Property Management Associates

Greetings,

I looked into***s situation and she is correct, there is credit on her account of ***
from an over payment of assessments.

I don't know why the credit was not refunded on a timely basis. My guess it it was a training issue on knowing the procedure to issue a refund. I've spoken to the folks in that department and reviewed the process with them so this wont occur again .

The check has been mailed to the address indicated on the complaint.
Again, I hope you will accept our apologies for the less than stellar service.

Sincerely

Dear Sir,

My name is John ***, and I am the owner of Property Management Associates, I received your complaint and have looked into it. I am sorry that your concern was not brought to my attention before you felt you needed to reach out to the Revdex.com.

I have reviewed the correspondence and actions taken in regards to your report of a water leak and spoke with different individuals involved.
As you know, the Association is run by an elected Board of Directors, comprised of homeowners such as yourself. Management works for the Board of Directors and among other duties is tasked with ensuring that when a repair is needed such as the water meter replacement, the proper party (Either the Association or the homeowner) is billed correctly based on who is responsible for the cost of that item as spelled out in the Association's governing documents.

Based on the information provided to us from the contractor which concluded that the water meter was defective and was the cause of the leak, and per the governing documents is the responsibility of the Homeowner you were billed accordingly. In my review of the documentation, I concur that the water meter was defective and required replacement, however, it was not crystal clear to me if the source of the water flow was on the common pipe side of the meter, or the homeowner side. Without that clarity, I don't believe you can be held responsible for that cost, and it should be applied as a common expense, therefore I have credited your account per your request the *** charge. I am hopeful that you will be satisfied with my assessment and resolution to your complaint.

In all fairness, I do wish to address the inaccuracies and false accusations asserted in your complaint as these embellishments were not only unnecessary for you to receive a satisfactory resolution, are completely false and without any basis of fact. By posting these on the Revdex.com Website which is publically available, only serves to defame my company's reputation and harm our ability to retain and secure future business.

Our records clearly show that we responded swiftly and professionally to your concerns and communicated to you timely throughout the process.
Here is a synopsis of the timeline of events:
7/23 Water leak reported by you via email. We responded to your email within 17 minutes
We dispatched a plumber that afternoon, who evaluated the situation.
7/24 Defective Water meter was replaced
8/14 After receipt of invoices for the work performed by the plumber, we notified you of the amount due on the Rebill
You responded later the same day disputing a portion of the charges
8/15 The Manager responded acknowledging your request and stating she was forwarding it to the Board of Directors for review and decision and we would get back to you once we hear back from the board. This is proper protocol
8/20 Homeowner submits a claim against PMA to Revdex.com
8/27 President of PMA receives Revdex.com complaint, begins review of issue
8/28 Completes assessment of complaint and responds via Revdex.com website

Inaccuracies and false accusations:

At no time did we ever "Refuse to address the issue" in fact the manager clearly communicated to you within 1 day that we have forwarded to the Board for review and decision. This is the proper procedure or handling disputes such as these. The board addresses these concerns at the next board meeting.

Your comments that we were conspired with the plumber to bill bogus charges and that we committed fraud is absolutely false and made without any basis of fact. I can assure you we have no affiliation with any contractor we work with. Our fiduciary duty is to the Association we take our ethics very seriously and it is ludicrous to think that we would risk our license and company's existence on something like that. We work extremely hard for our clients, and care about our communities and the residents in them.

As a retired disabled soldier, I thank you for your service to our country and the sacrifices you and your family have made and I could understand how in the heat of the moment one could assert things that they do not know to be true, however it would be my desired resolution that you please retract the false statements to prevent damage to my companies reputation.

Best regards,

John ***, PCAM

Greetings, while we certainly emphasize with Ms. concern, she indicates that it is PMA's responsibility to manage the landscape vendor, and in many cases that would be true, however as management we work for and at the Board's direction. In this particular community the Board elected to manage the landscape contract themselves, this is not an unusual occurrence because this community had been self-managed for many years and they are used to doing things themselves.
Regarding not responding directly to Ms. emails, unfortunately we are currently engaged in a legal matter with Ms. and we have been advised by legal counsel to block her email address and not to respond to her inquiries. She has been informed of the process for her to report complaints so they may be addressed.
Upon receiving the Revdex.com notice, we did however reach out to the Board and pass the concern along and the Board contacted the vendor. The vendor informed the Board that he was experiencing equipment failure and he would get out there as soon as possible. Since the complaint was filed, it is my understanding he has been out to the site on more than one occasion and will be there again tomorrow.
Ms. was notified of the situation and she acknowledged that he had been out there cutting.

Greetings, than you for the opportunity to respond to these allegations.

First and foremost, I take issue with the accuracy of the comments made by this individual as these statements are not only false, but they are highly defamatory, and I strongly request the Revdex.com consider removing them from their public site as by way of this response you are on notice that these statements are false, and leaving them, up on your site could make you party to potential litigation. Knowingly posting in public statements that are blatantly false and misleading, and could do irreparable harm to a company's reputation and ability to retain and secure new business is libelous and is a criminal offense.

To be clear we have not only executed on all facets of our contractual obligations, there have been several occasions where we have gone above our requirements and were entitled to additional compensation, but in an effort to build good customer relationships, we chose not to bill for those extra services. This individual would not be privy to the terms our contract to know what we are contractually obligated to do, so I'm unclear how she could speak with such authority that have not fulfilled contractual obligations.

Unfortunately, she is uninformed and is making broad based statements while leaving out salient details in an effort to discredit my firm because she has an axe to grind.

