Silver Bow Property Management

To Whom it May Concern with the Revdex.com,The former tenant seems to be raising the following points in their complaintEach item is presented with our response
-- The deposit was returned after the legally allowed day mark
This is untrue
The tenant may have surrendered the unit
on 2/15/but was responsible for the unit until 2/29/by their requestPlease find attached the notice letter from the tenantOn this letter they indicate that they will be departing on 2/29/Thirty days (as is required by the law quoted by the tenant) is allowed for the return of the depositThat day period ended 3/30/Their deposit was postmarked 3/21/To avoid any confusion about what day they had requested to be responsible for the unit a confirmation letter was sent with these dates the tenant provided(also attached.)
Additionally in Section (page attached) of their lease the tenants decided to automatically renew for months at the end of their initial term (9/30/2015)By state law this renewal period must be decided at the time of leasing and is based entirely on the tenant's wishes as indicated by their hand written notationThis final date of this renewal would have been 2/29/This is the last day of there lease meaning the final day to return their deposit would again be 3/30/
Furthermore, the tenant's letter, for which they required to give days of notice was postmarked 1/26/which means the earliest they could have terminated possession if we disregarded their written wishes to retain the unit until 2/29/was 2/26/2016, which would make the latest acceptable posting of a payment, based on a day window, as 3/27/2016.
-- The tenants had to do some cleaning at inception of their lease
The tenants did have some cleaning items that they took care of themselves and were credited $10/27/Their ledger is attached.
--- hours of cleaning after the move out was considered excessive by the tenant
The tenant was charged for hours of cleaning as they indicatedThis reflects the cleaning needed to bring the unit up to the standardThe credit of dollars at the beginning of the lease means they are responsible for returning the unit in the same clean condition that they were paid to bring it toIf no such requirement to return the unit clean was going to be made then the incentive to offer them payment for their services would never have been extendedThe tenant is welcome to return to SBPM the 75$ credit at which time we will return to them the cleaning charges (which were less than $75)
--- 35$ is considered excessive by the tenant
$represents the time spent to perform numerous small actions that prevent maintenance staff from doing one other hour billable maintenance workThese tasks include:
* Check the unit to see if the tenant cleaned the carpet as expected for this type of dwelling with this type of carpet.
* After discovering the carpets were not professionally cleaned the records were check to see if the tenant turned in a receipt indicated they had made a good faith effort to clean the carpet and the issue is with the vendor and not the tenantIn this case no such receipt was received
* The records of the prior tenant are checked to ensure that the carpets were professionally cleaned prior to this tenant taking possession so that the tenant can be held to the professionally cleaned standard(see dayspring receipt attached)
*The lease is checked to be completely sure that it indicates that carpet cleaning is required even though it should be pre-filled in by the computer we like to be completely sure(See attached page) to see if the tenant Determine that the carpet was not cleaned, verify in the lease that it was specifically required, Please see section 7.e.ii on attached page.* A work order is created and an appointment is then made with the professional carpet cleaning service
* Needed keys are checked out to the carpet cleaning service
* On the day of the appointment the work order and the keys ready for check out are double checked mid day to be sure that the cleaner is still on schedule (sometimes they run behind), any changes need to be coordinated with the cleaning staff and the leasing staff
* When the carpet cleaning is complete a follow up is done to be sure the carpet cleaning has been performed to standard so the the next tenant will have a clean home
* Keys are retrieved from the carpet cleaning vendor and checked back in
* The invoice from the carpet cleaner is then processed, paid and applied to the tenant's lease
While none of these actions represents an extensive time commitment they do represent collectively they represent time and resources not spent serving out other clients
--- The carpets were not indicated to be be professionally cleaned
The requirement for professional carpet cleaning was indicated in both the lease in section 7.e.ii, as stated above as well as Tenant Day Notice Acknowledgement Letter
--- Unsatisfactory maintenance items on the initial statement of condition were charged to their deposit
No fees was charged for any repair either during or after their occupancy(The Tenant's ledger is attached)
We welcome any additional questions
***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com***

