Initial Business Response /* (1000, 16, 2014/11/14) */
November 13,
Revdex.com
Case ID: XXXXXX
We entered into a lease with *** and *** *** on July 19, Apparently they could not find a time to view the property when we were available if they did not look inside
before rentingI showed up to prospects at a time this same house and had several showings but we also had over vacancies so could not spend all our time at one and showed each house several times until rentedWe tell every new tenant to make a list of any problems when they move in and we will fix or note that the problem was existing and not to be their responsibility when they move out
We received the list from the *** on July and issued a work order on that day to one of our independent contractors to take care of the repairable issuesOn July he completed repairing the bathtub, garage doors, kitchen faucet, garbage disposal (not on list but discovered needing replaced), added screws to one board in the deck floor and mini blinds replaced to match the back door closest to the windowThe locks on the front and back door were new locks that had been keyed alike and no repair necessary, only using the proper lock cylinder
In early September we received a call about the deck, some problems with the laminate flooring they you could put your fingers under it, fence gate falling downThe same contractor was sent back to the propertyThere were no bad boards on the deck, and after discussing the issues the contractor was told to leave the property and not fix anything by Mr*** so he left
A day or so later Mrs*** called and left a message acknowledging that her husband had told him not to fix anything but could he please fix a towel bar, some screens and one electrical outletOn September 23, the contractor returned and fixed those three items and at the time discussed the mold around the tub areaHe had not needed to caulk anything when the tube had been repairedHe explained that the black would just need to be cleaned to be removed
Around October we received calls from both Mrand Mrs *** regarding an issue with the railing on the deck where a vertical spindle had broken and sharp placed in the laminate flooringThe same contractor was sent again to check out the problemsThe broken spindle was not rotted but something had put enough pressure on it to snap itAt no time did he say the railings were rotted or unsafeThe laminate floor had two places in it where the joint was raised in one case and separated maybe 1/8th inch in the otherThese issues were then discussed with our maintenance foremanThe code regarding safety railing around a deck does not require a rail since it is not over inches off the groundAs property managers, we feel obligated to maintain a property within the code and not spend the owners money just because a tenant wants somethingThe options seemed to be leave it as it was or remove the railing, as a replacement spindle was not available to replace the broken oneWe consulted a flooring company regarding the laminate flooring and discussed ways of repairAfter many loud phone calls from the Hoffmans I decided to contact the owners and let them decide which way they wanted us to spend their moneythe husband is deployed in active duty military so I wrote the wife who lives of out of state with familyI explained the options and that the tenants have a year old they would like to retain the deck rail forShe said would go the options with her husband who did have some email contact abilityAfter a few days, she called me and said she had talked her husband into replacing the deck rail then issued a work order on November to replace the rail and see what could be done to the two issues in the laminateOn November the rail was replaced with all new rail and the floor repair was started and completed on November with no flooring needing to be removed or replaced, and fence gate was repaired
All issues we have been informed of by the *** have now been addressed and their lease is bindingUnfortunately it took longer on the decision regarding replacement or removal of the railing due to the owner's status but the decision the owner mad was as the tenant desired
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2016/10/25) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Jacques
Contact Phone: 417-[redacted]
Contact Email: [redacted]@thejacquesco.com
Answers are in the order submitted in the complaint.
Communication was complicated depending on whether talking to the complainant or her...
husband. A background check was purchased and in our files. Some charges and police involvement have occurred after lease began. We rented with no pets as part of the lease, which was shown to the complainant. $[redacted] penalty charged tenant upon verifying one dog on the premises. We could not tell anyone had smoked in the house when we got the house back. Cigarette butts outside are easy to remedy. Our lease was to one girl who listed her mother as another occupant. As far as we know that is who moved into the house. We have had no complaints from any neighbor. Complainant was informed in October 2015 that the air conditioner would have to be replaced in spring. They called on April 19, 2016 and asked us to get a bid. We submitted a bid from a contractor and
they said they would use their contact to do the job. We said fine and informed the tenant. In July the tenant was asking about getting the AC fixed and [redacted], maintenance director, called complainant to get the name and number of the person the complainant had turned it over to. [redacted] called the gentleman and he said he would try to get to it. After some more time and calls from the tenant, [redacted] gave the name and number to the tenant to try arranging a time. She was told it would be 10 weeks getting to it. When this was relayed to the complainants they said to proceed with the bid we had gotten in April. Order was sent to contractor on July 26 who told [redacted] that he would do it over the next 2 days before he left on a missions trip. Contractor called the office to get help getting a response from the tenant. [redacted] in our office then sent an email to tenant telling her we needed to set a time to do the job. Getting no response, the contractor left on his trip. During this time was when [redacted] was asked how it was going and he told client it was being installed which was the last he knew. Later, he learned of the lack of response of the tenant. I do not know why the office of the contractor did not know about the effort he made before he left but he can verify that he intended to get it [redacted]e and got no response from the tenant. Another contractor was hired by complainant to install the new unit and we never heard any more from the tenant. I [redacted]'t know of another incident similar to this at all. After knowing the complainant wanted the house back and that there had been police involvement, we moved forward with eviction. The court date was set for October 6 as we told complainant. We were told by attorney that it could be set up for immediate eviction if judgement entered. We received judgement on that Thursday and hand delivered execution of eviction to the sheriff's office shortly after on the same morning. We did not receive a call from deputy sheriff until Tuesday, October 11 when he told us he had posted the house for eviction on Thursday October 13. During this time is when [redacted], our maintenance director, was called asking about the eviction, which he knew nothing about until he was told on the 11th to arrange help to set it out on the 13th. I [redacted]'t think the complainant would be blaming us for the missed dates if she understood the fact that we can only do what the courts and the sheriff authorizes. We did set out the property on the 13th as posted by the sheriff and turned the property over to the complainant that day.
