Rentz Management, Inc.

January 26, 2017*** *** ***
*** *** ***
*** *** ***
*** *** *** Dear ***, Thank you for your letter of 1/17/I would like to respond to items included in your letter.Regarding dog “clean up”You may recall in our original conversation I indicated that Abby preferred defecating on training pads in our unitI would like to see the documented evidence provided by complaining homeownersPerhaps they took pictures of the waste we did not remove? There is, of course, documented evidence that we in fact failed to clean up as required! If there is no documented evidence, but only unsubstantiated allegations made by assumption, such allegations would then be and fraudulent! I would like to see the evidence provided by each of the complaining homeownersIf there is no such evidence I must then request a written apology from each complaining homeowner, Rentz Management and *** *** ** *** *** Board of DirectorsEach written apology must also be posted on the information board at the community entrance, included in the next newsletter and the Rentz Management websiteRegarding the Association Insurance Program: The General Liability policy includes a “Limitation of Coverage to Designated Premises” endorsementOn this we agreeYou state that the Umbrella Policy provides “worldwide coverage”Unless this has been changed since the policy was first issued, the Umbrella Policy Coverage B is subject to Nationwide form UM “Limitation to Designated Premises”Coverage A of the Umbrella Policy mirrors the underlying policy terms and conditions and would therefore also include a “Limitation to Designated Premises”Therefore, unless this endorsement has since been removed from the original policy, my initial allegation that there is no coverage for any loss away from the premises IS ACCURATEIf the initial policy limits were adequate, why did the Board decide to increase them? Also, who decided that the limits were adequate? Take for example, a grandchild is visiting and falls into the retention pondFortunately, they do not dieUnfortunately, they incur severe brain damage from oxygen deprivationHow much will it require to provide medical treatment and care for the child’s remaining lifetime? Unless there have been changes made since policy issuance, the Umbrella Policy does not include the Directors and Officers LiabilityFirst, The Directors and Officers Policy is not listed on the Umbrella Policy underlying coveragesSecond, the Umbrella Policy, both Coverage Parts A and B, apply to “bodily injury”, “property damage”, “personal injury” and “advertising injury”They do not apply to any other cause of lossThe Directors and Officers Policy specifically excludes any loss caused by these perilsThird, the Umbrella Policy Coverage A mirrors the terms and conditions of the general liability policyThis includes a Professional Liability exclusionThe Umbrella Coverage part B includes a Professional Services exclusionConsidering these factors, I fail to understand how the Directors and Officers Policy is included under either Coverage A or Coverage B of the Umbrella PolicyYou indicate that five years is a “standard” retroactive periodIn years of insurance experience, much of it including claims made policies, I have never heard such a statementAdding the retroactive date to the renewal policies is a potentially significant limitation to the coverage provided to former Board membersIf not already done so, this must be removed from the current policyConsidering the above, unless subject to corrections of which I am unaware, the Nationwide policy is not entirely proper nor adequate for our community needsEspecially considering the broad coverage provided by the CAU policyThe $saved by changing carriers does not warrant the potential increased financial riskNor does the $contribute significantly to any of the maintenance/repair projects within the communityI am not the only unit owner who has complained regarding the water damaged partition wallMy understanding is that neither Rentz, nor the Board of Directors, have responded to other complaints regarding this partition wallRegarding the police vehicle parking in guest parkingThe Board stating this is an infrequent occurrence would be falseI have a series of dated photos indicating the vehicle in question parked in guest parking nearly every day! Not infrequently as implied to you! The Kentucky State Police definition of a commercial vehicle may be valid and accurateIt is not the definition of a commercial vehicle included in the Community Bylaws and cited in my initial letterBased upon the Kentucky State Police definition, any vehicle used for commercial purposes and not meeting the stated criteria, may therefore park within our communityThis would include vehicles containing company advertising, boats, trailers, campers, recreational vehicles (under 10,pounds GCW), etcNone of these would be excluded by the State Police definition! The Kentucky State Police definition is not included in our current bylaws and, therefore, has no bearing on what is/is not a commercial vehicleRegards, *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

