Wendy's Restaurant

Dear MsCarmona:Please accept this letter as written confirmation that the complaint, submitted on May 25, (I***99), has been resolved directly with the customer.Our District Manager, Arturo Zuniga, personally reached out to the guest, apologized and, at her request, replaced her the meals
at issue with two new meals of her choiceShe left our restaurant satisfied.We appreciate your time regarding this issue, if there is anything further that you need, please let me knowThank you,? Kelly B SolaruSrParalegalCotti Foods***

? Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12175799, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me

Management One acquired the property located at [redacted], Irvine to manage effective December 21, 2015. The resident was already in the property when we took over the management of the home.Once they had vacated the premises and we received the keys our property inspector walked the property...

and video taped the inside and out completely. Since we did not have record of the condition the property was in when the residents original moved in we gave the information of the condition upon move out to the home owners to determine the security deposit breakdown.  Management One is in no way responsible for the deductions on the cleaning or misc. items of $830.86.[redacted] signed a one year lease on June 1, 2016 to expire June 1, 2017. Upon breaking the lease and vacating on August 16, 2016 we were able to re-rent the property as of September 1, 2016 therefore [redacted] was responsible for the rent per day from August 15, 2016 through August 31, 2016 for a total of $1146.62.The dispute if any would be between [redacted] and the owners of the property not with Management One.Warm regards,[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/08/30) */
Below is an outline of the conference call we had with Mr. [redacted]. He is in breach of his contract which will be sent to you as additional information once this is submitted. Management One spent time and resources to market the property and had...