The property suffered only normal wear and tear with no unusual or extraordinary damage. We collected rent, late charges, pet charges, forfeited deposit and legal fees totaling 28% more than contract rent was scheduled to be. We feel like, given the reasonable condition the house was returned in and the almost 28% extra money, that we did a good job of protecting the interests of our clients/complainants and that they were appropriately compensated. The complainants did not put the no pet or no smoking in writing when they filled out the management agreement and forms, in fact they wrote in that they would accept one dog under 15 pounds. They would have been given a copy when they turned them in to us but always welcome to another copy which we will supply with final settlement of funds this week. We put in the lease no pet so we enforced that clause whereas complainant would have accepted one small dog. However, the tenant chose to violate her lease by adding a dog. Cigarette butts in the yard is not smoking in the house, so I think we accomplished what our client thought they had asked for and made the tenant pay for her choice to violate the lease.
Calling the maintenance director to ask about ongoing legal issues does not make him rude when he just did not know details but offered to find out. We are always concerned when we have communication problems with a client or tenant. In a perfect world, we would have only one of the clients or tenants do all the talking for all of them and only one of us do all the talking for all of us. However, that arrangement would not be practical, workable or appealing, so we try our best to communicate as best we can and we all tell the truth as we know it.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 16, 2014/11/14) */
November 13,
Revdex.com
Case ID: XXXXXX
We entered into a lease with *** and *** *** on July 19, Apparently they could not find a time to view the property when we were available if they did not look inside
before rentingI showed up to prospects at a time this same house and had several showings but we also had over vacancies so could not spend all our time at one and showed each house several times until rentedWe tell every new tenant to make a list of any problems when they move in and we will fix or note that the problem was existing and not to be their responsibility when they move out
We received the list from the *** on July and issued a work order on that day to one of our independent contractors to take care of the repairable issuesOn July he completed repairing the bathtub, garage doors, kitchen faucet, garbage disposal (not on list but discovered needing replaced), added screws to one board in the deck floor and mini blinds replaced to match the back door closest to the windowThe locks on the front and back door were new locks that had been keyed alike and no repair necessary, only using the proper lock cylinder
In early September we received a call about the deck, some problems with the laminate flooring they you could put your fingers under it, fence gate falling downThe same contractor was sent back to the propertyThere were no bad boards on the deck, and after discussing the issues the contractor was told to leave the property and not fix anything by Mr*** so he left
A day or so later Mrs*** called and left a message acknowledging that her husband had told him not to fix anything but could he please fix a towel bar, some screens and one electrical outletOn September 23, the contractor returned and fixed those three items and at the time discussed the mold around the tub areaHe had not needed to caulk anything when the tube had been repairedHe explained that the black would just need to be cleaned to be removed
Around October we received calls from both Mrand Mrs *** regarding an issue with the railing on the deck where a vertical spindle had broken and sharp placed in the laminate flooringThe same contractor was sent again to check out the problemsThe broken spindle was not rotted but something had put enough pressure on it to snap itAt no time did he say the railings were rotted or unsafeThe laminate floor had two places in it where the joint was raised in one case and separated maybe 1/8th inch in the otherThese issues were then discussed with our maintenance foremanThe code regarding safety railing around a deck does not require a rail since it is not over inches off the groundAs property managers, we feel obligated to maintain a property within the code and not spend the owners money just because a tenant wants somethingThe options seemed to be leave it as it was or remove the railing, as a replacement spindle was not available to replace the broken oneWe consulted a flooring company regarding the laminate flooring and discussed ways of repairAfter many loud phone calls from the Hoffmans I decided to contact the owners and let them decide which way they wanted us to spend their moneythe husband is deployed in active duty military so I wrote the wife who lives of out of state with familyI explained the options and that the tenants have a year old they would like to retain the deck rail forShe said would go the options with her husband who did have some email contact abilityAfter a few days, she called me and said she had talked her husband into replacing the deck rail then issued a work order on November to replace the rail and see what could be done to the two issues in the laminateOn November the rail was replaced with all new rail and the floor repair was started and completed on November with no flooring needing to be removed or replaced, and fence gate was repaired
All issues we have been informed of by the *** have now been addressed and their lease is bindingUnfortunately it took longer on the decision regarding replacement or removal of the railing due to the owner's status but the decision the owner mad was as the tenant desired
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2016/10/25) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Jacques
Contact Phone: 417-[redacted]
Contact Email: [redacted]@thejacquesco.com
Answers are in the order submitted in the complaint.
