Professional Property Management of Northern Virginia, Inc.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
They said nothing different, other than show parts of the rental agreement in which I provided. The carpet and the wall merely had superficial wear than is normal from living in a place 18 months.  If they wanted to charge me to have the carpet cleaned I would have just let them do it. There practice is shameful. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The management initially only only provided me with one estimate for work to be done, as opposed to the minimum of two proposals from which to select a contractor.  I responded in a timely fashion to each of their messages, and, after PPM quit, I established my own, direct relationship with the tenant, who has since understood my direct actions to  correct the issue and has indicated satisfaction with the actions I have made, all from a considerable distance.The amount I wish to be reimbursed is the managemtent fee for the final month of their so-called "service," for they, unlike I, did not reply in a timely fashion to my requests for information regarding the necessary repair.
Regards,
[redacted]

November 19, 2014Dear [redacted],We are responding to your letter (received on November 10, 2014), regarding the complaint by [redacted], henceforth referenced as “Landlord”. Your ID # for this matter is [redacted].PPM has acted in good faith as the Landlord's agent since we were hired in 2007. The Landlord has visited the property on several occasions – sometimes to view the property with our inspector or with a contractor – so the condition of the property has been known to her throughout our management tenure.As stated previously, during the last tenancy the Landlord mandated that only repairs would be considered for leaks, appliances and HVAC issues. For many of the items that the Landlord has now listed as needing repairs, she would have declined these while her property was a rental, Screens have deteriorated and the previous tenant removed them due to safety concerns with their children. The crack in the bathroom ceiling seems to be due to settlement – certainly not tenant damage. The carpet mentioned has become stained and worn over the years. For tax purposes, carpeting is considered to have a seven-year lifespan. It should be replaced now due to age - not tenant damages beyond normal wear-and-tear.The Landlord mentioned that PPM did not get authorization for a recent repair over $300. She is referencing email correspondence from 7/10/14. The repair was for a “no air conditioning” service call made during the heat of the summer. Diagnosis was that the system would not operate due to lack of Freon, and the total repair was for $321.40. Air conditioning in the summertime is considered a priority repair and PPM made the reasonable decision to go ahead, Had we gotten the repair diagnosis, but then waited for the Landlord's approval, there would have been a follow-up trip charge from the contractor. PPM actually saved the Landlord roughly $100 having the HVAC contractor make the repair while he was onsite.We wholeheartedly disagree with the Landlord’s allegation that PPM lied to her about the final moveout inspection. The former tenants requested their inspection for 7/29/14, and the Landlord had already arranged for a visit to the property on 7/30/14 with our inspector. After that, the Landlord provided PPM a list of concerns which has been discussed with her.We empathize with the Landlord's situation. PPM has had many clients return to their home after an extended period of “rental property” use. They understand that consideration must be given to deterioration over the years. However in this instance the Landlord could not hold the tenant responsible for normal wear-and-tear items, and now expects PPM to return the property to its pre-2007 condition. Our offer remains to provide $1,000 as a gesture of goodwill.Kind regardsHoward BDirector Chris RSenior Property Manager

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution, which is to provide $1,000 towards the cost of repairs, is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

The following is in response to the dispute of funds deducted from the security deposit. Included with this letter are copies of the move-out inspection report, all pictures taken at the move-out inspection, invoices for all charges deducted, the move-in inspection report, the lease, and the tenant...

