@properties

We need to know the address of the listing in order to know the @properties representative

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/07/07) */
We have spoken with the Revdex.com and informed them that without at least a specific address of the apartment in question, it is very difficult for us to look into this matter. We request that Ms. [redacted] provide the address (including unit number) of...

the apartment.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 9, 2015/07/10) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The address of the unit I applied for was [redacted] # [redacted] Chicago IL 60616.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 11, 2015/07/17) */
On the listing sheet for this rental, it does state that dogs and cats are allowed, however it specifies that the owner was willing to consider tenants with pets on a case-by-case basis. This means that the owner would look at all applicants (and their pets) individually to determine whether they would be a good fit for this apartment. Having a pet wouldn't necessarily mean they'd be denied, however, not every pet would be accepted. Nowhere on the listing is it advertised as "dog friendly" as [redacted]'s complaint alleges.
When the tenant's agent initially requested the showing, she did mention that [redacted] had a 30 lb dog. I scheduled the showing knowing that if the owner would consider a tenant with pets, that she would want to look at the tenant's entire profile including credit, income, background, etc, before making any decision. The owner requested all applicants to complete the @properties application, which includes credit, criminal and eviction checks, so she could assess each tenant using the same criteria, in order to be fair.
At the showing, which the tenant's agent was not present for, [redacted] explained that her dog was only 1 year old, approximately 10 pounds and would grow to be 25 or 30 pounds. I told her that the owner had previously denied another applicant with a 50 pound dog, and that she might consider a smaller dog.
After the showing, the tenant's agent followed up with me through email, asking whether the dog would be an issue. I wrote, "she will consider pets on a case by case basis, I doubt 25 lbs would be a problem. Probably would ask for an additional deposit." After that, her agent said that [redacted] would be filling out an application.
Since the decision on who the apartment goes to is the owner's, ultimately, the owner decided to move forward with another applicant. The size of [redacted]'s dog was not the issue; it was the fact that the dog is a 1 year old puppy and the owner did not want to deal with potential damage to the unit that a puppy can cause. After the owner's denial, I wrote the tenant's agent saying, "In the remarks, it says the owner will consider pets on a case by case basis. Since this dog was only 1 year old, she did not want to rent due to the age." This reason was given to the tenant's agent, and from [redacted]'s complaint, it sounds like it was not communicated to her by her agent.
At no point was [redacted] or her agent given confirmation that the owner would accept her or her dog, either written or verbal. Submitting an application for an apartment doesn't guarantee that one will get it, especially if there are multiple applications for the owner to consider.
The assertation by [redacted] that @properties was "fraudulent" and "taking advantage... to make money off unsuspecting rental applicants" is completely untrue. The application fee goes directly to the outside vendor who runs the credit checks. The owner, agent or company does not see any of this money as part of the rental process.