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
Silver Bow Property Management (SBPM) agreed in their rebuttal that the property was surrendered by the tenant and acceptance of the premises by SBPM occurred on 02/15/2016. Montana Code Annotated (MCA) 70-25-202 states “Every landlord, within 30 days subsequent to the termination of a tenancy OR within 30 days subsequent to a surrender and acceptance of the leasehold premises, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, shall provide the departing tenant with a written list of any rent due and any damage and cleaning charges, brought after the provisions of70-25-201 have been followed, with regard to the leasehold premises that the landlord alleges are the responsibility of the tenant. Delivery of the list must be accompanied by payment of the difference, if any, between the security deposit and the permitted charges set forth in70-25-201”.  Regardless of the date our 1/26/2016 letter stated or the termination date stated in the lease, the property was surrendered first (i.e. it happened prior to the termination of tenancy); therefore, per MCA, the surrendered date (02/15/2016) is used for determining when the security deposit was required to be returned.
We should have received our refund and list of deductions no later than 03/16/2016.  The security deposit refund was post-marked 03/21/2016, which means the refund wasn’t even mailed until 5 days past the 30-day time frame required by MCA.  As stated in our initial complaint, according to MCA 70-25-203, violation of MCA 70-25-202 dictates that SBPM forfeited all rights to withhold any portion of the security deposit for damages or cleaning.
SBPM is clearly failing to adhere to Montana Code; by refusing to return the balance of our deposit, which they forfeited their right to, they are knowingly and willfully continuing to violate Montana Code.
SBPM is clearly in violation of MCA, and is required to refund us our remaining deposit, which makes the remainder of the issues irrelevant. However:
The deficiencies of the unit were profound when we moved in.  It was not to our standard of being habitable.
SBPM provided us with a Statement of Condition on 10/01/2014, which stated that the premises had been cleaned. However, once we entered the premises we discovered this was not true- every room in the house, including the garage, was extremely dirty. We returned the Statement of Condition with a list of all the problems that we found (Correction to the Statement of Condition). SBPM then admitted and agreed that the premises had not been cleaned (as evidenced by Israel Green’s voicemail and in the rebuttal), and agreed to credit us for the cleaning we had already undertaken in order to begin moving our belongings into the unit.  The $73.50 credited only covered 3 hours spent cleaning the kitchen, which was a small portion of the total time spent cleaning the entire unit.  We were never credited for the remainder of the hours spent cleaning. 
Our Correction to the Statement of Condition clearly states that it took us three hours to clean just the kitchen; SBPM has disregarded that.  In their rebuttal, SBPM is asserting that we spent three hours cleaning the ENTIRE unit. They charged $61.25 to “wipe cobwebs from staircase, clean light fixture in upstairs hallway, replace light bulb in front bedroom, wipe door jam going into kitchen, remove tin foil from burner trays clean if necessary, sweep/mop all floors if needed.”  There is no way that the entire house can be cleaned to SBPM’s standard in 3 hours if those 6 items take 2.5 hours. Based on the statement that 6 items take 2.5 hours to clean, the 3 hours spent cleaning by us at the beginning of the lease could not have brought the unit near the condition that SBPM is claiming.  Since there were only 6 items that needed cleaning when the unit was returned compared to the amount of cleaning performed by us at the beginning of the tenancy, it proves that we exceeded the cleaning standard set forth in the contract and should not be charged cleaning fees.
If SBPM contends that the $75.00 they credited us brought the entire unit to standard then charging $61.25 for cleaning the 6 items on the Move Out Calculation is excessive.  If SBPM asserts we are capable of cleaning the entire house (which we clearly received in worse condition than we left it) in 3 hours, then professional cleaners should have completed the work of cleaning the 6 items on the Move Out Calculation in a matter of minutes.  SBPM’s argument is illogical and they have contradicted themselves.
Additionally, SBPM’s claim that they credited us $75.00 is incorrect.  We only received a credit for $73.50 which we deducted from the final month’s rent (February, 2016).  If the ledger states we were credited $75.00, we want the remaining $1.50 credit added to our remaining deposit for a total of $278.87.
$35.00 for vendor coordinating is excessive.  “Checking the unit to see if the carpets were cleaned, checking the lease to see if the premises required carpet cleaning, checking to see if the prior tenant cleaned the carpets” should have been accomplished by SBPM prior to submitting the 24 Hour Right to Clean to us.  How can SBPM tell us to clean the carpets on the 24 Hour Right to Clean if SBPM hasn’t completed their due diligence and checked that it is even required? This administrative work should not have been billed to us, since it should have been completed prior to the 24 Hour Right to Clean.  SBPM states “On the day of the appointment the work order and the keys ready for check out are double checked mid day to be sure that the cleaner is still on schedule (sometimes they run behind), any changes need to be coordinated with the cleaning staff and the leasing staff”-why is SBPM charging us to double-check an appointment that they made? If SBPM chose a vendor who sometimes runs behind (according to SBPM rebuttal) it is not our fault and it is not a justifiable charge. By their own account SBPM shows that the fees charged are excessive.
We reserve the right to comment on carpet cleaning to a later date as we cannot view the Dayspring receipt attachment.
SBPM claims that we received a Tenant 30 Day Notice Acknowledgement Letter that indicated the requirement of professional carpet cleaning.  We never received this letter.
Our original complaint and this rebuttal provide solid reasoning for the return of the remainder of our deposit.  SBPM’s response did not give any relevant information for us to reconsider our position and fails to provide any rationality as to why they failed to abide by MCA. We demand the return of the remainder of our deposit of $277.37 and $1.50 credit for a total of $278.87 by May 12th 2016.
Sincerely,[redacted]

