Tiner Properties, Inc.

Tiner Properties was contacting this applicant by email today to let them know we would refund their application fee due to the miscommunicationThe refund will be completed by Monday, March 2nd

The complainant is disputing the deductions made from their security depositPursuant to Civil Code Section 1950.5, Tiner Properties completed a pre inspection of the property on 12/22/to provide the complainant an opportunity to resolve items that may be deducted from their security deposit
That report indicated the hauling, cleaning, repairs and carpet cleaning needed to avoid deductions from their deposit, if not remediedOn 1/1/15, the tenants completed their move and returned possession of the property to TinerTiner completed the final move out inspection, compared the condition with the move in report signed by complainants and noted those items that were not remediedPictures of those items were taken and shared with complainantWithin days Tiner provided the complainant the security deposit accounting noting that not all invoices had been received, and providing estimated costs for the invoices not receivedWithin days of receipt of the final invoice Tiner provided the complainant a final accounting with the invoices attachedThose invoices included cleaning, carpet cleaning, and unpaid rentThe deposit refund accounting was handled in a timely manner and within the requirements of Civil Code 1950.5. Complainant references repairs to the fireplace, refrigerator and microwave, which are not part of the security deposit accounting or part of the amount they are seekingThese repair items were noted and reported to the owner when Tiner was notified of the conditionTiner responded by ordering estimates for repair of the microwave and providing to the landlordRent deductions for these items were never requestedThe requirement for repair and deduct for these items would not be upheld as they are not habitability issues

Hi, thanks so much. I don't agree with their offer of just giving 30 dollars for the filter and bulbs which we replaced before moving out.What about the cleaning charges for 185 dollars when we left the place sparkling clean.The only place we did not clean was the smallest room of the house the laundry room and you conveniently sent me those pictures. Me and my whole family spent 3 days cleaning the house sweeping mopping vaccumming removing cobwebs everything as stated on your move out list this issue cannot be amicably resolved until you guys refund us us deposit reasonably. I am attaching the videos we took before we moved out

The property was provided to the complainant in clean condition, and pursuant to the lease and civil code section regarding security deposit determinations, the landlord may charge the tenant's deposit to bring the property back to the condition received. Attached are some pictures taken at the move out inspection that indicate the floors were not cleaned, kitchen counters and appliances had spills, drawers had debris and were not cleaned out, closets were not cleaned of debris, laundry sink was left dirty, window sills were dirty. An invoice was provided to the complainant with the security deposit determination reflecting the expense to the landlord to clean the property. The costs for cleaning the property are warranted. We are willing to refund the $30 for the disputed light bulbs and filter charges.

I am rejecting this response because: I am rejecting this response because: Their claims are bogus, the home was left in excellent condition and thoroughly cleaned. I stand on my original claim and am prepared to take this matter to court. Tiner Properties has a long history of this bad behavior and I will not fall victim to their predatory practices.

My grandmother and I jointly owned a rental home. When our tenant vacated, our property manager (not Tiner Properties) told us that the home needed 60K in repairs to make it ready to rent or sell. We then called John T[redacted] with Tiner Properties. John and his teammate Jenny H[redacted] came out and helped us devise a much more affordable plan to sell the home. They suggested $10K for the most needed repairs that would make the home look good, coordinated all the vendors to do the work and even got most of the vendors to agree to payment when we closed escrow. In no time our house looked great and we had multiple offers! We ended up closing escrow above full price. The whole sales process was great, but the service they provided after the sale was even more impressive to my grandmother and I. Our former Property Manager had a tying arrangement which required us to list the home with him - but we did not know about that clause in our agreement until after our home was sold and he demanded 6K in Realtor fees! We called John in a panic. John calmed us down and invited us back to his office for a consultation. He listned carefully and read all our documents, then called the Real Estate legal hot line on our behalf. Then he helped us craft a great letter which ultimately resulted in the demand for 6K being dropped! It was awesome to work with someone who had our best interest at heart before, during and after the sale! I highly recommend John and Jenny to anyone considering selling or buying RE. They are fantastic and always have their clients best interest at heart

Review: Tiner Properties will not respond to our mail, emails or phone calls regarding our security deposit dispute.

We entered into a contract to lease a house [redacted] Citrus Heights, CA XXXXX) with [redacted] through [redacted] Property Mgmt. on 7/15/12. We always paid our rent and water bill on time. Never late.