Clarification from the contractor who responded:"Emergency call for water leaking from unit 12: Water was running from master bathroom ceiling in units #and #No one was home in unit #Set ladder up and found that the sink was left running and was overflowing in unit #Shut off the sink
from utility room off deckWe did not enter the unitDried up the areas effected in units #and #Installed blower and dehumidifier in each units #and #Returned to monitor dryingRemoved equipment when areas were dry." The breakdown states that the charge of $covers the cost of the emergency response charge, time spent on unit #specifically, and the truck charge. No one entered unit #12; however, the owner of unit #is responsible for paying the $for services rendered

[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 If you and the business have reached an agreement and compliance is set for a future date, we trust the business will comply Please contact us after that time if the matter is not resolved as agreed and we will review the complaint and proceed accordingly.]
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,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.We did not receive a bill until six months after the event and I'm assuming it was because you were hoping we'd forget about it $is a ridiculous charge for turning off a water heaterAlso , as part of my insurance liability clause, they should have paid anything for services rendered to the condos belowLastly, the bill we received was not itemized and also happened to show the cost billed to the other units which, amazingly enough , was the same charge we receivedWe are not paying $for someone having to set up a ladder to flip a switchWe tried to resolve this months ago and only received this attempt at an explanation after I complained to the BBC.
Regards,
*** ***

Where exactly were you parked?Directly in front of my driveway and the grass section of my yard where the tree is locatedall the way to the right of the main street, tires partly on the driveway and grass section so as to allow enough room to the left of the vehicles for cars to pass throughThis is where I told them I would be parked when I called for permission to be there. Were you parked on asphalt or the cement? Not sure what the difference in those two are as there isn't any gravel here but where the white driveway ends & the grass section ends, the black top road startsI was parked on all three as described above and shown in the previous pictures I sent. Where exactly is the trailer? It is showing clearly in the photo's I sent on the previous response to be at the end of my driveway & hooked up to my truck. Let me know if there is anything else,Thank you,***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint I never received a letter of collection to pay Rentz management - I would have paid. They can not provide a receipt of received mail unless they send certifiedIf they are looking to add a lien on someone's property or to collect money due wouldn't you send this certified to prove a copy was received? Rentz managments attorneys mailed me the attached letter that says I owe $for assessments and late fees through 8/This figure includes a legal fee of $I paid them $as that is what is listed on the lienI asked what the diffence in the lien amount and the amount listed on the attorney letter is a fee $is for and Rentz said it was for the collection letter mailed( I never received or have proof that they sent any letter) how can you charge me $for a letter to be mailed but you don't send it certified? After I paid the amount due- $Rentz management said I owed legal fees of $when the attorney letter attached says $and this is includedWhy would I pay Rentz management any money for legal fees when they clearly do not have their accounts in orderThey were not addressing mail to me and I did not receive any mail saying I owed fees for and 2013. I purchased (closed my loan) on 3/30/so technically the fees for should be prorated and I should not owe the full amounts. Also I read on the website that any amounts paid would be applied to any past due amounts - WHY WASNT my payments applied to and if in fact these amounts were past due? There are several things that do not add up with Rentz management and my account and why they didn't have my correct name, any of my contact information that I am sure is listed on my paperworkThe fact that they are not saying I owe more money once I paid the amount on the lien is ridiculous I have the attorney letter attached saying that the legal fees are included and I should not have to pay additional fees of $ Regards,
*** ***

Parking a large vehicle with a trailer in an open spot in front of a unit after getting approval is one thing. Parking a large vehicle with a trailer in a circle across from the units where there is a sign that clearly says "NO PARKING IN CIRCLE" is another. Parking illegally does not require notice...

