brandy hill apartments

Dear Ms. [redacted]: Below, please find a timeline of events
regarding the above referenced complaint. • On December 28, 2015 [redacted],
Senior Site Manager, Brandyhill Apartments, received an email from [redacted], Ms. [redacted] roommate at unit [redacted],
Brandyhill...

Apartment, which is located in Mechanicsville, VA. The email stated
Ms. [redacted] belief that there was "black mold" in their unit on or
around the shower heads, toilets, shower curtains and on the carpet. Ms.
[redacted] was out of the office that day and [redacted], who is an Assistant
Site Manager at another property, was covering the office at that time. Ms.
[redacted] and Senior Maintenance Technician, [redacted] responded to the
unit that same day. Ms. [redacted] took pictures of what Ms. [redacted] emailed
stated that she believed to be "mold. " The spots on the carpet, the
shower heads in both of the bathrooms, the toilets and the shower curtains. Ms.
[redacted] observed that the shower curtain liners in both of the bathrooms were
cloth and therefore, not waterproof. Ms. [redacted] suggested to Ms. [redacted] at that
time, that purchasing vinyl shower curtain liners would likely resolve this
issue. Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] did not detect any odor of any kind in the
unit and could not locate a water intrusion of any type at that time. Ms.
[redacted] documented her findings and also asked that Ms. [redacted] do the same on a
Resident Water Intrusion Form. On this form, Ms. [redacted] stated that she and Ms.
[redacted] first noticed this issue on December 1, 2015, however they did not
report it until December 28, 2015. • On January 5, 2016, Ms. [redacted] returned
to work and entered the unit to inspect for herself. At that time, she pulled
back the carpet to inspect for any type of moisture. She did not find any
dampness nor moisture underneath the carpet at that time. Ms. [redacted] also
photographed and touched the spots on the carpet that Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted]
believed to be "mold" of some type. Ms. [redacted] indicated that the
spots were "sticky" to the touch. Ms .[redacted] also stated that the
"black stuff' in the toilets and on the shower heads appeared to be hard
water stains or iron sediment common to the water at Brandyhill Apartments. Ms.
[redacted] was instructed by Senior Management of [redacted] that
out of an abundance of caution, she should order air samples at that time. Ms.
[redacted] contacted [redacted] of New Kent/Williamsburg and the Northern Neck at that
time to perform air sample testing. • On January 6, 2016, Ms. [redacted] sent
another email to Ms. [redacted] stating that there was "standing water"
in or around the air conditioning unit. Ms. [redacted], Mr. [redacted] and I
responded to the unit that same day and inspected. The "standing
water" was only located after Mr. [redacted] shone a flashlight into the
return vent cover in the hallway, where he saw water sitting in the duct. Mr.
[redacted] attempted to remove the return vent cover as he normally would and
found that it was bent and appeared to have been tampered with. The cover was
secured with new screws. Mr. [redacted] inspected the unit's condensation drain,
which was dry. The heat was on at this time in the unit. So, the hvac unit
would not have produced any condensation at that time. Mr. [redacted] then removed
the water with a wet-vac and installed a dehumidifier to help dry out the duct.
• On January 7, 2016, Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] returned to the unit to check
on the progress of the dehumidifier. They found that the duct was still damp
and contacted a contractor to perform a water extraction. This took place that
same day. Mr. [redacted] removed the duct liner at this time as well. Ms. [redacted]
also contacted [redacted] to install a new duct liner. • On January 8,
2016, [redacted] replaced the duct liner. Also, on this date, [redacted]
collected air samples from the unit to be laboratory tested. • On January 19,
2016, Brandy hill Apartments received the results of the air sample testing,
which were negative. Per [redacted], of [redacted] of New Kent, Williamsburg
and the Northern Neck, no action was recommended at this time. However, it was
recommended that the residents replace the cloth shower curtain liners with the
vinyl/waterproof variety. • On January 22, 2016 Ms. [redacted] emailed Senior Site
Manager, [redacted] and reiterated her belief that "mold" was
present in your unit. This email stated that she now believed that there was
"mold" present on the window sills. This email included pictures of