closing statement. All charges deducted from the security deposit were presented to and approved by the tenants' Landlord.Please see attached document.December 19, 2017Dear [redacted],The following is in response to the dispute of funds deducted from the security deposit. Included with this letter are copies of the move-out inspection report, all pictures taken at the move-out inspection, invoices for all charges deducted, the move-in inspection report, the lease, and the tenant closingstatement. All charges deducted from the security deposit were presented to and approved by the tenants' Landlord.1. Carpet cleaning - The tenant was asked to refer to the signed lease, paragraph #30 sections A & G, as well as the attached pictures from the move-out inspection that show multiple stains on the carpet.30. CHECK OUT INSPECTION: Tenant shall provide written request for a check out inspection to Agent/Landlord no later than Ten (10) days prior to Tenant's intended check out date. Agent/Landlord shall have the sole discretion in determining the time of the check-out inspection. The Tenant has the right to be present. Agent/Landlord shall make a reasonable effort to advise Tenant of the time and date if the check-out inspection, which inspection shall be made within seventy two (72) hours, weather permitting of termination of occupancy or tenancy, whichever occurs last. The inspection will be made to determine if there are any damages not considered fair wear and tear. More than one inspection may be necessary before all damages can be assessed. Prior to the inspection the Tenant shall:A. Have carpets cleaned by a professional company acceptable to the Agent/Landlord andprovide a paid receipt. If cleaning is not acceptable or a receipt is not supplied, Agent/Landlord reserves the right to hire another company to re-clean the carpets at the Tenants expense. In a dispute regarding cleanliness to the inside and outside, Agent/Landlord's decision will prevail.2. Touch up paint of lower level bedroom wall – The tenant was asked to refer to the signed lease, paragraph #15 A, as well as the attached picture from the move-out inspection that shows a large scuff on the lower level bedroom wall.15. TENANT OBLIGATIONS:A. Tenant Maintenance - The Tenant shall not deliberately or negligently destroy, deface, damage, impair, or remove any part of the Premises, nor permit any person to do so. The Tenant shall pay for any repairs or replacements made necessary due to deliberate or negligent acts or omissions of the Tenant, Tenant's family, guests, employees or pet(s).PPM presented the tenant's request for reimbursement for the disputed items to the Landlord. Per theLandlord, no reimbursement will be authorized.Thank you,Professional Property Management

October 16, 2014Dear [redacted],We are responding to your letter (received on October 8 2014), regarding the complaint by [redacted], henceforth referenced as "Landlord". Your ID # for this matter is [redacted]. Thank you for allowing us to respond to these concerns.We feel that it's...

unfortunate that the Landlord has contacted you as PPM has successfully managed her property through three sets of tenants in a seven-year time span (July 2007-2014). In that time it is reasonable that the property, which is over sixty years old, would develop normal wear-and-tear issues. However, upon her return the Landlord has expected the property be in its pre-2007 condition.Per our Property Management and Leasing Agreement (PMLA) Item 2 b, PPM will make at the Landlord's expense, “...any repairs or replacements necessary for the upkeep and protection of the property and for operating efficiency thereof...." The Landlord has collected over $200K in rental income during this time, yet addressing normal repair requests to the property has proven difficult at times.Starting in August 2008 during the first tenant's residency, the Landlord requested that an additional term be added to the lease renewal that the tenant would be responsible for a $75 deductible for any repair items except the HVAC and water heater. Having this deductible may on occasion save a property owner from some expenses because it makes a tenant less likely to report possible repair needs. This $75 deductible was continued per the Landlord in the following two lease contracts.Additionally during the last tenancy (July 2013), at the Landlord's instruction PPM added the following language to the lease: "...no further improvements would be made to the property and appliances will not be upgraded from their current condition with the exception of any plumbing leaks, appliances that become inoperative and HVAC system maintenance and failure." The Landlord did not wish to make any repairs to the property unless it was absolutely necessary. [See attachment.]Our final inspection of the Landlord's property was when the last tenants vacated (July 2014). We found that most, if not all, items of concern were not considered tenant damage, but normal wear-and-tear issues. In the following weeks after the Landlord returned, we met her at the property to review her concerns. We reminded her that she could be facing a court battle with the former tenant if unsupported deductions were made against the tenants' deposit. The Landlord said she did not want to go to court and thus, PPM made the only appropriate deduction necessary.Since many of our property owners reside overseas, PPM's inspection reports have always been made available online through our secure website so any client can review them at their convenience. When the property is occupied, PPM performs an interim inspection – roughly every six months – and these are forwarded to the property owner for comment and review.Regarding the $300 maintenance reserve cited PMLA stem 5 d, this was mailed back to the Landlord. It is our normal policy that we hold these funds until her account is completely closed with us and all financial matters are settled. This has never been an issue of contention.Our management contract allows for any property owner to terminate at any time with no penalty if they are dissatisfied with our services. For the record the Landlord has visited the property several times during our management tenure and at no time did the Landlord communicate dissatisfaction with our management of the property nor did she express any concerns of consequence with regard to the condition of the property.PPM strives to end our business relationships on good terms. With consideration given to some of the Landlord's concerns – even though they would be considered normal wear-and-tear items – PPM recently offered the Landlord $1,000 as a gesture of goodwill so she could take care of some repair issues. In return she has demanded $2,000-$2,500 as compensation and filed a complaint with you.PPM has gone above and beyond in providing quality service, and feel our offer to finalize matters with the Landlord has been reasonable and fair. We look forward to your response. Thank you.Kind regardsHoward BDirectorChris R.Senior Property Manager