prior to towing. She was never given permission to park in the circle. Please see the attached tow request sent by our office to authorize the tow from the circle.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint and I feel it is necessary to respond at this time.The business stated that the "contractor who was responsible for the painting quit responding to us and as of the date of this complaint still had not been reached". My concern with this statement is that I was not made aware that the contractor had quit responding.  In fact I initiated emails to Rentz regarding this issue on 4/07, 4/17, 4/24,5/1,6/24,7/21,7/24,8/13,8/17,8/31 and at no time was I ever told that the contractor had stopped contacting Rents.  In fact my last correspondence with Rentz prior to filing my complaint was on 8/31 was sent on 8/17.  Sharon responded to this email and said "I spoke to the contractor and he stated that he will try and get there this week".  The contractor never showed up and there was any follow-up from Sharon regarding this.  The interesting thing is that I did receive a response from Sharon AFTER I filed the complaint that the painter was on vacation and she was unable to contact him.  Therefore the above statement made by Rentz that I was "aware" is highly inaccurate. Rentz claims that "[redacted]’s emails were responded to in a timely fashion, though I was unable to give her the answer that she wanted due to the fact that the painter was unreachable" is again inaccurate.  In my original complaint I list the dates that I sent correspondence to Rentz and did not receive a response and therefore I had to send another email.  It is also important to note that when I did receive a response from Rentz it was very clear that there was contact with the painter.  Please see my original complaint as this identifies the dates I did receive emails from Rentz in which the painter was supposed to come, never did and then I had to initiate another email.  In fact, Sharon, Bob R[redacted] and the painter met on 7/24 so apparently they were not having issues getting in touch with the painter.Sharon sent me an email on 7/9 (again showing that she was in contact with the painter) that stated: "I have met with the painter and have found that the door is badly in need of replacement.  They have been sanded 2 times and rust proofing applied but this will not hold up with the door in the shape that they are in.  Once the rust has started it is impossible to stop and to keep the paint on. Just to make sure I have contacted other painters and they concurred on the problem.  The doors are so rusted that the primer and paint will not hold up in any condition." I disputed this claim considering that this was the first that I had ever hear this.  As I stated before, Sharon, Bob and then painter met on 7/24.  I was told after this meeting via email that: "There is some small rust on a few of the doors.  We are going to sand the rust and paint with rustoleum.  This will help with the rust and cover it.".  The painter did come last week however the areas were not sanded.  He simply painted over the areas as he has in the past.  This has been the ongoing problem because the rust then seeps through because it has not been sanded or treated. This issue is still unresolved and I did not know that the "issues was being handled" as Rentz has claimed in their response. I would be more than happy to forward email correspondences which clearly show that Rentz was in contact with the painter and that Rentz also failed to respond to my emails on many occasions. 
Regards,
[redacted]

January 17, 2017[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]Thank you for your letter of November 19. I apologize for the delay in my response; I wanted to be sure that everything contained within my response is as clear and correct as possible.Firstly, I was asked to write...