Review: Silver Bow Property Management are gaining excessive complaints around town against them, and as a recent tenant of theirs, I now see why. After having a very friendly converstation with the property manager, he assured me that as long as I move out and clean the unit to be as clean, if not cleaner than I had left it, we would have no problems with them returning the deposit. Upon move out, I had the carpets cleaned, and had a proffessional cleaner assist me with the finishing touches throughout the unit. 1 month later, I received a breakdown of why I would not be getting my deposit back, which included professional carpet cleaning, and SEVERAL other cleaning actions that were unecessarily done after my departure. Certain things were listed, in which I am not arguing with, as in backyard upkeep (I did not manicure the backyard before I moved), 3 items (plunger, soap dispenser and a small fire log on the back porch) were left behind, in which I am not disputing. They claimed lightbulbs had to be replaced, when I went through the house twice to make sure they were all in working condition. They were all in perfect working condition. They sent me photos of ONE penny on the floor (on a hardwood surface, which I had none in my home), ONE TINY woodchip, (which could have come off of ANYONE'S shoe...even theirs), and ONE TINY peice of lint on the carpet, to justify cleaning the floors again professionally. Not only are they trying to hold my entire deposit of $675, but they are claiming I OWE them almost $100. I've heard stories around town about them being the worst property management in Butte, and they have proved their reputation to be correct. Not only will I not be paying them, but I would like to pursue legal action.Desired Settlement: I have already sent them a copy of my receipt for the professional carpet cleaning I had performed on my last day in the unit. I would like for at least $400 to be returned to me from my deposit.

Business

Response:

We have not had excessive complaints, our Revdex.com record shows this; as does our A rating.

Manager did have a conversation with tenant [redacted], to help her situation out, we would not charge her early termination fee; if she found a new tenant to take her place. She did so, and we did not charge her the early termination fee.

We also agreed that there would be no cleaning charges, "clean the unit to be as clean, if not cleaner" This agreement is the same for all tenants. The [redacted] unit clearly was in need of additional cleaning, while the place was not filthy, there were clearly some items that needed to be addressed, so that the new tenant would have a clean place to live; This cleaning also had to be performed on an urgent basis to accommodate the near seamless occupation of the new replacement tenant.

It is unclear what items tenant [redacted] is and is not disputing. In attached email "Re Move out pictures for [redacted]" Tenant seems to only be concerned with the carpet cleaning. In this Revdex.com complaint [redacted] states "Certain things were listed, in which I am not arguing with" but also disputes $400; "I would like for at least $400 to be returned to me from my deposit. ". It is very unclear to us what exactly is being disputed. It is clear to us that [redacted] disputes the carpet cleaning, but that is only $146.88, what makes up the remaining $253.12 she disputes? No combination of these charges equals the amount disputed, the number seems to be arbitrary; We are asking for clarification on this; We have provided a very clear and concise list of charges against [redacted]'s deposit, in the document SBPM_- _Move_Out_Calculation_([redacted]_-_[redacted])(2)

As for the carpet cleaning, MT law requires a receipt as proof. Without a receipt as proof, finding items left on the surface, and the other cleaning items needing to be done at the time of the final inspection we had to come to the conclusion that che carpet had not been cleaned. Providing a receipt 70+ days latter is just too late. Receipts are written poof used to prove to the next tenant that carpet cleaning did indeed occur, not providing this proof in a reasonable time frame (on or before final move out day), but days, weeks, months latter is the error of the tenant not ours. No matter how frustrating to either party. Sure the bits of junk in the photo could have been tracked in by the inspector; but the fact remains that no receipt was submitted at the time, and based on the condition of how the unit was left, it was easy to conclude that the carpets had also not been cleaned.

Lightbulbs, can burn out any time, there is just no telling when exactly the bulb burned out. We will research the cost of the bulb and refund that amount and operate under the assumption that it burned out during the transition period, its just not worth arguing about.

The photo of the penny is not on a flooring surface, but of the inside of a cabinet shelf. The photo shows the surface to also be very dusty.

Not sure how we can come to a conclusion on this. We have not "held" [redacted]s deposit, rather it has been used to pay for the cleaning and repairs needed to get the unit into condition like when [redacted] moved in. This is our obligation to the property owner; who we represent. We are awaiting clarification on what specific line items cunningham is disputing.

Management Department

Silver Bow Property Management

###-###-#### Office Ext #

###-###-#### Fax

[redacted]

[redacted]

Review: As guardian of my disabled son I helped him find a rental house. All agreements were done through Silver Bow Properties. When it came time to move my son to a different rental I made sure everything at the old house was as good or better than when we moved my son in. Silver Bow Properties refuses to return my security deposit of $645.00 and has lied about the reasons. I took pictures and have witnesses of the condition of the house when we left because I had heard stories of Silver Bow doing this to others.Desired Settlement: Return of deposit and admonishment of Silver Bow regarding the way they treat customers.

Consumer

Response:

[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]

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,

I do not accept Silver Bow's response because I feel that all the facts and reasons for returning my security deposit have already been presented to them and ignored. Also, they didn't even come close to complying with the state laws (attached) governing security deposit returns. I am also attaching a copy of the letter I wrote to Silver Bow Property Management which they have yet declined to respond to.