAfter communication with the owner, we can state that that the work being done is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and that it will be completed in thirty days timeAdditionally, we have pictures from the owner, who states that access to the business was not obstructed.We strive to maintain high standards when it comes to property management, and that includes involving tenants in major work like this, including giving them advanced notice of work, and having discussions regarding how we can mitigate, potential issues, which we accomplish when we work with ownershipThis did not happen here, and subsequently, we are dealing with a situation that we did not create, nor bear any responsibility or liability for.Sincerely,Potter-Taylor & Co.*** ** ***, President

***: First, I was mistaken that the notice did go out of this office at the request of the owner advising the tenants that work was to comment (see attached email). At the time it was sent, my company was between property managers overseeing this project and the property management assistant acted upon my direction. The document was not the correct document to use in this case and should not have gone out of this office as the document is lacking a clear discerption of the work being done and the time frame in which it would be completed. I have discussed this with my staff such that it won’t happen again. As a follow up to the email I did meet with the owner at the project and the contractor was in the process of jack hammering out the sidewalk in front of all the spaces. Also included in with this email is a copy of the property management agreement by and between Dil Investments LLc and Potter-Taylor & Co establishing the relationship between the owner and the property manager . Section of the agreement sets forth the responsibility of Potter-Taylor as agent for the owner. Specifically subsections 1(a) and 1(d) deal with our limited abilities in dealing with the tenants without the owners approval Lastly, I have attached a copy of the lease by and between Dil Investments, LLC and Sam’s Town Cyclery which establishes the relationship between the owner and tenant I understand the tenants issue with his business being interrupted but unfortunately I was not in the position then or am I in a position now to provide him with any rent relief The owner is the only person that can make this decision. Please let me know if I can answer any further questions *
*** ** ***President

We are writing in response to several complaints filed by tenants at the Cambridge Plaza center, located at [redacted] [redacted] Cambridge Park, CA 95682. We work with ownership normally, and the owner decided to initiate the project without involving us, meaning that we were unable to...

inform the tenants of the work. In the big picture, we feel compelled to remind you that we have no authority or control over the property when ownership decides to take action or initiate work, and such is the case here. The owner decided to take action and started this project without running it through us, which is the owner's right, but also removes us of any and all responsibility as relates to the project. By handling this separately from us, ownership assumes all responsibility for the project and its fallout, and subsequently Potter-Taylor is not held liable in any way, shape, or form.Even so, we wish to formally apologize for all failure of communication which occurred on our end, and have been attempting to remedy the situation as best we can, acting as a line of communication between ownership and the tenants. However, we must reiterate that the ultimate responsibility for rectifying the situation lies with ownership. After communication with the owner, we can state that that the work being done is in compliance with the American Disabilities Act, and that it will be completed in thirty days time. Additionally, we have pictures from the owner, who states that access to the business was not obstructed.We strive to maintain high standards when it comes to property management, and that includes involving tenants in major work like this, including giving them advanced notice of work, and having discussions regarding how we can mitigate, potential issues, which we accomplish when we work with ownership. This did not happen here, and subsequently, we are dealing with a situation that we did not create, nor bear any responsibility or liability for.Sincerely,Potter-Taylor & Co.[redacted], President

I am rejecting this response because: Again, Potter-Taylor looks to me like a drowning victim flailing his arms to stay above water but if theyd put their feet down they would realized the water is only a couple feet deep. PT did not properly review this matter and has done a poor job of managing this property---ALL of my tenants will testify to this.The problem with Potter Taylor is not just the construction project where though not directly stated in the language but from what I'm advised BOTH PT and DIL will shared liability for my losses here and this is why our conversation still exists. Not to mention the fact that Potter-Taylor REFUSED to provide a breakdown of the CAMs for our property when I asked them in March. That said, some tenants are paying the CAMs because theirs are cheaper now because of improper billing for water useage. Also, our businesses have been without FIRE PROTECTION for the last 60 days and Potter Taylor has put 4 restaurants and all our other businesses at risk.The personel problems they have experienced does not excuse their liability. It is their contracted responsibility to DIL and ALL TENANTS to protect our businesses to a greater extent than what they did.I really do not have time to keep going back and forth with PT. This reporting should be made public and an unresolved matter. PT merely firing DIL does not allow them to escape responsibly for their mismanagement of our center. In fact, it's cowardly to fire the company to escape the hard work to help my center get our businesses back on track and recoop losses that are potentially in the $10's of thousands!!