my letter of November 10 to you by the Board of Directors of The [redacted] regarding cleaning up after your dog, Abby. It had been reported by several different homeowners that cleanup was not being performed. It is standard operating procedure for the Board to request a written letter to any homeowner that they have received multiple complaints about. Additionally, the letter itself is of a standard form. The size of your dog really has no bearing on the situation.With regard to the Association insurance:O The Nationwide General Liability coverage includes a "Limitation to designated premisesendorsement" which only applies to "bodily injury," "property damage," "personal and advertising injury," and medical expenses. Additionally, the umbrella policy that has been put into place gives worldwideliability coverage. Thus, your statement that "any cause of loSS, occurring AWAY from the premises is NOT COVERED" is inaccurate.O You are correct in your understanding that the commercial general liability limits on the Nationwide policy are $1,000,000/$2,000,000 (occurrence/aggregate) with the umbrella policy increasing those to $2,000,000/$3,000,000 respectively. The Board of Directors had decided to increase the Umbrella to at $2,000,000 limit, so that overall liability coverage is now at S3,000,000 occurrence and $4,000,000 aggregate. However, I would like to make clear that the original policy was more than adequate for the Association, based on industry standards.O You are incorrect in believing that the Umbrella policy does not follow the D&O Coverage. It in fact does. Therefore, prior to the Board's decision to increase the Umbrella limit there was a $2,000,000 occurrence and aggregate. Now, with the increase to the Umbrella, coverage is identical to the CAU policy. Again, this is not to state that we believe that the Association was ever underinsured under the Nationwide policy.O. With regard to the retroactive date of the new policy, five years is a standard retroactive period for which to hold insurance. To extend this date is of great additional cost to the Association and is not necessary to hold.o The named insured has been updated from "[redacted]" to [redacted] O Rentz Management and [redacted] Board of Directors are both covered under the "Employee Dishonesty" coverage, amendment PB542204 06, Employee Dishonesty Optional Coverage - Condominium, Townhouse, or Homeowners Association.O The property blanket limit was determined by Commercial Building Valuation reports using the [redacted] program. The underwriter will not blanket a property unless it is insured to value. Replacement cost value is determined by cost per square foot and construction of buildings. The underwriter agrees that this risk is insured to value. The advantage of "Blanket Value" is that there is no co-insurance and the blanketed value can be used to cover loss on one or as many buildings as needed.O The blanket Earthquake coverage on the Nationwide policy is the blanket value of $15,144,000. The 10% deductible is applied per building. Thus, for a building valued at S1,403,000, the earthquake deductible would be $140,300. The CAU policy had a blanket value of $10,000,000 with a 5% deductible per building, meaning that for a building valued at $1,403,000, the earthquake deductible would be $70,150; however, the blanket value was $5,144,000 LOWER on the CAU policy than it is on the Nationwide policy.The new Nationwide insurance policy on the property more than adequately insures the ASSociation, while also saving money that is needed for other projects around the community. Many of the points that you made were not accurate. To suggest that the Board is being lax in their decision of changing insurance policies indicates that you do not believe that the Board and Management are doing their due diligence in the operation of the day-to-day business of the Homeowners Association. In fact, the Board of Directors of [redacted] has gone above and beyond in ensuring that they are meeting with the Fiduciary Responsibility that accompanies holding a position on the Board. They have met multiple times with the Association's insurance agent to compare policies and to discuss the ins and outs of changing carriers. With the fullest understanding of the differences between the two policies attainable, they made the joint decision that it was in the best interests of the Association to move forward with Nationwide.Regarding the water damage to your balcony partition wall, this was discussed verbally during a phone call that you made to the office. Balcony partition walls will be addressed in concurrence with the deck repair and Sealing work that will occur in the summer. By grouping it together with other work, the Board is attempting to address all issues with decks in a systematic manner that generates Some CostSavings for the Association while ensuring that everyone gets the attention that is needed for their Specific issues. If the decay of this wall is affecting your unit in a more tangible way than exterior appearances, please let me know and I will see that it gets addressed more quickly. Safety concerns are of the utmost importance to management and the Board of Directors. As it is currently understood, the water damage on your