the window sills. • On January 24, 2016 Ms. [redacted] emailed myself and Ms.
[redacted] and stated that she and Ms. [redacted] " found more mold" during
the previous weekend. Her email referenced an issue with excessive condensation
around the windows and the patio door of the unit. The email included pictures
of the windows, patio door and the far wall of the master bedroom. • On January
24, 2016 Ms. [redacted], at the direction of [redacted]' Senior
Management contacted [redacted] of New Kent, Williamsburg and the Northern Neck
to inspect the unit again • On January 28, 2016 a representative of [redacted]
along with Ms. [redacted] and Senior Maintenance Technician, [redacted]
inspected the unit. Also present was [redacted], Building Inspector with
the County of Hanover. Mr. [redacted] was present in response to a complaint
made by Ms. [redacted] and /or Ms. [redacted] to the County of Hanover, Office of
Building Inspections. During this inspection, possible biological growth and
discoloration was observed by the aforementioned parties in the master bedroom
closet as well as the far wall of the master bedroom, behind a dresser. • On
February 1, 2016 I received, via email, Ms. [redacted] written request asking to
be released from the lease agreement without penalty. This email referenced
"ongoing respiratory illnesses that we have endured during our time at
Br[redacted]hill". This email implied a belief that these "illnesses"
suffered by Ms. [redacted], Ms. [redacted] and their respective children were somehow
caused by or linked to the condition of their unit and implied a perceived fear
for their health and /or safety and that of their children. • On February 2,
2016, Ms. [redacted] was advised in writing by [redacted] of [redacted] that in
her professional opinion and based on the findings during the January 28, 2016
inspection of the unit, remediation of the area affected in the master bedroom
closet and far wall was necessary. Ms. [redacted] stated that condensation in and
around the windows was due to the extreme drop in the exterior temperatures
causing the windows to reach their dew point, creating condensation. Per Ms.
[redacted], this is unrelated and not relevant to the issue in the master bedroom.
Per Ms. [redacted], this remediation will take a maximum of two business days. Ms.
[redacted] also advised that it would not be necessary to relocate the occupants of
the unit during the remediation. • Also on February 2, 2016, I advised Ms.
[redacted] and Ms. [redacted] in writing, via email, that [redacted]
was prepared to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] from any further lease
responsibility "if you plan to vacate immediately". • On February 3,
2016 Ms. [redacted] responded by email and asked for the word
"immediately" to be clarified. She also stated that they would need
at least 30 days to move. "Immediately" was clarified to mean 24
hours. This offer was extended based on their previous emails which, again,
implied a sense of urgency and a concern for their health and the health of
their occupants. • On February 3, 2016 Ms. [redacted] responded via email that she
found 24 hours to be "unreasonable" and reiterated that she and Ms.
[redacted] would need minimum of 30 days to vacate. • Again on February 3, 2016 I
advised Ms. [redacted] in writing, via email that remediation was necessary and is
scheduled to take place on Monday, February 8, 2016 and that she and Ms.
[redacted] would need to remove all of the items currently stored in the master
bedroom closet and that they will need to move the dresser in the master
bedroom so that the sheet rock can be accessed easily by the contractor. The
remediation was expected to be completed by the close of business that day. The
subsequent sheet rock repairs that were necessary were scheduled to take place
on Tuesday, February 9, 2016 and would be 3 complete by the close of business
on that same day. The email also extended an offer to place Ms. [redacted] and Ms.
[redacted] in a hotel for the duration of the remediation in an effort to minimize
any inconvenience. • On February 4, 2016 I received an email from Ms. [redacted]
which again asked to "terminate the lease without penalty". Her email
again referenced that they would need 30 days to vacate the unit. • On February
5, 2016 I received a letter, via fax, from a [redacted]. regarding
[redacted], the 5 year old daughter of [redacted]. Dr. [redacted] letter
made sweeping statements regarding the condition of their apartment and its
relevance to the health of [redacted] that would be impossible for her to
have substantiated. This Jetter insinuated that the child's sinopulmonary