On 3/1/13 [redacted] transferred all of their leasing contracts to Tiner Properties Inc. We never signed a new contract with Tiner.

On 6/15/13 we were giving a 30 day notice of termination of tenancy from Tiner Properties. The homeowners wanted to sell there home.

During our 30 days before moving out we spoke with [redacted] our new property manager from Tiner, regarding the stress of finding a new home in 30 days. [redacted] told us to find a house for rent on tiner.com and we will get you guys in as soon as possible. We found a house we liked on there website and meet with [redacted] there. She told us we would need to submit new applications but that there would be no problem getting us into this house because we have never been late on our rent and that we were good tenants. We went home right away and submitted our applications and paid the $35 a person application fees. We called everyday for a week trying to find out our status on the house. Most of the time they didn't answer so we would leave messages. We were ignored for over a week. Finally having enough I asked my friend to call Tiner regarding the same house to see what they tell her. They told her that it was still available and to go ahead and submit an application with them. We were upset that Tiner could not pick up the phone and tell us what was going on. So that same day we called over and over until we finally got [redacted] on the phone and she told us we were denied because of an issue on our credit from over 7 years ago that was discharged on our bankruptcy. We felt it was unfair to deny us over something we could do nothing about from so long ago. So after wasting over a week waiting on Tiner and now being out $70 for there application fees, we went back to work finding a new home. We found a new home and moved in on 7/6/13. We clean the [redacted] house. Both front and back yards. We had the carpets cleaned professional even though the carpets were not cleaned upon our move in. We left that house in better condition then when we moved in. We did a final walk through with [redacted] of Tiner on 7/15/13. [redacted] told us at the time everything looks good and she doesn't see anything that would be deducted from our deposit, but that she does have to meet with the homeowner and she will get back with us in a few weeks. [redacted] then emails us on 7/18/13 with issues the omeowners have stating that they spoke with [redacted] from Deterding Properties to confirm these wer not here upon move in: Paint graffiti on garage wall, haul wood on side yard and cost of countertop microwave. We called [redacted] and left message on 7/18/13. I received no call back. I emailed [redacted] on 7/23/13 stating the graffiti and firewood was preexisting to our move in. We did accept the microwave charge. [redacted] emails back the same day that she will forward any concerns to the homeowner. We also spoke with [redacted] from Deterding she told us that she told [redacted] that she doesn't remember the [redacted] house that she seen thousands of houses since then. She also said that Tiner has to give you the opportunity to fix these issues. I wrote [redacted] an email on 7/24/13 as well as called her office and left a message regarding the firewood. I asked if we could pick up the firewood as we were not aware this was going to be an issue since the house has a fireplace. No response back from [redacted]. I email her again on 7/30/13. Again no response. On 8/2/13, we receive in the mail our deposit with deductions for the following: firewood haul away $115, Paint graffiti and clean stove $45. Replace microwave $50, water 6/13-7/15 $47.85, water 3/27-4/10 $21.75. I mailed and emailed a letter disputing our deposit deductions. I have not received any response. I have emailed, I have called and left messages.Desired Settlement: What we are asking for is the $115 returned to us for the fire wood that we were not giving the opportunity to haul away ourselves, as well as $22.50 for the stove top cleaning that was never mentioned to us and it was clean when we moved out. And either proof of the water bill for 3/27-4/10 or $21.75 returned to us. As they provided prove of everything else except the water bill for 3/27 - 4/10. Totaling $159.25 for the deductions in our security deposit that we feel is unjust. We also feel we should be giving back the $35 per person for application fees totaling $70 as [redacted] told us "since we were great tenants that there would be no issues of us renting a house from them again", then [redacted] waits over a week to finally let us know we were denied by Tiner Properties and we're out $70. We always had issues with the water bill. Both companies, Tiner as well as [redacted] would not put the water bill in our name or have it mailed directly to our address. Instead they would receive the water bill and mail it to us and we would mail back the water bill payment sometimes with the rent payment back to the property management. Then the property management company was supposed to pay the water bill. Both companies paid this water bill late. Every water bill I would receive I would minus the late fee penalty because I pay my bills on time and don't feel like I should be penalized for the property management's mistakes. Tiner even mailed us a notice of intent to terminate service from the water company instead of the usual water bill with our usage on it, proving Tiner never paid the water bill that we have been paying to Tiner. The water district also sent us a certified mail stating the water bill has not been paid and they will be shutting off the water. This is why I don't believe Tiner in regards to the water bill from 3/27 - 4/10 that they provided no prove of. We always paid what our water usage was. So I am not sure where they came up with this $21.75 for 3/27 - 4/10. We have supporting documents of all the water bills received, emails between [redacted] and ourselves and also our dispute mailed and emailed to [redacted] at Tiner. We really feel Tiner Properties Inc. is an unprofessional and untrustworthy company who takes advantage of their tenants. They have no basic customer service skills, like returning ones phone calls or emails. I don't understand why they won't respond back to my dispute for the security deposit. Any assistants in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Business