partition wall is not creating a safety issue or affecting the quality of life in your home.Additionally, the "cracked brick" on the front of your garage is a tuck-pointing issue. A work order was issued on November 21, 2016 for a mason to inspect and bid the repair of three areas in need of similar repairs around the community, including the area on your home. The bid was received and approved by the Board, however the weather was not cooperative in allowing for these repairs to be completed. Once those conditions were met, the contractor returned to the property to complete this work. Again, as Stated above, this work was not of immediate necessity in order to maintain the quality of life or Safety of residents within the community. It was addressed properly by the Board and Management and was resolved as quickly as possible.Rentz Management does not disburse uniform Certificates of Insurance to everyone in the community at one time. Rather, requests for Certificates of Insurance are handled on a case by case basis so that the ASSociation's insurance agent can accommodate the specific need of each homeowner and/or mortgage Company. More often than not, mortgage companies require a Certificate of Insurance to specifically cite the name and address of the individual insured. In a community of sixty-three homes, it is not sensible to do this on a single certificate. Thus, once a homeowner requests a Certificate of Insurance from the Property Manager, they are often directed straight to the Association's insurance agent to meet their specific needs.With regard to the Parking Regulations of the Association, specifically the section which reads:No Vehicle shall be regularly parked or kept on any open parking space. An open parking space is a parking space in the Common Areas which has not been assigned to a particular lot and is intended for temporary use by non-residents of the community who have as legitimate reason, including social or business, to be in the community. Vehicles of any kind parked or used in violation of this Declaration or any rules and regulations of the board, may be towed away at the owner's risk and expense.AS you have pointed out, a homeowner who drives a police cruiser has parked in the open parking area near his home. According to the Board of Directors, it is common practice for homeowners to park in the open areas from time to time as needed for personal reasons. It is not a practice of the ASSociation's Board of Directors to tag or tow such a vehicle unless it is being parked in the overflow parking on a regular basis. The Homeowner Handbook states (page 14, Use of Parking Pads): "The Community Parking Pads were initially developed to provide temporary parking spaces for guests and visitors to our community. They were not intended to become regular parking spaces for our homeowners. Association members should be parking their vehicles in their garages or driveways." Permy discussions with the Board, the vehicle in question has not been parking there regularly. Regardless, a Conversation has been had with the homeowner regarding the parking of his vehicle to ensure that he understands this rule and will keep it in mind when he parks his cruiser.Additionally, after reaching out to the State of Kentucky, the Kentucky State Police offer the following definition of a Commercial motor vehicle:Commercial motor vehicle means any self-propelled or towed motor vehicle used on a highway in interstate commerce to transport passengers or property when the vehicleO Has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating, or gross vehicle weight or gross combination weight, of 4,536 kg (10,001 pounds) or more, whichever is greater, or ols designed or used to transport more than 8 passengers (including the driver) for compensation, or ols designed or used to transport more than 15 passengers, including the driver, and is not used to transport passengers for compensation, or ols used in transporting material found by the Secretary of Transportation to be hazardous under 49U.S.C. 5103 and transported in a quantity requiring placarding under regulations prescribed by the Secretary under 49 CFR, subtitle B, chapter I, subchapter C.Thus, a police cruiser, also classed as an "emergency vehicle" by KRS 189.920 to 189.950, is not considered a commercial vehicle by the State of Kentucky nor by [redacted] Homeowners Association, and will be permitted on the property.Finally, regarding your question about the Association's qualification for FHA financing, Landominiums, or planned unit developments such as [redacted] do not have to be "certified" for FHA financing. Only true condominiums must be certified by the FHA. Though the community is not certified, an individual purchasing a Unit can still obtain FHA financing. In this instance, the FHA does decline to approve loans on units in communities where over 30% of the units are rented. However, [redacted] is nowhere near having 18 rental units, so any concern of an inability to get FHA financing based on the number of rental units is unwarranted in this case.I hope that this clarifies all of the questions you have posed. If any additional questions arise, please let me know.Regards,Rentz Management, Inc.Co: [redacted] Board of Directors