What she had failed to tell you is that she was running a Day Care business out of her home, which is not allowed per the Association's Covenants, conditions, and Restrictions. This issue was raised by several owners, and we (at the request of the Board) sent her a cease and desist letter in October of 2016. Additionally she fails to tell you that we've had to send her no less than 18 delinquency letters because until recently they have been in arrears almost constantly since 2016. At one point owning the Association almost *** When she talks about not paying the landscaper on time what she doesn't tell you is:
1) It took us several years to get the Board to increase dues to meet the obligations
2) There are several owners who are chronically delinquent which also impacts cash flow (She was one of them)
3) The Board approves contracts above budget without a plan on how to cover the costs.

So yes if bills were paid late it is because the Board didn't do their job, not management. We can only work with what we are given, we advise the Board and then act on their direction.

What is truly interesting is that this person's Husband is the President of the Board of Directors of the Association.

1) This owner, who is not on the Board of Directors, emails constantly about Board Issues which would be inappropriate for us to comment on. It does appear that she is gaining access to Board only information which she should not have access to, which is a matter we have brought up to her husband.

2) We respond to her to her constantly, with information we are allowed to provide, she emails an excessive amount. Expects us to jump out there several times per week when our contract with the Association only provides for one site visit per month, but is in in favor of can paying management for the additional services. Nowhere in our contract are we required to keep a homeowner continually updated on every little issue. We report to the Board of Directors, and we provide our updates to them as required in our contract.

3) She stated when the retaining wall collapsed we didn't respond. Again, not true. We sent someone out to investigate the same day, took pictures, and we contracted the Developer who agreed to have it repaired at no cost even though it was out of warranty. This information was immediately relayed to the Board of Directors.

4) Regarding the Gate, what she fails to mention is that we have had the gate repaired on more that on occasion, and that almost as soon as it is repaired, another person runs into it and breaks it again.

5) The comment about "Sketchy Contractors" is also unfounded and untrue. We only recommend and use fully licensed and insured contractors.
The board selects the contactor from the bids we receive. I don't know what she is talking about regarding "Police Action" but there was never any issue in getting back any of the fountain parts.

At the end of the day, the issues here are that this person moved into a community with deed restrictions, and learned the hard way that she has to abide by the contract she signed and is disgruntled. She is blaming management and looking to take her anger out on us. I'm sorry that she feels this way, but I don't know what if anything we can do to make her understand we are the messenger, and we don't run the association or call the shots. She may get a better understanding if she took the time to attend a meeting.
Thank you for your time and feel free to reach out if you have nay other questions. I look forward to seeing this matter resolved and removed from your website.
Thank you

Contact Name and Title: John ***, Pres/CEO
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX x 103
Contact Email: ***@thinkpma.com
Greetings,
In response to this owner's complaint I'd like to clarify, the owner has been responded to each time by management and repairs have been made to the common element area of his perimeter fence. (See attachment) The condition of his fence is comparable with all the other fences in the development; older but still serviceable. Another point of clarification for the owner is that PMA is not the decision maker in these matters, the Board of Directors is. We are facilitators based on the direction and approval received by the Board of Directors. The manager has been to the site on more than one occasion and has documented the conditions to provide direction to contractors to get the work done that is the responsibility of the Association.
We submitted a work order request to JT *** on 2/26/18 as the owner reported portions of his patio fence being rotten. The contractor was asked to inspect and to see if any slats are rotten and provide estimate. JT *** reported back that a few of the fence pickets were warped, not rotten, and so they were replaced at or about 3/14/18. (See attachment)
In the original complaint the unit owner states that he has made "Repeated Requests to inspect, repair, and replace worn our fence DIVIDING my patio with my neighbors as well as ongoing Landscaping issues". That portion of the fence he references as well as the gate, is per the governing documents of the Association, is the unit owner's responsibility to maintain, repair, and replace. This has been that way since the onset of the community, and as a good owner in the community, he should make sure he is familiar with what falls under the unit owner's responsibilities.
As much as we would like to assist in repairing or replacing the dividing fence, the Board and Management have fiduciary duties that prohibit them from spending Association funds on non-Association (unit owner) items. My understanding is the landscape issues he has are also located inside the patio areas and is a unit owner responsibility as well.
It seems that it is the owner's belief that it is time to replace the fence. This is something he should bring to the Board's attention. Currently the board is not engaging in a fence replacement project but as a normal part of their budget planning process annually reviews these types of items to see if it needs to be done in the upcoming year. As we are now entering into our budget planning season I am sure they will do their due diligence the fences for the whole Community.
In the meantime we have facilitated any required repairs to keep the Common portion of the fence in good serviceable condition (see attachment). As you can see the fence is not falling down nor is it unsightly. Being a common element, the Board decides what is satisfactory, not the unit owner or management for that matter.
This has been communicated to the owner, but he still felt it necessary to file a complaint against us (incorrectly) with the Revdex.com. We hope this response will clear this matter up, and we also hope that the Revdex.com would consider not posting to begin with, or removing erroneous complaints that go against an organization's reputation when they are;
1) Misdirected to the incorrect entity. Although incorrect to begin, the complaint should have been placed against the Association, which is the deciding entity and not PMA who is merely the "messenger" in this issue.

2) Misstated or over stated in what appears to be an attempt to get what they want because they received a response contrary to their wishes, especially when it is easily refuted with documentation.
Our goal is to always try to assist the unit owners in understanding and navigating the process, and we would be happy to try and provide more clarification if necessary to educate the owner on the best way to approach this with the Board.
I hope this response provides the clarity you requested on this situation. Please feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

John ***, CMCA, AMS, PCAM
President/CEO
Property Management Associates