symptoms which she developed in the summer of 2015, when she moved into the
unit at [redacted] with her mother, Ms. [redacted], were somehow related to the
condition of the unit at the time. Dr. [redacted]Letter included the statement
that she "strongly recommended that her family move into a different home
as soon as possible to help improve [redacted]'s condition and hopefully minimize
the need for further surgical and medical treatments." These statements
are unsubstantiated and irresponsible. No determination of harmful or toxic
mold was ever made by a qualified professional. Determining whether an
individual has been exposed to or suffered the effects of harmful or toxic mold
is a process which requires extensive medical and laboratory testing by licensed
and qualified individuals with access to all relevant data and physical
evidence. • On February 5, 2016 I advised Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] in writing
that based on their statements that implied a fear for their health and safety
and that their children, they could vacate the unit on or before Monday,
February 8, 2016 at 9am, without penalty and without cause and that they would
be released from any further lease responsibility as of that date. [redacted] conducts business in accordance with the terms of its
signed lease agreement as well as the Virgi ni a Residenti al Landlord &
Tenant Act (V RL TA). The applicable section of the VRLTA in this circumstance
is referenced be low. The essence of which is that a condition of mold does
not negate the signed lease agreement. The VRL TA does not in an y way require
[redacted] as the landlord to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted]
from their lease agreement, which is a legal and binding contract. They were
made this offer based on their statements of fear for their health and/or
safety and the health and safety of their children. Although, there is no
verifiable evidence that their health or the health of their children was ever
adversely affected. Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] vacated the unit on February 8,
2016. Their lease responsibility ended as of that date. [redacted] conducts business in accordance with the terms of its signed lease
agreement as well as the Virginia Residential Landlord & Tenant Act (V
RL TA). The applicable section of the VRLTA in this circumstance is referenced
be low. The essence of which is that a condition of mold does not negate the
signed lease agreement. The VRL TA does not in an y way require United Property
Associates as the landlord to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] from their
lease agreement, which is a legal and binding contract. They were made this
offer based on their statements of fear for their health and/or safety and the
health and safety of their children. Although, there is no verifiable evidence
that their health or the health of their children was ever adversely affected.
Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] vacated the unit on February 8, 2016. Their lease
responsibility ended as of that date. Reference is made to the Virginia
Residential Landlord & Tenant Act, Page 27, Section 55- 248.18:2. states
that "where a mold condition in the dwelling unit materially affects the
health or safety of any tenant or authorized occupant, the landlord may require
the tenant to temporarily vacate the dwelling unit in order for the landlord to
perform mold remediation in accordance with professional standards as defined
in 55-248.4 for a period not to exceed 30 days. The landlord shall provide the
tenant with either (i) a comparable dwelling unit, as selected by the landlord,
at no expense or cost to the tenant, or (ii) a hotel room, at no expense or
cost to the tenant. The tenant shall continue to be responsible for payment of
rent under the rental agreement during the period of any temporary relocation
and for the remainder of the term of the rental agreement following the
remediation. Nothing in this section shall be construed as entitling the tenant
to a termination of a tenancy where or when the landlord has remediated a mold
condition in accordance with professional standards as defined in 55-248.4. The
landlord shall pay all costs of the mold remediation, unless the mold is the
result of the tenant's failure to comply with 55- 248.16. [redacted] has acted appropriately and in timely manner with regard to each
claim of biological growth/material in the unit formerly occupied by Ms. [redacted]
and Ms. [redacted]. All action taken has been in compliance with the terms of
their signed lease agreement as well as the Virginia Residential Landlord &
Tenant Act.