Notice the date of the occurrence was 12/29/15. We received the bill in early May. They flat out state that they set up a ladder, saw the sink overflowing, and turned it off then dried up the area. In their last response they claim they turned off the water from my water heater. They didn't enter my condo but claimed to have dried up my bathroom. They just say whatever they want and hope I forgot since it happened almost a year ago!

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]

December 2, 2014   [redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]   This letter is in response to the complaint that you filed with the Revdex.com on November 12, 2014.  As you may recall, we have...

communicated multiple times both before and after the complaint was filed regarding this issue, and based upon those conversations I believed you had a clear understanding of the situation.      As I explained to you the first time we spoke, the washers and dryers at [redacted] had not been properly maintained for many years prior to Rentz Management taking over management of the association in May of 2014.  When problems surfaced regarding the washers and dryers I took steps to have them inspected and learned that many of the hoses and valves to the machines had rotted out.  I immediately contracted with a plumber to replace all of the hoses and valves to all machines.  This was a time consuming process for the plumber because not all of the lines to the machines have their own shutoffs.  In fact, a few still need to be done because we will have to shut off water supply to the entire building to do them.  However, while these repairs were being performed, I ensured that all residents had working plumbing.   After that, we brought in an appliance repairman who went through each building and checked out every washer and dryer in the community.  He found 3 washers and 4 dryers that were out of commission and needed replacement.  One of those needing replacement was a washer in your building; however, the other washer had been working fine during all of this work, as determined by both the plumber and the appliance repairman.  That said, I would like it to be noted that all laundry rooms are available to all residents, which means that there were 12 other working washers throughout the community available for use when your tenant was unable to locate one in your building, even though there was a functioning washer in it.   I responded to the problem with the machines as soon as I was informed of it, and had taken the time to explain to you the process we would be going through to repair them as quickly as we could so this would not be an ongoing problem.  One washer in your building, as of the date of this letter, was replaced last week and the other has been working the entire time.  It should be noted that we have not received any complaints in regard to this issue other than yours.   Sincerely,   [redacted] Property Manager Rentz Management, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This is absolutely not true that I was not given permission. I KNOW the policy on parking here and this is why I called before I even arrived to make sure I could mark in front of my home to load my MOVING trailer ( I was not parked in the circle - there was enough space between my vehicles and the circle, which is right in front of my home, to drive around the circle)  I was PAYING for a rental space for trailers and such already. Had I not been given permission I would have utilized it. The secretary answering the phone gave me permission that morning. I was parked for 6 DAYS touching my yard, my driveway and the front of [redacted]'s vacant driveway next to me - and a cars width away from the "circle." I took careful concern so that no traffic flow was blocked by me with the least amount of inconvenience done as I finished loading the trailer. I had one more day left on packing when you towed me. Your office obviously doesn't know what the right hand is doing from the left if you seriously weren't aware that she gave me permission, which is I suppose possible. But it shouldn't cost ME money because your office doesn't have a functioning communication system in place.
 I can assure you the secretary KNEW it was wrong when I called her back to ask her why they did that when she gave me permission. SHE felt bad and said she was going to talk with her boss. When she called me back, she apologized but said there was nothing she could do.These aren't the best pictures because I didn't know I would need to document for proof but in one picture you can see my black trailer behind my grand daughter right at the end of my driveway. In front of it is the truck that pulls it, blocking the rest of my yard and then [redacted]'s vacant driveway. In the other photo you can see my grand daughter, the same day, same clothes, riding the same bike in the first photo, next to the circle they are saying I was parked in. Clearly by the space around her and the fact that there was enough space to not even see the trailer, I was not parked in the circle as they are trying to say. I WAS in front of my yard and driveway. 
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted] purchased her home in March of 2012, without the knowledge of the Master Association, due to the manner of the sale, which occurs from time to time.  We were informed of the sale by way of a letter from the [redacted], who had previously owned the residence, which...

we received on May 17, 2012. That letter is attached here for reference. In researching the new owner of the home in August of 2012, the [redacted] PVA website was consulted, which stated the name of the owner as [redacted]. A print out of that sheet from August 17, 2012 is attached here for reference. On August 21, 2012, a welcome letter was sent out from our office addressed to [redacted], along with a sheet to update the information that we keep on file in our database. The information sheet was never returned to us, thus the information that we have on file remained solely based on the data collected from the [redacted] PVA website. Copies of the letter and the information sheet that were sent out on August 21, 2012 are attached here. Invoices and late letters were sent out to the new homeowner, [redacted], in both 2013 and 2014, but no response was received. Payments were received on the account in both 2015 and 2016, but they did not cover the amount past due from 2013 and 2014. Following the procedure of the Master Association, a collection letter was sent to [redacted] on May 26, 2016 in an attempt to collect the $415.40 past due amount on the account. A copy of the ledger from our system from May 24, 2016 showing the past due balance as well as a copy of the collection letter sent May 26, 2016 are attached here. When no response was received, the account was processed for a lien in September 2016. In researching the title in order to file a lien, the attorney’s office found that the full name of the owner is in fact [redacted]. The lien letter was addressed as such. When the homeowner received the lien letter and called Rentz Management, she informed us that [redacted] is her middle name, and any mail sent to that name is automatically thrown away without review. [redacted] has in fact paid in full the $415.40 that was originally owed to the Master Association. However, the $450.00 is still owed in order to make the Association whole for the legal fees expended in order to collect the money owed in unpaid Association fees. The fact that [redacted] paid her fees in 2015 and 2016 through Rentz Management seems to indicate that she was in fact aware of us as the Managing Agent for the Master Association. Why then would she dispose of any mail clearly from Rentz Management without opening it, even it was addressed using her middle name rather than her first? I have attached a Rentz Management envelope here to illustrate the fact that mail from Rentz Management is clearly identifiable. The Master Association will not remove the lien until the account is paid in full.