even taken an application for the property which was denied as they did not qualify for the property. Now due to Mr. [redacted]'s plans changing He would like Management One to release him of the contract obligations. We offered a discount of 30% which he has denied.
XXXXX Placid Hill- Conference call 08/18/XXXX X:XX a.m.
Conference call with [redacted], the owner, [redacted] and me:
[redacted] advised owner to please give his version of the events and explain the reason for his dissatisfaction.
Mr. [redacted] explained that the main problem is he does not trust the staff at the office. He mentioned the initial hiccups with the property listing like the issues with just one picture appearing on all ads, the amount of bedrooms being incorrect as well the amount for the security deposit. He then mentioned that his main issues are:
1) the unannounced showings, details in showings have led him to believe that [redacted] has not being truthful with him based on the amount of details the prospective residents showing up at his door have given him.
2) He feels like [redacted] just does not want to go out to the property to show it.
3) He feels like [redacted] has not been truthful about prospective residents since based on the people that have been out there to view his property. People that have been there were adamant about renting the property yet it is still not rented.
[redacted] advised him of the following:
1) timeline: we discussed the original issues with the listing of the home and rectified them in a timely manner.
2) making appointments: 1st person showing up unannounced filled up an app and got denied.
[redacted]: "[redacted] said he never had an appt. with her, then changed her story." Confirmed by [redacted] in the meeting. He is upset that she keeps giving contradictory information.
3) issues with Leslie West (contradictory information): agent said she spoke to [redacted], and [redacted] said she never spoke to her. [redacted] explained that this is an industry issue where agents are constantly showing up unannounced. Unfortunately it happens more often than it should. Even with [redacted]'s explanation owner feels like he wouldn't trust what the agent would say now since he thinks she would be trying to save her professional relationship with us to get more referrals. He will go by what the agent told him the 1st time (when she showed up at the house) and the 2nd time (when he followed up with her via phone).
Owner mentioned he is just generally unhappy and does not see it resolving due tot he trust issues. He is asking to find a way to end it, he does not feel happy or comfortable entrusting his property to us. He likes our systems, the way the system is set up and sees the potential, but unfortunately, he just does not trust the people in the office.
[redacted] explained that resource have been committed to service him and although we have made mistakes we have also made reasonable accommodations and adjustments to his requests therefore the money would be owed to management one. [redacted] explained that closeout=buyout. In regards to the showings he explained that without hard evidence at this point it is heresay. Owner mentioned that he understands there are some people that may involve in unethical practices in the industry in regards to the showings but that is not normal business practices. He said that the information we have offered to him is either unreliable or lacking credit, in reference to the events that took place where M1 failed which is the reason for ending the business relationships.
[redacted] explained to him the buyout and the he will owe the full management agreement buyout, to which the owner requested that [redacted] be satisfied with the $350.00 initial payment and if we are to charge him a full year he would like a detailed breakdown of how we have spent resources on his property. He also mentioned that upon his bad experience, he researched the company further and has found numerous bad reviews against M1, to which [redacted] explained that it is unfortunate but negative reviews are always more common but that is soon to change.
Mr. [redacted] explained that he feels cheated, like we just want to take him money and doesn't feel like we have earned it. To which [redacted] explained that unfortunately, there is not enough evidence for him to approve waiving his management contract buyout. Owner feels like it is unfair that he has to pay for 1 yr of management fees and got 1 month of mistreatment in return.
[redacted] also explained to the owner that we would not call and owner until the property has rented, and that we have been currently working on getting rented every day, even after his letter. To this, the owner was appalled that we have continued to work on renting the property even though, as per him, that we might not even be able to move them in since he had given notice of wanting to end the business relationship, he feels like that is not ethical. He just wants to find middle ground and end it immediately. [redacted] asked owner to submit to him an offer in writing and advised that the $350.00 offer is not ok, and it is not an option. Mr. [redacted] explained he does not want to continue negotiating, fighting, or the conversation for that matter. [redacted] also clarified that an app is considered a renter as per his management agreement. [redacted] advised that as per the owner's request, he will go over the account, study it and submit something to him in writing within 24 hrs. and recommended that the contract be terminated within those 24 hrs. with either a buyout or middle ground. Owner wants to take it off HOLD NOW! [redacted] explained that we are not taking his money even though he feels like we have not earned it. [redacted] will evaluate it tomorrow and it can come off hold by Thursday with either a mutual agreement or not to a buyout, for now it will remain on hold for 48hrs. Owner agreed to the 48hr. hold. As per [redacted], I will draft up cost owner breakdown, sent to [redacted] for review and then it will be sent to the owner TODAY.
After meeting [redacted], [redacted], and I went over the following lessons learned:
1) Data must go in correctly when entering a property ad. This is why we have GB, we MUST make sure all information in CORRECT and double check as a consumer.
2) We must be absolute when scheduling appointments, only advising owner when it is confirmed.
3) We must be very careful and watch what we say very carefully.
4) If we loose trust in the front end, then anything else we miss just adds to it.
5) Normally, we offer 20% off but we will offer him 30% off his buyout as of today. I will calculate his buyout today and include 30% discount. I will work n it today and sent to [redacted] for approval. Hopefully have it send to owner today. I will also attach management agreement with page that states that an app=renter.
6) We have to constantly work on reviews.
7) [redacted] is to advise applicant that property is no longer available.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 9, 2015/09/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The Management One (M1) CEO now alleges that I am in breach of contract. This continues his unethical business practices in that it comes as a response to my allegation that his company breached the contract by failing to perform the management duties, as outlined in my email to the M1 CEO on 8/10/15. Despite contradictory and false statements of his leasing agent concerning unannounced showings and her failure to attend them (discussed via conference call on 8/18/15), he offered no alternative but more of the same. He stated "we aren't a perfect company" and described the complaints as hiccups and hearsay. I advised him that if I was being forced to deal with a leasing agent that was clearly unethical in her dealings, that I had no trust in his company. I advised that unannounced visits to my house were unacceptable, especially when there are times when my children are there alone. Though I did not discuss it at the time, my confidence in the company had been further shaken by the fact that I had done some research on M1 at the Bureau of Real Estate and found that their license had been previously revoked on multiple occasions (see http://www2.dre.ca.gov/PublicASP/pplinfo.asp?License_id=XXXXXXXX ), suspended on another (see http://www2.dre.ca.gov/PublicASP/displayonlinedocument.asp?filing=HXXXXXLA ), and is currently on a "Restricted" license.