Review: Mold growth in all areas of the apartment which caused health issues, poor maintenance, lack of communication from the Office Manager and non-compliant with the legal lease agreementDesired Settlement: Breakage of the lease without penility

Business

Response:

Dear Ms. [redacted]: Below, please find a timeline of events

regarding the above referenced complaint. • On December 28, 2015 [redacted],

Senior Site Manager, Brandyhill Apartments, received an email from [redacted], Ms. [redacted] roommate at unit [redacted],

Brandyhill Apartment, which is located in Mechanicsville, VA. The email stated

Ms. [redacted] belief that there was "black mold" in their unit on or

around the shower heads, toilets, shower curtains and on the carpet. Ms.

[redacted] was out of the office that day and [redacted], who is an Assistant

Site Manager at another property, was covering the office at that time. Ms.

[redacted] and Senior Maintenance Technician, [redacted] responded to the

unit that same day. Ms. [redacted] took pictures of what Ms. [redacted] emailed

stated that she believed to be "mold. " The spots on the carpet, the

shower heads in both of the bathrooms, the toilets and the shower curtains. Ms.

[redacted] observed that the shower curtain liners in both of the bathrooms were

cloth and therefore, not waterproof. Ms. [redacted] suggested to Ms. [redacted] at that

time, that purchasing vinyl shower curtain liners would likely resolve this

issue. Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] did not detect any odor of any kind in the

unit and could not locate a water intrusion of any type at that time. Ms.

[redacted] documented her findings and also asked that Ms. [redacted] do the same on a

Resident Water Intrusion Form. On this form, Ms. [redacted] stated that she and Ms.

[redacted] first noticed this issue on December 1, 2015, however they did not

report it until December 28, 2015. • On January 5, 2016, Ms. [redacted] returned

to work and entered the unit to inspect for herself. At that time, she pulled

back the carpet to inspect for any type of moisture. She did not find any

dampness nor moisture underneath the carpet at that time. Ms. [redacted] also

photographed and touched the spots on the carpet that Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted]

believed to be "mold" of some type. Ms. [redacted] indicated that the

spots were "sticky" to the touch. Ms .[redacted] also stated that the

"black stuff' in the toilets and on the shower heads appeared to be hard

water stains or iron sediment common to the water at Brandyhill Apartments. Ms.

[redacted] was instructed by Senior Management of [redacted] that

out of an abundance of caution, she should order air samples at that time. Ms.

[redacted] contacted [redacted] of New Kent/Williamsburg and the Northern Neck at that

time to perform air sample testing. • On January 6, 2016, Ms. [redacted] sent

another email to Ms. [redacted] stating that there was "standing water"

in or around the air conditioning unit. Ms. [redacted], Mr. [redacted] and I

responded to the unit that same day and inspected. The "standing

water" was only located after Mr. [redacted] shone a flashlight into the

return vent cover in the hallway, where he saw water sitting in the duct. Mr.

[redacted] attempted to remove the return vent cover as he normally would and

found that it was bent and appeared to have been tampered with. The cover was

secured with new screws. Mr. [redacted] inspected the unit's condensation drain,

which was dry. The heat was on at this time in the unit. So, the hvac unit

would not have produced any condensation at that time. Mr. [redacted] then removed

the water with a wet-vac and installed a dehumidifier to help dry out the duct.

• On January 7, 2016, Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] returned to the unit to check

on the progress of the dehumidifier. They found that the duct was still damp

and contacted a contractor to perform a water extraction. This took place that

same day. Mr. [redacted] removed the duct liner at this time as well. Ms. [redacted]

also contacted [redacted] to install a new duct liner. • On January 8,

2016, [redacted] replaced the duct liner. Also, on this date, [redacted]

collected air samples from the unit to be laboratory tested. • On January 19,

2016, Brandy hill Apartments received the results of the air sample testing,

which were negative. Per [redacted], of [redacted] of New Kent, Williamsburg

and the Northern Neck, no action was recommended at this time. However, it was

recommended that the residents replace the cloth shower curtain liners with the

vinyl/waterproof variety. • On January 22, 2016 Ms. [redacted] emailed Senior Site

Manager, [redacted] and reiterated her belief that "mold" was

present in your unit. This email stated that she now believed that there was

"mold" present on the window sills. This email included pictures of

the window sills. • On January 24, 2016 Ms. [redacted] emailed myself and Ms.