Response:

Initial Business Response

In response to the complaint filed by complainant (tenant) the following information is provided.

1. The tenants were provided with a notice to terminate tenancy in a lawful manner.

2. The tenants were provided in writing their right to a pre move out inspection.

3. The tenants were notified of Tiner Properties policy regarding standard application qualifications and that applicants with an unpaid rental history would not be approved. The tenant's application was processed and an answer provided to the tenants within the time frame provided in our application processing cover letter.

4. Upon vacating the property the tenants were provided information regarding the conditions needing improvement to avoid deductions from their security deposit prior to return of possession and were allowed time to correct those conditions.

5. The tenants chose to correct one of the deficient items and disputed the other deficiencies.

6. The tenants were provided, in writing, an accounting of their deposit pursuant to civil code section 1950.5. with attachments supporting those deductions.

7. The tenants were provided a response, in writing, to their dispute of the deductions.

Tiner Properties, Inc began management of the property at [redacted] Way on March 7, 2013 with tenants in place. On June 12th, 2013 the tenants were served with a 30 day notice to terminate the tenancy. The tenants submitted an online application for a Tiner managed home on a Saturday, which Tiner Properties began processing on Monday, June 24th. The tenants were notified that their application was declined on June 27th due to unpaid past rental obligations. On July 15th, 2013 the tenants vacated the [redacted] Property and met with their property manager to provide keys and complete an inspection. The tenants were notified of the following items: Wood on the side yard that needed hauling, graffiti on the garage wall and a hook left in the ceiling of a bedroom. The tenant disputed the hauling and graffiti stating the condition was present at move in. He agreed that the hook should have been removed and kept one key to complete the removal on 7/15/13. On 7/18/13 the property manager met with the owner of the property to go over the condition. The owner contacted the previous property manager during the inspection to confirm that the graffiti and wood were not present at move in and the move in condition report, signed by the tenants, does not note these conditions being present. In addition to these items the owner noted that the tenants were provided a counter top microwave which was not left at the property upon vacating. On 7/18/13 the property manager emailed the tenant to notify them of my confirmation with the owner of the conditions discussed at the move out inspection and pending deductions from the security deposit. The tenant responded acknowledging the microwave and accepting the deduction of the cost of this item but continued to dispute the other deductions. The property manager emailed the tenant a response on 7/23/13, confirming the owner's decision. On 7/29/13, the tenants were provided a final accounting of their security deposit.

Final Consumer Response

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

We received Tiner's final deposit determination and I just don't understand where this $20 water bill came from (3/26-4/11) and how I didn't already pay this. They never sent this water bill to us. And usually with bills whatever was not paid from a previous month they add to the next bill. So this amount should have been collected with the next water bill I already paid. What I find funny is how they did not show proof of this said water bill just subtracted $21.75 from our security deposit. Then when I ask for proof they ignore me until I submit a complaint through Revdex.com and now they show proof of this water bill and it's now only $20.00.

[redacted] at Tiner also added another water bill from 6/12 - 8/10 and subtracted $3.53 out of the $22.50 they so generously just gave back for the cleaning of the stove. I know this is just dollars but I really feel Tiner Properties is a dishonest company! They never paid the water bill that we were paying to them, resulting in almost having our water shut off in last month of our lease. I was constantly subtracting the late fees from the water bill because I pay my bills on time and felt it was not fair for us to be stuck with their late penalties.

I feel Tiner helped the homeowners get there home ready to sell on our dime. And if you look at the pictures of the firewood most of it is from the fence on the property that fell down during a storm that had to be replaced and the fence company left on the property. Furthermore, there was fire wood on the property when we moved in. We did not mention it on our walk through paperwork because the house has a fire place and didn't realize it was going to turn into this when we moved out. Nor was there even a spot on the walk through paperwork for firewood to be listed.