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because I am requesting a higher compensation. November 2, 2014
Dear [redacted], Thank you for following up on my complaint with ID [redacted].We have reviewed the response from Professional Property Management of Northern Virginia (PPMNVA). Unfortunately despite our repeated requests for an itemized estimate of the damages to our property, more than three months after we have requested it, we still have not received one from PPMNVA.We acknowledge that PPMNVA is willing to offer us a $1,000 compensation for damages to our property, however, we estimate that we will need well over $2,500 to repair the serious damages to the house. This is not even taking into account the abnormal wear and tear to the old and historic wood parquet floors that were maintained in fairly good condition until 2007 and now need to be replaced.As we do not currently live in Virginia, we traveled there over the Columbus Day weekend and attended to some of the issues. More specifically, we spent over $200 (we have receipts) and purchased materials and tools and repaired the following: light switch plates, missing closet hanging rods, door stoppers, missing mirrors, and broken lighting fixture.We had to order two new specialty rods to put in the two bedrooms ($187) where the old ones were, and we had to order special curtains for one of the bedrooms for $180, as the original ones were missing from the house. We still have not addressed the issue of window coverings in the master bedroom. I would like to note that the house has floor to ceiling windows in all rooms including the bedrooms and even though we left the house with custom curtains in all bedrooms, we came back to find all curtains and custom rods missing. We found the blinds in the living/dining and study rooms broken. Rather than repair them we now have to replace them. The cost of these new window coverings will exceed $1,000.Other damages and my rough estimate to repair them include:Repair drilling to outside brick walls of the house, including historic fireplace, $400+ Scratched toilet needs to be replaced, $100–$200 Repair of seriously cracked bathroom ceiling, $100–$200 Missing window and door screens (estimate provided by PPMNVA), $339.15 Purchase and install missing motion detector light, $100+ Purchase and install missing kitchen under cabinet lights: $100+ Large, very visible stains to all wool high quality carpet in large family room which now needs to be replaced. Installed on 5/25/2007 (right before turning over the house to PPMNVA for a cost of $2,859)• Large free standing fireplace in the family room does not work and it appears that the handles on the two vents that allow the air to flow in the fireplace are broken. This is a major issue and very costly depending on whether it can be repaired or replaced.Other issues per my original complaint not answered by PPMNV:• PPMNVA has not provided “Condition Reports” when last tenant or previous tenant vacated our property as required by their agreement with us (see attached). It is these reports that need to be used to determine non-fair wear to our property. We requested these reports by email on 9/2/2014 (attached page 15).• PPMNVA violated the term of their contract with us and did not get authorization from us or even notified us prior to repairs exceeding $300. They withheld the money from our direct deposit but did not post the invoice until after I inquired about this (see attached emails dated July 10, 2014, on pages 18-22).• PPMNVA lied to me that the house “move-out” inspection would happen on July 30 at 10:00 am. I flew to Virginia to be present to this inspection, however, when the inspector Mark K[redacted] arrived he said that [redacted] already had the move out inspection the previous day and everything in the house was fine, including all the appliances. After insisting that we walkthrough the house to check it we started discovering the damages. See attached emails dated July 9-25 and August 2-October 8 on pages 16-17 and 1-14)Attached also please find the Property Management and Leasing Agreement we signed with PPMVA. Please take a note of items:> 2(b) regarding $300 limit on repairs without authorization, and > 4(e) regarding “condition reports” which are in addition to inspection reports.Unfortunately PPMNVA did not safeguard our property as they were obligated to us through their agreement. In addition, to the damages, several other smaller alterations (i.e. change of the bathroom faucets, and outside house numbers) have changed the character of our house without our approval and have increased our dissatisfaction with PPMNVA. When we turned our house over to PPMNVA we spent several hundreds of dollars to professionally clean it including the windows and hired a gardener to take care of the garden. Seven years later why should we be satisfied to receive a house with filthy windows inside and out and a lawn with patches of dead grass and the bushes haphazardly pruned?It is based on all the above facts that I estimate that compensation in the range of $2,500 - $2,000, even though it is a fraction of what it would cost us to bring the house to something close to its 2007 condition, would be a more appropriate compensation.Sincerely,

From: Larry B[redacted] <[redacted]@ppmnva.com>Date: Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 7:36 AMSubject: RE: Complaint ID#[redacted] - Prop#[redacted] - [redacted] - [redacted]To: [redacted] <[redacted]@myRevdex.com.org>Good Morning [redacted], The complainant suggests that damages caused were either in place or reported...