[redacted] and stated that she and Ms. [redacted] " found more mold" during

the previous weekend. Her email referenced an issue with excessive condensation

around the windows and the patio door of the unit. The email included pictures

of the windows, patio door and the far wall of the master bedroom. • On January

24, 2016 Ms. [redacted], at the direction of [redacted]' Senior

Management contacted [redacted] of New Kent, Williamsburg and the Northern Neck

to inspect the unit again • On January 28, 2016 a representative of [redacted]

along with Ms. [redacted] and Senior Maintenance Technician, [redacted]

inspected the unit. Also present was [redacted], Building Inspector with

the County of Hanover. Mr. [redacted] was present in response to a complaint

made by Ms. [redacted] and /or Ms. [redacted] to the County of Hanover, Office of

Building Inspections. During this inspection, possible biological growth and

discoloration was observed by the aforementioned parties in the master bedroom

closet as well as the far wall of the master bedroom, behind a dresser. • On

February 1, 2016 I received, via email, Ms. [redacted] written request asking to

be released from the lease agreement without penalty. This email referenced

"ongoing respiratory illnesses that we have endured during our time at

Br[redacted]hill". This email implied a belief that these "illnesses"

suffered by Ms. [redacted], Ms. [redacted] and their respective children were somehow

caused by or linked to the condition of their unit and implied a perceived fear

for their health and /or safety and that of their children. • On February 2,

2016, Ms. [redacted] was advised in writing by [redacted] of [redacted] that in

her professional opinion and based on the findings during the January 28, 2016

inspection of the unit, remediation of the area affected in the master bedroom

closet and far wall was necessary. Ms. [redacted] stated that condensation in and

around the windows was due to the extreme drop in the exterior temperatures

causing the windows to reach their dew point, creating condensation. Per Ms.

[redacted], this is unrelated and not relevant to the issue in the master bedroom.

Per Ms. [redacted], this remediation will take a maximum of two business days. Ms.

[redacted] also advised that it would not be necessary to relocate the occupants of

the unit during the remediation. • Also on February 2, 2016, I advised Ms.

[redacted] and Ms. [redacted] in writing, via email, that [redacted]

was prepared to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] from any further lease

responsibility "if you plan to vacate immediately". • On February 3,

2016 Ms. [redacted] responded by email and asked for the word

"immediately" to be clarified. She also stated that they would need

at least 30 days to move. "Immediately" was clarified to mean 24

hours. This offer was extended based on their previous emails which, again,

implied a sense of urgency and a concern for their health and the health of

their occupants. • On February 3, 2016 Ms. [redacted] responded via email that she

found 24 hours to be "unreasonable" and reiterated that she and Ms.

[redacted] would need minimum of 30 days to vacate. • Again on February 3, 2016 I

advised Ms. [redacted] in writing, via email that remediation was necessary and is

scheduled to take place on Monday, February 8, 2016 and that she and Ms.

[redacted] would need to remove all of the items currently stored in the master

bedroom closet and that they will need to move the dresser in the master

bedroom so that the sheet rock can be accessed easily by the contractor. The

remediation was expected to be completed by the close of business that day. The

subsequent sheet rock repairs that were necessary were scheduled to take place

on Tuesday, February 9, 2016 and would be 3 complete by the close of business

on that same day. The email also extended an offer to place Ms. [redacted] and Ms.

