Precizzion Krome Motorsports

I am not aware of a public complaint made by this tenant in January or what the complaint was related to nor is in any way related to the items listed in this complaint through the Revdex.com today.    I am aware of a complaint made by this tenant on [redacted] on the evening of the July 29th to...

which I immediately responded and told the tenant I would investigate the file to determine if any of the charges in the security deposit were erroneous.  I pulled the file yesterday the 30th and reviewed the work done prior to move in, the move in condition form, our move in inspection report, the mid-term reports, and the move out inspection report.  Today (31st)I had a phone call with the owner of the property to discuss my findings and let them know what I found that I believed to be in the tenants favor. I have responded Today - 48 hrs later - to the review on [redacted].  The same gist of that information will follow in this response.  The email that was sent to the tenant on the 29th had an attachment called Security Deposit Itemization that is promulgated by the State of [redacted] and is the document we are required to use as an accounting for the funds in a security deposit refund.  Because we agree that the required document is lacking in the desired detail we included in the body of that email the charges in broken out form. Feel free to review the attachments.  The charges were for: move out inspection fee $75 (per the lease agreement),  damage to the face of the stainless steel oven door $306.55, and carpet odor treatment $442.57.  After reviewing the account we found that extensive odor treatment and carpet cleanings were done prior to tenant occupancy.  This tells me it is quite possible that this was a pre-existing condition that has now been attempted to be remediated again. This would be a tough item for a tenant to put on a move in condition form because odor can be subjective and you can not necessarily see it if there are no stains (which there were not at move in.)  The tenant claims to have had the carpets cleaned prior to our company going, so it is likely that the condition just can not be remediated any further.  We are going to credit the tenant back $442.57 for the carpet odor treatment based off these findings.  The oven door is dented and it was not on the move in condition nor is it seen in the photo from the move in inspection report so there is nothing I can do to remove that charge.  We do not make any money off the security deposit items and have no incentive to charge them to a tenant. In fact, when charges like this happen it just creates more work that is not vey fun. It is not often we find grounds to reverse fees because they are typically very black and white. In this case I am glad we were able to determine that more than 50% of the charges could be refunded to the tenant.

The Security Deposit accounting form was sent on 9/27/16.The tenant has 10 days to respond to the accounting with any disputes.  They opened a dispute with our office on 9/27/16 which was received on time. We have 10 days to research and respond which will be on 10/07/16.  We should be...

allotted the proper time to diligently respond to a discrepancy before it is filed with the Revdex.com. We have reviewed the file and have a response to the tenant dispute. The lightbulbs charge was a total of $45 which includes the cost of the bulbs and the labor/trip for the contractor to put them in. There were 13 bulbs that were non-functioning or missing and replaced. This is explicitly written in the lease and the charge is reasonable. We have attached a report with photos of all of the bulbs that were missing or burnt out at the time that we took possession. For the blinds there were a total of 17 blinds replaced due to condition.  We noted the two on the inventory condition for as having pre-existing damage and we charged the remaining 15 blinds to the tenant. The photos of the damaged blinds and their respective photos of the replaced blinds are in the same report. The charges for the sink repair we have determined to be work that should have been warrantied by the contractor that did the work previously during the lease term.  We are in agreement with the tenant that they should not be charged for this repair. We are going to hold the contractor liable for the work that should have been covered by warranty and credit the tenant for this repair.  This charge of $240.00 will be credited to the tenants account via ACH transaction. Please expect to see these funds in your account within 5 business days. Thank you,[redacted]Broker/OwnerTHE SYSTEM IS NOT ALLOWING ME TO SEND THE ATTACHED REPORT AS IT IS 10.8MB. I AM SENDING THIS RESPONSE WITHOUT THE AFOREMENTIONED REPORT. IF IT IS NEEDED PLEASE ALLOW ME ANOTHER METHOD.

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

This tenant is correct that they had a non-refundable cleaning fee which is reserved for the cleaning of the property upon move out. The cleaning fee that the tenant paid was in fact used to clean the property in it's entirety. The tenant also paid a refundable pet deposit of $300.00 which is...

held to cover any pet damages. This is documented in the pet addendum that is attached to the lease.  In this particular move out there were pet odors in the carpet that required the carpet company to have to do additional odor or enzyme treatments for the pet odor. The cost of the additional pet treatments were 210.93.  We applied the 210.93 to the refundable pet deposit per the pet addendum and refunded the balance of the refundable pet deposit. I can certainly understand if the tenant has any confusion regarding the accounting of that charge specifically as the Texas provided Security Deposit Itemization form does not breakout the pet deposit from the standard deposit and lumps them all together.  It thereby makes it confusing that there would be an additional carpet "cleaning" charge for which the tenant already paid the non-refundable cleaning fee. I hope this clears up any confusion.

I understand the frustration. It can not be fraud as we have not profited from the charge.  The stains were removed by a vendor that sent us a bill. This charge is simply a pass through for work completed. Because the work was done and the bill was paid it was charged to your deposit. Stains are considered damage and not normal wear and tear. I a sorry the charge stands and no further action can be taken at this time.

I received a return phone call from the vendor that the tenant used to get an estimate for repairs. In his estimate he was going to do a "fix job" that seemed "reasonable" for a property thats a rental property. He also said that if the other vendor that bid the refinishing of the floors was doing the whole floor that the bid seemed cheap for that size of square footage.  His bid was specifically a localized cosmentic fix that would look okay but would not compare to refinishing.   We presented all the findings to the owner.  The owner was adamit that the floors had been fully refinished when she bought the house.  While she does expect normal wear and tear she does not expect deep gouging scratches in the floor to be overlooked as normal.  While the owner has not agreed to refund the security deposit, they have agreed to reduce the amount owed by the tenant to bring the account to a zero balance and not pursue the tenant through court or collections. In this situation no one feels like they are winning.  The owner is upset about the damage to their property and the tenant is upset about the loss of the security deposit.

I honestly did not remember the issue in January the tenant was referring to.  I have since spoken with the tenant and assured him that the items are totally unrelated.  In the end I have sent the tenant additional documentation showing the picture of the stove at the move in and at the mid-term inspections as well as the move out photo. I have sent the tenant a copy of the receipt for the work completed in repairing the dented door so he could see the actual cost incurred was what was charged to him. This was the only remaining item of contention and to my understanding this has been resolved.  For the record, the tenant felt to cost of repairing/replacing the door was to high.  I showed him on the receipt how the charges broke out and I think that made it more understandable.  I wish him the best on his next deployment.

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: it was not part of my contract, it stated that it needed to be cleaned and it was cleaned. No pictures were provided prior to the cleaning to show what it looked like.  There were spots in the garage floor prior to me renting the property.  This is considered fraud because it was not written in my contract to deep clean the garage.  You took the funds from my deposit without having legal grounds regarding my contract on this property. The amount charged for this is between the owner and the Property Management.Regards,[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I do not agree with the $210.93 charge. Again, this was incurred by Red Wagon is the sole responsibility of Red Wagon. Additionally, $650.00 was paid in total for the pet deposit, not $300.00. Please see the attached Pet Agreement. Please refund the full amount of the pet deposit ($650.00) and the Security Deposit ($1395.00) less the inspection charges (-$103.09) for a total of $1941.91.
Regards,
[redacted]