by them during the course of their tenancy. Please see attached Evidence Item V – LeasePlease see attached Evidence Item X – Move In-Condition ReportPlease see attached Evidence Item  Z – Tenant Move in List Please note that the Tenant’s Move In List (Item Z) was sent and received  by PPM 43 days after the lease (Item V) start date.  The Move In & Condition Report (Item X) clearly states that the tenant must submit their Move In List within 7 days of the lease start date. Please also note that the Tenant’s Move In List with the exception of Item #3 does not pertain to any of the damages caused by the tenants and charged against their security deposit. With regard to Item #3 – Reported Pet Odor and Carpet DamageThe complainants had 2 pets – a cat and a very large dog.  At the time of move in, conducted with the tenants, by our Property Inspector, there was no mention of pet odor, no mention of carpeting damage and our Move In Condition Report also did not make note of the alleged problems.  In addition, the fact that the tenants submitted their Move In List 43 days after the lease start date clearly creates a situation where the tenant and their pets had ample time and opportunity to cause damage. The complainants contend that they “reported” problems “as they happened” and “without attention by the landlord”.  This contention is erroneous.  All items reported by the tenants, that were required elements provided by the lease, were addressed in a timely manner and without fail.  To do otherwise, would have been a violation of the lease agreement. Our extensive database of service calls received and work orders issued can be provided immediately if required.  This information will conclusively show that PPM and the owners of the property were responsive and addressed all reported problems that were critical to the property functionality or a requirement of the lease. What the complainants failed to report were the damages that they or their pets caused during their tenancy.  As an example – Significant repairs were conducted in the Lower Level Bathroom due to a plumbing problem.  Once the repairs had been completed, the tenants allowed their dog to walk through the freshly poured cement and failed to report the damages that their pet obviously caused.  Please reference attached Evidence Item AA – Concrete Damage. Failure to report any damage to the home is a direct violation of the lease agreement.Please refer to Paragraph 15, Section A which clearly states: 15. TENANT OBLIGATIONS:A.        Tenant Maintenance - The Tenant shall not deliberately or negligently destroy, deface, damage, impair, or remove any part of the Premises, nor permit any person to do so.  The Tenant shall pay for any repairs or replacements made necessary due to deliberate or negligent acts or omissions of the Tenant, Tenant’s family, guests, employees or pet(s).  The complainants also contend that they were charged for “standard move out cleanings that were not specified in the lease”. The Lease clearly states in Paragraph 30, Section F that the tenants are to insure that the “Premises are thoroughly cleaned”. 30. CHECK OUT INSPECTION:  Tenant shall provide written request for a check out inspection to Agent/Landlord no later than Ten (10) days prior to Tenant’s intended check out date. Agent/Landlord shall have the sole discretion in determining the time of the check-out inspection.  The Tenant has the right to be present.  Agent/Landlord shall make a reasonable effort to advise Tenant of the time and date if the check-out inspection, which inspection shall be made within seventy two (72) hours, weather permitting of termination of occupancy or tenancy, whichever occurs last.  The inspection will be made to determine if there are any damages not considered fair wear and tear.  More than one inspection may be necessary before all damages can be assessed.  Prior to the inspection the Tenant shall:F.   Insure that the Premises are thoroughly cleaned, including having hardwood floors cleaned.  Where appropriate, have grass and shrubs properly trimmed and the beds weeded and leaves removed throughout yard. In addition, the Tenant Handbook, provided to the tenants at the time of move in contains a comprehensive list of cleaning requirements that all tenants are responsible for at the time of move out.  This information (via the Tenant Handbook) is provided to all PPM tenants at the time of move in.  Please reference attached Evidence Item BB_Exit Checklist.(This document is also available on the Tenant’s Page of the PPM Website – [redacted]) There can be no doubt that food residue stains throughout the kitchen, appliances and counters or fecal matter stainson the toilets can be considered thoroughly cleaned by anyone’s standards.Please reference attached Evidence Item B1_Cleaning. Lastly, the complainants contend that the “Property Management Company hung stained and dirtied curtains in the house”after the tenants vacated in an effort to increase the charges against their deposit. This outlandish fabrication is insulting and malicious.  