Because we were unaware of this I asked (called and emailed)[redacted] if we could just go by the property and haul it away so we don't get charged for a ridiculous amount when it would take a whole 5 minute to do ourselves. We didn't need to get keys back; we could have just slipped through the side gate and hauled it away ourselves. Instead [redacted] ignores us and hires a company to haul it away and charged us for it.

We fill everyone should know that Tiner is not looking out for your best interest if you're a tenant. They only care about the homeowners. I am so glad Tiner denied our application to rent through them. Because now I know what kind of company they truly are.

So let me just reaffirm what we are out here.

$70 for application fees that [redacted] told us there would be no issues in getting us into another home. And in there screening guidelines it does not mention anything in regards to them not accepting someone due to discharged unpaid rental history. This means that we no longer own any unpaid rent because it was discharged. I cannot go back and pay them because nothing is owed! And we never hid this information from them as they stated. All of our information was giving to [redacted] at Deterding property which was forwarded to Tiner properties. Not only did they take our money and deny us but they waited a week before finally getting back to us to inform us of their decision, knowing we had to find a new place within 30 days.

As I said before I am very thankful we are not contracted with Tiner! But it is still upsetting to be out $70 when someone guarantees you something and then last minute they deny you.

We are also out $115 for the removal of the firewood. Which I still feel is unfair!

And $22.50 for paint graffiti in the garage that was from the previous tenant, not our doing. We were not expecting to be thrown to a another property management company and deal with some one that had never seen the house right before the 30 notice was given and didn't think anything of it nor mention it on our walk through paperwork, which we should have, so we accepted that loss and learned from it. We also accept the microwave cost as to we forgot to leave it on the property when we moved out.

So in conclusion I am not accepting Tiner's proposed resolution. In a way this is not about the money, it's about what's fair and having some respect for your customers. We have never had a company treat us this way.

Normally a business cares about their clients. They answer their phones or if they miss a call they call that person back, also in regards to email, we were completely ignored by [redacted] at Tiner. Even with our written dispute regarding the security deposit return that I mailed and emailed to [redacted]. I was never giving a response other than her stating she was in receipt of it. When I called she did not answer or call us back or even reply to our emails. Just bad business practice!

As a Revdex.com accredited business like they are, one would assume that they would hold themselves up to better standards in regards to customer service and overall professionalism which I feel that Tiner is lacking greatly.

Final Business Response

Tiner Properties provides application screening guidelines on each property it advertises. We do not provide approval of tenants without processing an application and our owners make the final decision. The complainants did not provide the information that they had a unpaid collection from a previous rental that was discharged in bankruptcy. This information was discovered in the application process. The requirement of a positive rental history is clearly outlined in our screening guidelines.

The complainants were provided the items that would be deducted from their deposit. They chose to dispute those items and not correct them. Civil code 1950.5 does not require that the owner provide further access to remedy those items not cured by the tenant once possession is returned to the Landlord and that the Landlord may utilize the security deposit for those itemized deductions.

Cleaning of the stove was an additional item deducted from the tenant's deposit upon instruction of the Landlord. Due to the failure to provide that item in the move out inspection Tiner Properties will provide a final deposit determination with a credit for cleaning the stove. That determination will provide receipts for any water billing that was not received prior to the date required by law to provide the deposit determination.

The final deposit determination will be mailed on Monday, October 7th, 2013.

Review: On 1/13/14, a Tiner Properties, Inc representative ([redacted]) unlawfully kept $298 of our tenant security deposit. First, Tiner unlawfully charged us to repair the homeowners faulty garage door opener. The opener fell from the ceiling when we pushed the button, on the evening before the walkthrough 11/29/12. We notified [redacted] of the incident the next morning, 11/30/12, via email. Later that day, during the walkthrough inspection, it was brought to [redacted]s attention that it appeared that the opener fell because it had been installed into drywall instead of supporting beams. Yet [redacted] used $78 of our security deposit to have the opener reinstalled correctly. Secondly, Tiner unlawfully charged an additional $220 for a second full carpet cleaning. We already paid $250 to have the carpet professionally cleaned and we supplied the receipt of this cleaning to [redacted]. We were pleased because the carpets were cleaner and smelled better than they did the day we moved in. During the walkthrough, [redacted] claimed her suspicion of pet odor in one bedroom closet. She acknowledged that there were no stains and I acknowledged that I did not smell an odor. However, to be cautious, I called back the carpet cleaner to re-clean the closet. Even though our professional cleaners confirmed that was no evidence of a stain or an odor, they re-cleaned the area and they treated the carpet with enzyme. We emailed [redacted] and told her that this re-cleaning and enzyme application had been completed within hours of the walkthrough. Weeks later, our security deposit was unlawfully reduced by an additional $220 claiming additional cleaning costs.Desired Settlement: We require a full refund our our deposit $2,945. Either re-issue a new check for the full amount or send a check for the remaining $298 in unlawful withholdings.

