Southern California Real Estate Management Reviews (%countItem)
Southern California Real Estate Management Rating
Address: 28001 Smyth Dr STE 107, Valencia, California, United States, 91355-4032
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Web: |
|
E-mails: |
Sign in to see
|
Add contact information for Southern California Real Estate Management
Add new contacts
Failed to fix repairs in timely manner or provide equitable adjustment. Deposit fraudulently held in bad faith for services not provided.
Southern California Real Estate Management (SCREM) has held my deposit for a property they manage in bad faith for 43 days. On January 24th, 2020 SCREM deducted funds from my deposit. A few days later, SCREM stated that all of the deposit funds that were held were based on estimates because as of 27th of January, 2020, SCREM had not received any invoices for the services they held the funds for. I never receieved the estimates provided from any contractor, only an overview list from SCREM. The overview of the estimates appeared to be highly inflated, and in alignment with what appear to be other artificial charges held against many other past tenants. The estimates included painting charges, although Tim specifically told me not to paint during my pre-moveout walkthrough. The company later admitted that the held funds were not used for the means stated, prior to a new tenant taking possession of the property, including the charges for painting. They further stated that they would refund me at least an additional $***, none of which I have seen to date. After many attempts to get in touch with SCREM regarding the return of my deposit, I spoke to ***, who is the "head of the office" according to SCREM employee ***. *** stated that she had contractor invoices for the property being re-keyed ($250) and cleaned ($330) for services that were performed on the 22nd, which is in contrast to prior communications from SCREM, when *** previously stated that they had no idea what the final charges for those services would be when they sent my first refund on the 24th of January. I suspect the documents she read might be the estimates provided by the contractors, because I don't think the cleaning and re-keying service was actually performed as stated. As of February 21, 2020, I have not received any refund for the funds held by SCREM as estimates. In addition, SCREM has also not responded to multiple request for an equitable adjustment for a time period when I was unable to use a portion of the property due to flooding and inadequate repairs that failed to fix the problem. It is also highly likely that I was exposed to mold during that time-frame or since, due to SCREM's negligence in making a timely and adequate repair. If other SCREM customers read this and feel they may have also been negatively affected by SCREM they can contact my attorney via our websites that will be launched in the next 72 hours, including
100% refund of all funds held by SCREM or property owner, due to funds being held in bad faith (landlords are legally liable for three time a tenant's deposit if funds are held in bad faith), and equitable adjustment reimbursement for the time a portion of the property I rented was inhabitable ($700), in accordance with past precedent sent to SCREM by tenant.
This clients issue has been resolved. He tried extorting money from us to not report us or post bad reviews all over the internet. We refused, provided proof of all landlord valid deductions and proof of payment as well. He is not entitled any anymore money. He is upset his work forced him to break his lease early and was charged accordingly. He
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Southern California Real Estate Management's ("the company") statement that I tried to extort money is slanderous and defamatory and may harm my continued ability to perform my job, due to the nature of my work. I requested a refund of disputed funds held against my security deposit and equitable compensation for a time that a portion of the property was uninhabitable, which is clear in my correspondance to the company. I have removed comments on Yelp and Google and offered to remove comments on Facebook (company deactivated Facebook reviews, which had a 1 out 5 rating prior to my post), due to being threatened with a lawsuit for posting my perspective of experiences with their company and attempting to correspond with other clients who may have had similar experiences. I thought removing the post was the best decision at the time, considering the threat of a lawsuit for using online review forums has caused additional emotional distress in regard to my dispute with the company. Also, none of the post I made changed the company's composite rating for reviews, due to the numerous other reviews being posted on the review forums, many of which make similar, if not more definitivy negative claims. I additionally tried to cancel this complaint on Revdex.com due to the above stated reasoning but have not found a function within the online interface allowing me to do so.
I provided receipts for professional cleaning that I paid for in the days prior to vacating the property upon the company's request, which did not change the company's perspective, and they did not offer a refund for cleaning charges held against my deposit, so I'm not sure why they requested the receipts.
As of yet, I have not been provided photos of the move-out inspection, in contrast to agreements negotiated in my efforts to reach a reasonable resolution. Instead the company sent me the move-in inspection photos and orginally claimed they were the move-out inspection photos until I pointed out a date on one of the photos that was clear evidence of the contrary.
Additionally, the company's statement on multiple internet forums which implies "He is upset his work forced him to break his lease" is false and defamatory to me and my employer. I willfully chose to break my lease after accepting a voluntary transfer that came in conjunction with a promotion at my place of employment. I could have maintained my current prior position with my employer for the duration of the lease if I chose to do so. Therefore my decision to break the lease was voluntary and not "forced", in contrast to what was definitively implied by the company's statement. Such statements may hurt my relationship with my employer and my employers ability to recruit.
Consumer now admits he voluntarily broke the lease. Per the contract that he signed and initialed he is responsible for those damages to the landlord. He failed to provide any receipts or alert anyone that he allegedly cleaned the house prior to move out until a couple weeks ago. The home was not in position to be re-rented as the oven blinds counter and other places of the property we're not cleaned. We have offered to compensate him for the three days 200 sq feet of the 2200 sq feet was allegedly uninhabitable but he has refused to accept because he wants to be reimbursed for him voluntarily breaking the lease. Consumer does not realize that we are a middle person between him and landlord and landlord is allowed to keep the portion of the security deposit as a result of his breach of the lease.