The contractor who was responsible for the painting quit responding to us and as of the date of this complaint still had not been reached. [redacted]’s emails were responded to in a timely fashion, though I was unable to give her the answer that she wanted due to the fact that the painter was...

unreachable. I did my best to resolve this issue, reaching out to the painter many times, until I was finally able to contact him on October 9, 2015. [redacted] was fully aware of this situation prior to filing her complaint. She knew that it was being handled, as well as the problems that we were having with the contractor. I hope now that the painting has been completed, she understands that Rentz Management acted correctly within our capacity as the Association’s management to resolve this issue and that unfortunately things sometimes simply take longer than desired to reach fruition due to circumstances outside of our control.

The dryer vent is appurtenant to the owner’s individual unit, meaning that it is for the sole exclusive use of the unit’s owner. The condominium owners association has the dryer vents cleaned annually, despite it not being part of its maintenance responsibilities. This annual cleaning is a courtesy...

and is only performed, along with cursory inspections, for the benefit the individual homeowners and to ensure the safety of everyone in the building. Any maintenance required to a unit appurtenance like plumbing, HVAC, and yes, a dryer vent is the responsibility of the homeowner. [redacted] has no evidence that the dryer vent was somehow knocked down/damaged due to a vendor acting on behalf of the condominium owners association. Furthermore, the vent being installed in a substandard manner, for which there is also no evidence as such, would be considered a builder defect and explicitly not the responsibility of the condominium owners association. The $200.00 monthly assessment is collected to pay for the COMMON elements of the property, such as the clubhouse, the pool, landscaping, trash removal, insurance, water, etc. It is not for maintaining elements of the property that are solely the responsibility of the individual homeowners to maintain as defined in the condominium owners association’s governing documents.The condominium association does send out notice to homeowners when damaged or disconnected dryer vents are discovered during the annual cleaning so that homeowners are aware and can address the issue. Attached are past letters sent to homeowners within [redacted]'s building. There is no record of any issues with the dryer vent that services [redacted]'s unit. Additionally, I am attaching a letter from [redacted] from 2012 that explains the process of dryer vent cleaning and notification handled by this contractor. This process has remained the same for many years now.

Sharon met
with the contractor, chosen and hired by the [redacted],
in early July at the request of the homeowner. When the findings were not what
the homeowner desired, a second meeting with the contractor was scheduled for
July 22nd, this time with Bob R[redacted]. At this meeting the painter was
authorized to complete the work of sanding down and repainting the areas in
question. On July 24th, [redacted] was informed of this movement
towards a resolution of her problem. It was not until August 17th,
three and a half weeks later, that [redacted] reached out to inform us that the
painter had never shown up. This is important to point out because Rentz
Management is not an onsite management company. We rely on a system of
communication with homeowners to provide us with knowledge of problems at their
homes. Once we heard from [redacted], again we reached out to the painter who
assured us he would be there within the week. A week and a half later, on a
Saturday, [redacted] reached out to us a second time to inform us that the
painter had never shown up. The following Monday, she reported Rentz Management
to the Revdex.com. The Revdex.com did not inform us of [redacted]’s complaint until the following day, September 1st.
It was the
same Monday the complaint was filed, during regular business hours, that our
attempts to contact the painter were unsuccessful. For the entire month of
September, the painter was unable to be reached. Sharon explained this chain of
events to [redacted] on Wednesday, September 2nd via email:“[redacted], I have made
many attempts to have the contractor come back andrepaint
the doors. The company name is [redacted] and theowner is [redacted] and his number is [redacted]. He has
assured me manytimes
that the work would be done. I called again yesterday and found out thathe is on vacation and
will not return for at least another week. I called his son and asked to
have the work completed and h(e) told me as soon as he reached his dad he would get
back to me. I have not received a call as of today. I will keep you informed of any information I receive. Sharon”
Rentz Management
and [redacted] ended their relationship effective October 1,
2015. Despite this fact, Sharon still reached out to the painter to try to
resolve this issue for [redacted], speaking to him for the last time on October
9th. If the work done after this time was not acceptable, Rentz
Management no longer has any recourse in the situation. It is now up to the new
management company to resolve this issue going forward.