Business

Response:

On 12/30/14 the tenants (complainants) vacated a rental property and we conducted our move out inspection. Pursuant to civil code 1950.5 the tenant was notified of three conditions that needed to be cleaned and repaired. The tenant remedied one item, cleaning. The security deposit was used to repair damage to the carpet by the tenant's pet and repair a garage door opener that had been left hanging from the ceiling. The security deposit accounting, copies of invoices and refund was provided to the tenant on 1/14/14 within the 21 days provided by law. In response to the tenant's request we asked for a determination from the garage door repair company regarding any installation defects for the opener. Upon receiving confirmation from the garage door company that the opener was not installed properly we immediately refunded the amount charged to the tenant's deposit on 2/11/14. The security deposit refund was completed in a timely and lawful manner.

Review: We are disputing Tiner Properties withholding the majority of our security deposit. We rented a upscale home in Folsom with the expectation the fireplace, refrigerator and microwave were in working condition. These items were reported as not working to Tiner properties and they were never repaired. At every annual walk through we reported the same items, and Tiner never scheduled any repair work. We were available every weekday for appointments and none were done. At one point, they dropped off a microwave in a box inside our entrance but never scheduled the installation. We never deducted any rent for this loss of use.In addition, Tiner properties made an annual inspection of the property. At every inspection, the inspector noted the items needing repair and noted that we maintained the property in excellent condition. All inspections received a special note, "Beautifully maintained home". Yet, now that we have moved out and they have our money, they are withholding the majority of our security deposit claiming the property needed cleaning and repairs. We cleaned the property top to bottom according to their checklist, including windows and fans, light bulbs, etc. We returned the home in better condition than we received it but they kept our money anyway. We paid a $1,000 security and received only $190 back. We are requesting $920 back which represents $1,000 minus $80 for one extra day. They should not be deducting for cleaning or carpets as our walk through noted the stained carpets and we cleaned that house top to bottom before we left.On the final walk through, [redacted] the property manager for Tiner Properties said that the property was in great condition and she did not see any issues in refunding our deposit.Desired Settlement: $920.00 refunded

Business

Response:

The complainant is disputing the deductions made from their security deposit. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1950.5, Tiner Properties completed a pre inspection of the property on 12/22/14 to provide the complainant an opportunity to resolve items that may be deducted from their security deposit. That report indicated the hauling, cleaning, repairs and carpet cleaning needed to avoid deductions from their deposit, if not remedied. On 1/1/15, the tenants completed their move and returned possession of the property to Tiner. Tiner completed the final move out inspection, compared the condition with the move in report signed by complainants and noted those items that were not remedied. Pictures of those items were taken and shared with complainant. Within 21 days Tiner provided the complainant the security deposit accounting noting that not all invoices had been received, and providing estimated costs for the invoices not received. Within 14 days of receipt of the final invoice Tiner provided the complainant a final accounting with the invoices attached. Those invoices included cleaning, carpet cleaning, and unpaid rent. The deposit refund accounting was handled in a timely manner and within the requirements of Civil Code 1950.5. Complainant references repairs to the fireplace, refrigerator and microwave, which are not part of the security deposit accounting or part of the amount they are seeking. These repair items were noted and reported to the owner when Tiner was notified of the condition. Tiner responded by ordering estimates for repair of the microwave and providing to the landlord. Rent deductions for these items were never requested. The requirement for repair and deduct for these items would not be upheld as they are not habitability issues.

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because: I am rejecting this response because: Their claims are bogus, the home was left in excellent condition and thoroughly cleaned. I stand on my original claim and am prepared to take this matter to court. Tiner Properties has a long history of this bad behavior and I will not fall victim to their predatory practices.