Rental deposit not refunded
After being given a notice to vacate because the owner wanted to sell the property, I requested a walk-thru with the property mgmt. on Wednesday, 8/29/18, two days before vacate date. I had the house professionally cleaned as well as the carpets, and wiped down the walls. When *** and *** entered the home with me on 8/29 they both started commenting on how clean the house was and asked me if I had painted the walls because they looked so good. We walked the entire house. The only thing *** noted was to replace a few light bulbs that were out. He also said that if there are holes in the screens I would be liable. I said I would have a problem with that because we did not review the screens on move in so there is no way to tell that I did damage. I left the walk thru thinking everything was good. Then when I get my refund check I find that they deducted over $600 for paint because the owner decided to paint the entire house white before selling. I explained that the walls were left in great condition as *** and *** attested to. However, when I saw the form that *** filled out, he checked that the walls needed paint. I did not get a copy of that document at the walk thru. Then they deducted over $$300 for a broken microwave that I used daily and never saw the large crack that they showed in the picture, nor did they point it out in the walk thru. They deducted $150 for screens which they refunded after I pointed out that they did not include screens on the walk-thru. I was stupid not get *** and *** to sign something at the walk thru. We have not rented in a very long time and as homeowners ourselves, we took great care with the property and I spent a week preparing the property after we moved out, making sure it was beautiful. I took pictures of the floor that also shows some of the walls, but I didn't think I needed to take detailed pics of everything after *** and *** raved about how nice the house looked. I feel like I was fooled, lied to, and taken advantage of. I have been asking around about SCREM and here that this is common behavior for them. They are supposed to be the professionals and they should provide a checklist of all items that are in disrepair, beyond reasonable and customary, to the tenant at the walk thru. And that is the other matter, I do not believe that the walls were beyond a reasonable and customary condition after two years of being in the property. There were no holes or chips. They only sited a few scuff marks here and there. The owner is supposed to take responsibility for upkeep, but I feel like that was passed on to me. We had an excellent payment history and never caused any problems. We are honest, *** folks and know what it is like to be a landlord. We would never take advantage of an landlord because we plan to be landlords again ourselves. There were a few other charges like $120 cleaning fee even though we had the house cleaned. They said some of the blinds were dusty. I'm going to let that go.
Property Address: ***
Tenancy: 9-1-2016 - 8-31-2018
Refund of painting charge for scuffs on the wall of $632.70 because the scuffs were not unreasonable or even mentioned on walk thru and a refund of $384.70 for the crack in the microwave that was found after my walk thru. The walk thru is supposed to be their opportunity to point out what the problems are and to allow me the chance to fix it.
A walk thru on the property is very basic and does not entail the precision, detail and tedious work of a move out inspection after a tenant vacates. Not all imperfections and damages can be seen or noted on a walk thru inspection. The tenant still has possession of the property after the walk thru and we cannot predict what damages may occur between the walk thru and actual move out.
Paint is given a 3 year life expectancy. The tenant was in the house for 2 years. The walls needed touch up paint after they vacated and they were charged with 33.3% of the cost to paint the walls for a total charge of $632.70. This was based on 2 bids from painters and the tenant was charged 33.3% of the lesser bid.
Upon the move out inspection, the microwave was found to be cracked. This could not be repaired and the microwave had to be replaced. The tenant was charged with the replacement.
The lease agreement is between the homeowner and the tenant. SCREM does not own the property. The homeowner was contacted numerous times to discuss the concerns the tenant had with the security deposit charges. The homeowner was only agreeable to removing the charge of $150 for the screens. She was not agreeable to waiving any other charges.
SCREM does not benefit from any charges against a tenants security deposit and only the actual homeowner can agree to delete or waive any of the charges, SCREM cannot.
We do not hold the security deposit and cannot refund any additional money to the tenant even if we would like to.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It was unreasonable to paint the entire house and charge me 33% of the lessor bid. A few scuff marks, as described by SCREM personnel, does not necessitate the entire house being painted. A reasonable response would have been to first wipe the wall clean, or to charge for touch up paint for the few spots that needed it. SCREM's job is to advise the homeowner of what is reasonable.
My understanding of tenant law is that a tenant is given the opportunity to make needed repairs, which is the purpose of the walk thru. To conduct the walkthrough with the tenant with no intention of actually informing the tenant of obvious repairs such as paint, in particular, seems to me a derrilict of duty. In my case, SCREM personnel even asked me if I had painted the walls, representing the exceptional condition of the walls. Further, it seems that SCREM advised the homeowner that because we were only in the home for two years, that it was okay for them to charge us a third of the cost to paint the entire house. The entire house was only painted because the owners decided to sell the house and obviously felt that white walls would sell better than the peach and green walls that existed. SCREM should have advised the owner that to repaint the entire house would be their sole responsibility, as the few scuff marks were within reason.
As for the microwave, we used it every day and I do not see how I could have missed a crack on the front facing part of unit. To not have known about it, combined with the unethical tactics shown by SCREM, leaves me to speculate if the crack happened after I moved out.
I believe that SCREM did not protect my tenant's rights. It is no matter to me what the owner agrees to or does not regarding my deposit refund as SCREM should have done a better job. If SCREM says that they cannot do a thorough walk thru with the tenant present, that should be communicated to the tenant. Maybe they should do the tenant walk thru a week before moveout, actually pointing out scuff marks and broken appliances, since these are big ticket items, and then tell the client that if additional damage is done after walk they will be liable for that as well. Set the expectations with the tenant and they will have far less complaints and unhappy tenants.
As far as I'm concerned, my refund for the paint charges and microwave is due even if at SCREM's expense. Thank you.
The tenant was charged a portion for TOUCH UP PAINTING, not painting of the whole house. Do you think the microwave door cracked while the property was vacant? Move-in and move-out inspections are both of equal detail.
Again SCREM does not have the money deducted from your security deposit. Your lease was between the owner and yourself not us. The owner is the only one that has any liability to you for your security deposit.