I advised the M1 CEO that I did not feel that they had lived up to the terms of the contract, but that I would be willing to walk away from the $349.00 I had paid ($99 for the listing, $250 for deposit) just to be done with the matter. He countered with a buyout provision in the contract (if I canceled the contract) of over $2,000. I informed him that this was unreasonable considering that in the span of 30 days, they could not list the property correctly for over half of that time, did not show up for a single property showing, and if their leasing agent were to be believed, they did not even schedule a showing. They were lowering the expected rent every week after the second week despite not showing up for interested tenants. They provided dishonest and contradictory explanations for having people show up on my doorstep unannounced, leaving me to show the house (something I was never trained to do, nor should I have to do if they are acting as my management company). I told him that I was willing to negotiate a reasonable settlement in this manner to avoid litigation. He indicated that he would look over everything and put something in writing to me in the next 48 hours in an effort to settle the matter, and asked that we put the property on hold for 48 hours while we negotiated a buyout. I received an "Owner Cost Breakdown for Account" from M1 via email on 8/18/15 offering a 30% reduction in their normal buyout, which would require me to pay an additional $1,224.20 to cancel the contract. This breakdown clearly indicates that the only costs the company has incurred on my behalf is $99 for the advertising of the property on the MLS, leaving a credit of $250 on my account. They cite a contract buyout of $1,474.20 based on contract language alone (not expenses), which is where their counteroffer originates. This is the same language that would pertain to a property for which his company had secured a tenant willing to sign a one year lease, but the owner failed to move out, causing the loss of a year's worth of management fees. In this case, with no tenant in waiting, there is no loss of management income to consider.
On 8/20/15 at 9:33, I received a call from the M1 accounting rep ([redacted]) indicating that the CEO decided that he could not accommodate my request for a settlement based on a counteroffer of $749 that I made to resolve the issue, even though their costs were only $99. In essence, their position was that I should pay them another $1,200+ on top of the $349 I had already paid them for a total of 30 days of botched listings and a pair of mismanaged and unaccompanied attempted showings. This was their offer, and I could take it or leave it. I indicated to her that I would not be complying with those terms. This phone call lasted one minute according to my cellphone record.
[redacted] called me back immediately at 9:35 am and indicated that she needed me to put something in writing to them that would indicate that I wanted to cancel the contract. I told her that I would simply wait out the additional 60 days and cancel the contract then according to the 90-day cancellation provision in the contract (see section 5a). It did not make sense that I would pay additional money to cancel the contract when I felt they breached the contract, and when the contract language would allow me to cancel after 90 days without cost anyway. I instructed her to take the property off of hold and I would wait the additional 60 days to cancel. I told her that I was willing wait it out because they would not rent the property based on their track record. At no time during that conversation did we discuss showing the house or allowing access as this is not even her role with the company ([redacted] handles that). This second conversation also lasted one minute according to my cellphone record. My logic was that if they were going to charge me basically the same fees that they would charge if I backed out after they secured a tenant, I might as well wait to see if they were unsuccessful after 60 additional days so that I could exit the contract without cost.
On the basis of the second call, I received a letter from the CEO dated 8/24/15 claiming that in that conversation I breached the contract. This is the same CEO who thought that his leasing agent's missteps were of no consequence because they were "hearsay", even though they could clearly be corroborated by multiple uninterested parties. The letter alleges that I made a decision not to allow access to the property, breaching sections 9h, 9j, and 11b of the contract. The first error in this statement is that access could not have been prevented when the company, to this day, has never scheduled an appointment for any prospective tenant to view, let alone occupy the property. Secondly, the contract sections cited in their letter do not contain any language pertinent to the circumstances of this case:
Section 9h refers to move in and move out dates once the property is rented, and gives the homeowner "0+30" days for the property to be ready for the tenant (that's 30 days AFTER the prospective tenant makes their deposit). Since they have not even shown the property, and thus have never established or communicated a move in or move out date, this section cannot apply.
Section 9j requires the homeowner to keep utility and HOA bills current (which we have) and to give Management One "contact names, phone numbers, gate codes, pool keys and or any access keys at time of signing this agreement." When we signed the agreement with the CEO, he indicated that all he needed was the house key since we were still living in the house, and to this day our house key has not been returned.
Section 11b outlines how the homeowner is "releasing the leasing rights to the property to Management One and occupancy rights to the resident / tenant and agrees to abide by all legal rights provided by law." It also prevents the homeowner from dealing directly with a tenant. Neither of these issues is pertinent since we never had a showing by the company, let alone any resident/tenant to speak of. Incidentally, their rental sign posted on our lawn was not removed until 9/2/15 (which was their decision - we made no request in this regard).
The second phone call from [redacted] was obviously an attempt to bait me into canceling the contract in order to move into the "Liquidated Damages" provision of the contract. Since I refused to cancel ahead of the 90-day provision, M1 is now attempting to fabricate a basis for claiming that I am in breach of the contract based on "hearsay" that would not even breach any specific contract terms even if it were true (which it is not). In fact, there is no language in the contract regarding owner obligations to show the property prior to the owner moving out of said property. Rather than attempting a resolution by negotiating in good faith, M1's CEO is attempting to turn a contract that his company failed to honor into a collection debt he can pursue through litigation. His letter threatened us with legal action if I did not provide a written "lifting" of a verbal statement I did not make. M1's allegation of my "plans changing" are ridiculous. We had rental property in waiting in Orange County as of 7/23/15 contingent on our house renting (which we can document), which would have eliminated most of our 1-2 hour daily commutes. We have been forced to continue those commutes due to the ineptitude of M1 in the handling of our property.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/09/14) */
Management One feels we are justified in the request per the terms of the agreement. Due to Mr. [redacted] feeling differently we have no choice but to file a small claims suit and we will let a judge determine the outcome.
Regards,
Management One
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 14, 2015/09/15) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
No resolution was proposed. The company is essentially saying "we're keeping your $349 - pay us an additional $1200+ even though we have failed to live up to the contract - pay or we'll sue you." As a consumer who feels defrauded, I have no choice but to defend my position in small claims court.