[redacted] in a hotel for the duration of the remediation in an effort to minimize

any inconvenience. • On February 4, 2016 I received an email from Ms. [redacted]

which again asked to "terminate the lease without penalty". Her email

again referenced that they would need 30 days to vacate the unit. • On February

5, 2016 I received a letter, via fax, from a [redacted]. regarding

[redacted], the 5 year old daughter of [redacted]. Dr. [redacted] letter

made sweeping statements regarding the condition of their apartment and its

relevance to the health of [redacted] that would be impossible for her to

have substantiated. This Jetter insinuated that the child's sinopulmonary

symptoms which she developed in the summer of 2015, when she moved into the

unit at [redacted] with her mother, Ms. [redacted], were somehow related to the

condition of the unit at the time. Dr. [redacted]Letter included the statement

that she "strongly recommended that her family move into a different home

as soon as possible to help improve [redacted]'s condition and hopefully minimize

the need for further surgical and medical treatments." These statements

are unsubstantiated and irresponsible. No determination of harmful or toxic

mold was ever made by a qualified professional. Determining whether an

individual has been exposed to or suffered the effects of harmful or toxic mold

is a process which requires extensive medical and laboratory testing by licensed

and qualified individuals with access to all relevant data and physical

evidence. • On February 5, 2016 I advised Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] in writing

that based on their statements that implied a fear for their health and safety

and that their children, they could vacate the unit on or before Monday,

February 8, 2016 at 9am, without penalty and without cause and that they would

be released from any further lease responsibility as of that date. [redacted] conducts business in accordance with the terms of its

signed lease agreement as well as the Virgi ni a Residenti al Landlord &

Tenant Act (V RL TA). The applicable section of the VRLTA in this circumstance

is referenced be low. The essence of which is that a condition of mold does

not negate the signed lease agreement. The VRL TA does not in an y way require

[redacted] as the landlord to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted]

from their lease agreement, which is a legal and binding contract. They were

made this offer based on their statements of fear for their health and/or

safety and the health and safety of their children. Although, there is no

verifiable evidence that their health or the health of their children was ever

adversely affected. Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] vacated the unit on February 8,

2016. Their lease responsibility ended as of that date. [redacted] conducts business in accordance with the terms of its signed lease

agreement as well as the Virginia Residential Landlord & Tenant Act (V

RL TA). The applicable section of the VRLTA in this circumstance is referenced

be low. The essence of which is that a condition of mold does not negate the

signed lease agreement. The VRL TA does not in an y way require United Property

Associates as the landlord to release Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] from their

lease agreement, which is a legal and binding contract. They were made this

offer based on their statements of fear for their health and/or safety and the

health and safety of their children. Although, there is no verifiable evidence

that their health or the health of their children was ever adversely affected.

Ms. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] vacated the unit on February 8, 2016. Their lease

responsibility ended as of that date. Reference is made to the Virginia

Residential Landlord & Tenant Act, Page 27, Section 55- 248.18:2. states

that "where a mold condition in the dwelling unit materially affects the

health or safety of any tenant or authorized occupant, the landlord may require

the tenant to temporarily vacate the dwelling unit in order for the landlord to

perform mold remediation in accordance with professional standards as defined

in 55-248.4 for a period not to exceed 30 days. The landlord shall provide the

tenant with either (i) a comparable dwelling unit, as selected by the landlord,

at no expense or cost to the tenant, or (ii) a hotel room, at no expense or

cost to the tenant. The tenant shall continue to be responsible for payment of

rent under the rental agreement during the period of any temporary relocation

and for the remainder of the term of the rental agreement following the

remediation. Nothing in this section shall be construed as entitling the tenant

to a termination of a tenancy where or when the landlord has remediated a mold

condition in accordance with professional standards as defined in 55-248.4. The

landlord shall pay all costs of the mold remediation, unless the mold is the

result of the tenant's failure to comply with 55- 248.16. [redacted] has acted appropriately and in timely manner with regard to each

claim of biological growth/material in the unit formerly occupied by Ms. [redacted]

and Ms. [redacted]. All action taken has been in compliance with the terms of

their signed lease agreement as well as the Virginia Residential Landlord &

Tenant Act.