The suggestion that PPM, with malice and forethought, would deliberatelyhang “stained and dirtied curtains” in an attempt to somehow profit from the former tenants is an affront to PPM’s integrityand professionalism.  In closing, I would like to add that the complainants have also contended that the charges levied against their depositwere “obscene”.   The charges assessed against the tenants deposit are all documented with paid invoices.  All work thatwas performed was done so by contractors licensed and insured in the State of Virginia.  Copies of all invoices have beentransmitted to the complainants and if the Revdex.com requires this documentation, we’ll be more than happy to provide theinformation. If you have any additional questions, or require any documentation, please let me know.I’ll be more than happy to provide whatever you need. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Larry B[redacted]Property Manager – Blue TeamProfessional Property Management[redacted]Annandale, VA [redacted]

Review: This company did not manage my property according to the terms of the Property Management and Leasing Agreement we signedSome more specific violations of thei contract:
Item (b) Exceeded $limit on repairs without getting our prior authorization for non-emergency repairs
item (e) Did not prepare and provide condition reports when tenants vacate property to determine non-fair wear and Tera to property
item (g) Did not safeguard property to alterations and damages including drilling to the outside walls by tenants
Have not provided documentation and proof of appliance replacementNew appliance (range hood) does not work
Did not return $amount from my account.Lease ended on July 31,
Knowinly lied in emails and discussions for over months know and misled me that issues will be taken care offIn reality there was no action on their part.Desired Settlement: Repair damages or compensate me for the cost of damages
Refund $left in my account
Pay me the difference for excess repair cost over $
Business
Response:
October 16, 2014Dear [redacted],We are responding to your letter (received on October 2014), regarding the complaint by [redacted], henceforth referenced as "Landlord"Your ID # for this matter is [redacted]Thank you for allowing us to respond to these concerns.We feel that it's unfortunate that the Landlord has contacted you as PPM has successfully managed her property through three sets of tenants in a seven-year time span (July 2007-2014)In that time it is reasonable that the property, which is over sixty years old, would develop wear-and-tear issuesHowever, upon her return the Landlord has expected the property be in its pre-condition.Per our Property Management and Leasing Agreement (PMLA) Item b, PPM will make at the Landlord's expense, "...any repairs or replacements necessary for the upkeep and protection of the property and for operating efficiency thereof...." The Landlord has collected over $200K in rental income during this time, yet addressing repair requests to the property has proven difficult at times.Starting in August during the first tenant's residency, the Landlord requested that an additional term be added to the lease renewal that the tenant would be responsible for a $deductible for any repair items except the HVAC and water heaterHaving this deductible may on occasion save a property owner from some expenses because it makes a tenant less likely to report possible repair needsThis $deductible was continued per the Landlord in the following two lease contracts.Additionally during the last tenancy (July 2013), at the Landlord's instruction PPM added the following language to the lease: "...no further improvements would be made to the property and appliances will not be upgraded from their current condition with the exception of any plumbing leaks, appliances that become inoperative and HVAC system maintenance and failure." The Landlord did not wish to make any repairs to the property unless it was absolutely necessary[See attachment.]Our final inspection of the Landlord's property was when the last tenants vacated (July 2014)We found that most, if not all, items of concern were not considered tenant damage, but wear-and-tear issuesIn the following weeks after the Landlord returned, we met her at the property to review her concernsWe reminded her that she could be facing a court battle with the former tenant if unsupported deductions were made against the tenants' depositThe Landlord said she did not want to go to court and thus, PPM made the only appropriate deduction