We have audited the account for Mr. [redacted] and the following was discovered:   Upon his move in the property was professionally cleaned, vacant and free of any items on the property. It is expected and defined in the lease agreement, that upon moving out of the home the resident should...

leave the property in the same condition as when they received it, less any normal wear and tear.    During his residency, the HOA for the community Keystone Pacific noted violations for him going against the rules and regulations for parking as well as items and condition of the backyard.   Per Keystone, since 2010 there have been 12 violations and two fines at $150 each. Since the property is located in an HOA community, they are responsible for issuing these violations. The violations in question are not associated with Management One. The Resident was provided with a copy of the CC&R’s for the community when they moved in. The rules clearly outline the requirements of any resident living in the community in terms of parking and more.   Per the terms of the rental agreement in Section 32A, it does not matter how many years you resident at the property, the home is the be left in the condition it was for the resident less normal wear and tear. Leaving behind your personal belonging, trash, not cleaning etc. is not considered normal wear and tear. The resident was charged for a complete clean of the home, not including carpets, in addition to a haul off to dispose of their personal belongs that were left in the property. (See photos attached)   The property was professionally cleaned before the resident moved in, therefore it is expected to be left in that same condition, less wear and tear. The owners are not responsible to clean up after residents and haul away their trash and items they decided not to take with them. (See photos attached)   No matter how long the resident lives in the property 1 day to 50 years, the terms of the agreement outline their responsibility in the way they leave the home. Mr. [redacted] was provided a cleaning checklist from Management One 30-days prior to his move out. The purpose of this checklist is to demonstrate exactly what is expected from him and he clearly dismissed it and did not fulfill his agreement. (See checklist and agreement attached). The residents also had a pre moveout inspection with our property inspector and was notified at that time of the cleaning needed, removing of personal items, all trash and washing down the front and back areas. Mr. [redacted] elected to ignore the information given to him verbally, as was as in writing and per the terms of his rental agreement, which resulted in him not receiving his full deposit back. The funds were used to pay a contractor to take care of the items he should have done prior to his moveout.   We have sent Mr. [redacted] a copy of this correspondence along with an invitation to come into our office to review the photos and video of the home before and after he resided in the home. As of today, we have not heard from him to schedule that appointment.   As you can see from the pictures and the lease agreement attached, the resident was clearly in violation of his lease agreement during his stay with Management One and afterward. The charges are clearly justified based on the condition in which the home was left in upon move out.

Dear Ms. Carmona:Please accept this letter as written confirmation that the complaint, submitted on May 25, 2017 (I[redacted]99), has been resolved directly with the customer.Our District Manager, Arturo Zuniga, personally reached out to the guest, apologized and, at her request, replaced her the meals...

at issue with two new meals of her choice. She left our restaurant satisfied.We appreciate your time regarding this issue, if there is anything further that you need, please let me knowThank you, Kelly B SolaruSr. ParalegalCotti Foods[redacted]