Communication was complicated depending on whether talking to the complainant or her...
husband. A background check was purchased and in our files. Some charges and police involvement have occurred after lease began. We rented with no pets as part of the lease, which was shown to the complainant. $[redacted] penalty charged tenant upon verifying one dog on the premises. We could not tell anyone had smoked in the house when we got the house back. Cigarette butts outside are easy to remedy. Our lease was to one girl who listed her mother as another occupant. As far as we know that is who moved into the house. We have had no complaints from any neighbor. Complainant was informed in October 2015 that the air conditioner would have to be replaced in spring. They called on April 19, 2016 and asked us to get a bid. We submitted a bid from a contractor and
they said they would use their contact to do the job. We said fine and informed the tenant. In July the tenant was asking about getting the AC fixed and [redacted], maintenance director, called complainant to get the name and number of the person the complainant had turned it over to. [redacted] called the gentleman and he said he would try to get to it. After some more time and calls from the tenant, [redacted] gave the name and number to the tenant to try arranging a time. She was told it would be 10 weeks getting to it. When this was relayed to the complainants they said to proceed with the bid we had gotten in April. Order was sent to contractor on July 26 who told [redacted] that he would do it over the next 2 days before he left on a missions trip. Contractor called the office to get help getting a response from the tenant. [redacted] in our office then sent an email to tenant telling her we needed to set a time to do the job. Getting no response, the contractor left on his trip. During this time was when [redacted] was asked how it was going and he told client it was being installed which was the last he knew. Later, he learned of the lack of response of the tenant. I do not know why the office of the contractor did not know about the effort he made before he left but he can verify that he intended to get it [redacted]e and got no response from the tenant. Another contractor was hired by complainant to install the new unit and we never heard any more from the tenant. I [redacted]'t know of another incident similar to this at all. After knowing the complainant wanted the house back and that there had been police involvement, we moved forward with eviction. The court date was set for October 6 as we told complainant. We were told by attorney that it could be set up for immediate eviction if judgement entered. We received judgement on that Thursday and hand delivered execution of eviction to the sheriff's office shortly after on the same morning. We did not receive a call from deputy sheriff until Tuesday, October 11 when he told us he had posted the house for eviction on Thursday October 13. During this time is when [redacted], our maintenance director, was called asking about the eviction, which he knew nothing about until he was told on the 11th to arrange help to set it out on the 13th. I [redacted]'t think the complainant would be blaming us for the missed dates if she understood the fact that we can only do what the courts and the sheriff authorizes. We did set out the property on the 13th as posted by the sheriff and turned the property over to the complainant that day.
The property suffered only normal wear and tear with no unusual or extraordinary damage. We collected rent, late charges, pet charges, forfeited deposit and legal fees totaling 28% more than contract rent was scheduled to be. We feel like, given the reasonable condition the house was returned in and the almost 28% extra money, that we did a good job of protecting the interests of our clients/complainants and that they were appropriately compensated. The complainants did not put the no pet or no smoking in writing when they filled out the management agreement and forms, in fact they wrote in that they would accept one dog under 15 pounds. They would have been given a copy when they turned them in to us but always welcome to another copy which we will supply with final settlement of funds this week. We put in the lease no pet so we enforced that clause whereas complainant would have accepted one small dog. However, the tenant chose to violate her lease by adding a dog. Cigarette butts in the yard is not smoking in the house, so I think we accomplished what our client thought they had asked for and made the tenant pay for her choice to violate the lease.
Calling the maintenance director to ask about ongoing legal issues does not make him rude when he just did not know details but offered to find out. We are always concerned when we have communication problems with a client or tenant. In a perfect world, we would have only one of the clients or tenants do all the talking for all of them and only one of us do all the talking for all of us. However, that arrangement would not be practical, workable or appealing, so we try our best to communicate as best we can and we all tell the truth as we know it.