necessary.Since many of our property owners reside overseas, PPM's inspection reports have always been made available online through our secure website so any client can review them at their convenienceWhen the property is occupied, PPM performs an interim inspection – roughly every six months – and these are forwarded to the property owner for comment and review.Regarding the $maintenance reserve cited PMLA stem d, this was mailed back to the LandlordIt is our policy that we hold these funds until her account is completely closed with us and all financial matters are settledThis has never been an issue of contention.Our management contract allows for any property owner to terminate at any time with no penalty if they are dissatisfied with our servicesFor the record the Landlord has visited the property several times during our management tenure and at no time did the Landlord communicate dissatisfaction with our management of the property nor did she express any concerns of consequence with regard to the condition of the property.PPM strives to end our business relationships on good termsWith consideration given to some of the Landlord's concerns – even though they would be considered wear-and-tear items – PPM recently offered the Landlord $1,as a gesture of goodwill so she could take care of some repair issuesIn return she has demanded $2,000-$2,as compensation and filed a complaint with you.PPM has gone above and beyond in providing quality service, and feel our offer to finalize matters with the Landlord has been reasonable and fairWe look forward to your responseThank you.Kind regardsHoward BDirectorChris R.Senior Property Manager
Consumer
Response:
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Review: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because I am requesting a higher compensationNovember 2,
Dear [redacted], Thank you for following up on my complaint with ID [redacted].We have reviewed the response from Professional Property Management of Northern Virginia (PPMNVA)Unfortunately despite our repeated requests for an itemized estimate of the damages to our property, more than three months after we have requested it, we still have not received one from PPMNVA.We acknowledge that PPMNVA is willing to offer us a $1,compensation for damages to our property, however, we estimate that we will need well over $2,to repair the serious damages to the houseThis is not even taking into account the abwear and tear to the old and historic wood parquet floors that were maintained in fairly good condition until and now need to be replaced.As we do not currently live in Virginia, we traveled there over the Columbus Day weekend and attended to some of the issuesMore specifically, we spent over $(we have receipts) and purchased materials and tools and repaired the following: light switch plates, missing closet hanging rods, door stoppers, missing mirrors, and broken lighting fixture.We had to order two new specialty rods to put in the two bedrooms ($187) where the old ones were, and we had to order special curtains for one of the bedrooms for $180, as the original ones were missing from the houseWe still have not addressed the issue of window coverings in the master bedroomI would like to note that the house has floor to ceiling windows in all rooms including the bedrooms and even though we left the house with custom curtains in all bedrooms, we came back to find all curtains and custom rods missingWe found the blinds in the living/dining and study rooms brokenRather than repair them we now have to replace themThe cost of these new window coverings will exceed $1,000.Other damages and my rough estimate to repair them include:Repair drilling to outside brick walls of the house, including historic fireplace, $400+ Scratched toilet needs to be replaced, $100–$Repair of seriously cracked bathroom ceiling, $100–$Missing window and door screens (estimate provided by PPMNVA), $Purchase and install missing motion detector light, $100+ Purchase and install missing kitchen under cabinet lights: $100+ Large, very visible stains to all wool high quality carpet in large family room which now needs to be replacedInstalled on 5/25/(right before turning over the house to PPMNVA for a cost of $2,859)• Large free standing fireplace in the family room does not work and it appears that the handles on the two vents that allow the air to flow in the fireplace are brokenThis is a major issue and very costly depending on whether it can be repaired or replaced. Other issues per my original complaint not answered by PPMNV:• PPMNVA has not provided "Condition Reports" when last tenant or previous tenant vacated our property as required by their agreement with us (see attached)It is these reports that need to be used to determine non-fair wear to our propertyWe requested these reports by email on 9/2/(attached page 15).