Review: changed the conditions from lease to month to month without authorization

when the lease was about to expire they completed an inspection of the premises. we were asked if we wanted to renew the lease and we expressed the desire to do so. the month the lease was to expire we get a phone call asking us why we have not sent in the new lease, we call them back an tell them we have not received the new lease to send it back. we hear nothing for about 5 to 6 months then we get a statement in our email that states we are to pay a $1050 a month and we owe $300 in back rent. we respond to this in kind stating we are not month to month but should be on a lease they tell us because we did nothing according to the contract we are now month to month. I express to them that the office has made a mistake and never sent us a new lease and they total ignored that and sent us copies of the lease agreement and highlighted the section talking about month to month. we tell them we are not paying for the office mistake, which is also totally ignored and they reiterate the month to month clause. I finally tell them I want an explanation of this and its ignored until the first of the month. so I informed them that the rent will held in abeyance until this contract issue is resolved. I finally received a response to that with a threat of eviction if I don't pay the month to month price of the rent, again totally ignoring what has happened. Desired Settlement: they owe us $1150 on our security deposit they have told us we owe back pay of $300 and have intensions of keeping part our deposit for it we want our deposit back in full.

Business

Response:

Initial Business Response

A lease agreement between the landlord and Tenants, [redacted] and [redacted] expired on March 31, 2013. Item 9 of the lease agreement states, " Any holding over at the expiration of a lease term shall create a month to month tenancy and the monthly rent will be increased by $50.00 per month, payable in advance." The tenants remained in the property after the lease expired, a written change in terms was not completed. Tiner Properties notified the tenants in writing in January of the impending lease expiration and rent increase. Tiner attempted to contact the tenant to confirm their receipt of offer to renew the lease term in March of 2013. When the tenants contacted Tiner in August, 2013 regarding their concerns we attempted verbally and in writing to explain the lease terms and resolve the dispute. Tiner continued to respond to the tenant's written dispute. The tenant has withheld rent payment for October and a three day notice to pay rent or quit was served. The landlord has authorized Tiner to provide one more attempt at resolving the dispute by mailing, faxing, emailing and posting an stipulated offer to waive all past due rent, accept $1000 for October rent in the form of a cashier's check and the tenant shall vacate, per their written notice, as of October 31st, 2013 and the rental agreement shall be forfeited. This offer will be retracted if the tenant does not respond within 24 hours and Tiner will proceed with an unlawful detainer process to obtain the possession of the property and a money judgment through the courts.

Final Consumer Response

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

they are fabricating the truth, they never sent us any written anything in January, they gave us a call in march which we returned and never received an answer for, and in august all we received was the rental increase in the form of and e-mail and three days later in invoice form stating how much back rent we owed. then they began their process of threating us to force us to pay rent which I was well within my legal right to withhold since they had refused to admit they made a mistake in the way they handled this dispute and have resorted to placing the blame on the home owner stating she never renewed our lease (what home owner would refuse to sign a new lease with a tenant who never missed a rent payment) and wanted to deduct it from our security deposit. so far they have removed all insinuated past rent and penalties and we are waiting to receive our deposit back which they promised to give back in full. we are holding our pursuit of this matter until we receive it in full.

Final Business Response

On October 31, 2013, Tiner Properties met with the consumer (tenant) to receive possession of the property and complete a move out inspection. The tenants were provided information regarding their rights regarding a pre move out inspection. The inspection was conducted and a copy of the inspection provided to the tenant at move out. The tenant will receive their deposit determination within 21 days. The tenant is correct that the owner waived all past due rent and fees as a final resolution to the dispute.

Review: My husband and I were in the process of trying to apply for a rental home that Tiner was the property management company for. After waiting weeks to see the property, we finally got a call back and a time. The agent was 30 minutes late. We liked the home and submitted our application within 24 hrs. They lost most of the supporting documentation and denied us the rental because of the lost paperwork. THey also claimed that they did not receive our application fee. I had to contact them repeatedly to get them to check their drop box. They finally found the $70 fee. They stated we were denied at 11:45 am, I sent them an email re-attaching the missing documents that were the reason for the denial, at 1pm they said that they rented the property to someone else. I requested a refund of our fees due to their horrible mistake and they refused to refund the money.Desired Settlement: Want a refund of the $70

Business

Response:

Tiner Properties was contacting this applicant by email today to let them know we would refund their application fee due to the miscommunication. The refund will be completed by Monday, March 2nd.