• PPMNVA violated the term of their contract with us and did not get authorization from us or even notified us prior to repairs exceeding $They withheld the money from our direct deposit but did not post the invoice until after I inquired about this (see attached emails dated July 10, 2014, on pages 18-22).• PPMNVA lied to me that the house "move-out" inspection would happen on July at 10:amI flew to Virginia to be present to this inspection, however, when the inspector Mark K[redacted] arrived he said that [redacted] already had the move out inspection the previous day and everything in the house was fine, including all the appliancesAfter insisting that we walkthrough the house to check it we started discovering the damagesSee attached emails dated July 9-and August 2-October on pages 16-and 1-14)Attached also please find the Property Management and Leasing Agreement we signed with PPMVAPlease take a note of items:> 2(b) regarding $limit on repairs without authorization, and > 4(e) regarding "condition reports" which are in addition to inspection reports.Unfortunately PPMNVA did not safeguard our property as they were obligated to us through their agreementIn addition, to the damages, several other smaller alterations (i.echange of the bathroom faucets, and outside house numbers) have changed the character of our house without our approval and have increased our dissatisfaction with PPMNVAWhen we turned our house over to PPMNVA we spent several hundreds of dollars to professionally clean it including the windows and hired a gardener to take care of the gardenSeven years later why should we be satisfied to receive a house with filthy windows inside and out and a lawn with patches of dead grass and the bushes haphazardly pruned?It is based on all the above facts that I estimate that compensation in the range of $2,- $2,000, even though it is a fraction of what it would cost us to bring the house to something close to its condition, would be a more appropriate compensation.Sincerely,
Business
Response:
November 19, 2014Dear [redacted],We are responding to your letter (received on November 10, 2014), regarding the complaint by [redacted], henceforth referenced as "Landlord"Your ID # for this matter is [redacted].PPM has acted in good faith as the Landlord's agent since we were hired in The Landlord has visited the property on several occasions – sometimes to view the property with our inspector or with a contractor – so the condition of the property has been known to her throughout our management tenure.As stated previously, during the last tenancy the Landlord mandated that only repairs would be considered for leaks, appliances and HVAC issuesFor many of the items that the Landlord has now listed as needing repairs, she would have declined these while her property was a rental, Screens have deteriorated and the previous tenant removed them due to safety concerns with their childrenThe crack in the bathroom ceiling seems to be due to settlement – certainly not tenant damageThe carpet mentioned has become stained and worn over the yearsFor tax purposes, carpeting is considered to have a seven-year lifespanIt should be replaced now due to age - not tenant damages beyond wear-and-tear.The Landlord mentioned that PPM did not get authorization for a recent repair over $She is referencing email correspondence from 7/10/The repair was for a "no air conditioning" service call made during the heat of the summerDiagnosis was that the system would not operate due to lack of Freon, and the total repair was for $Air conditioning in the summertime is considered a priority repair and PPM made the reasonable decision to go ahead, Had we gotten the repair diagnosis, but then waited for the Landlord's approval, there would have been a folltrip charge from the contractorPPM actually saved the Landlord roughly $having the HVAC contractor make the repair while he was onsite.We wholeheartedly disagree with the Landlord's allegation that PPM lied to her about the final moveout inspectionThe former tenants requested their inspection for 7/29/14, and the Landlord had already arranged for a visit to the property on 7/30/with our inspectorAfter that, the Landlord provided PPM a list of concerns which has been discussed with her.We empathize with the Landlord's situationPPM has had many clients return to their home after an extended period of "rental property" useThey understand that consideration must be given to deterioration over the yearsHowever in this instance the Landlord could not hold the tenant responsible for wear-and-tear items, and now expects PPM to return the property to its pre-conditionOur offer remains to provide $1,as a gesture of goodwill.Kind regardsHoward BDirector Chris RSenior Property Manager