BBB Accredited Business since

Residential Property Management Inc

Additional Locations

Phone: (503) 245-8022 Fax: (503) 245-5586 10725 SW Barbur Blvd Ste 390, Portland, OR 97219 View Additional Email Addresses

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


This company offers property management services.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Residential Property Management Inc meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Residential Property Management Inc include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 6 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

6 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 0 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 2
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 4
Total Closed Complaints 6

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

1 Customer Review on Residential Property Management Inc
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 1
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 1

Additional Information

BBB file opened: August 20, 1997 Business started: 01/01/1990 Business started locally: 01/01/1990 Business incorporated 05/09/1990 in OR
Type of Entity


Business Management
Mr. Robert Johnson, Principle/Owner
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Robert Johnson, Principle/Owner
Business Category

Property Management

Hours of Operation
Monday through Friday
9:00am - 5:00pm

Monday through Sunday
24 hours

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

Residential Property Management Inc has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of A+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations

  • 10725 SW Barbur Blvd Ste 390

    Portland, OR 97219 (503) 245-8022

  • PO Box 80213

    Portland, OR 97280


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

6/17/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: They posted a house on Craigs list, we saw the house. it looked nice, we let them know right away I had a previous felony of 7 years ago for drug possession. I am now a business owner and my past is behind me, we make way more than enough money to afford the house. They called acting unusually cheery (mockingly) to say that we had been denied due to my felonies. I called the screening company right away,, they said that I was not denied due to my felonies because they only deny for manufatoring and distribution i was denied because I had not given a 30 day notice to my current renter. easily solved. Then they say that some one else had rented it, after just stealing the application fee. Although the screening company said we were clear. On the phone they laugh at your troubles and are unusally rude. I read the reviews on them afterwords and they just collect application fees and dont rent the house, it is back on craigs list now. They make promises over the phone, and then ask you to send them an "email" proving that they said what they said. I have never done business with a company that shady and they should be put in jail

Desired Settlement: I would like the $80 for screening fee back. In short, I told them everything up front, they said ok and took the money and said everything was fine, lied and said the screening company denied us for reasons that they did not. (the screening company was nice, and quickly resolved the issue)Then lie over and over again, and will not refund the money even though it was their lie and mistake. I want the screening fee back. $80

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2014/05/21) */ Our company contracts with landlords to find qualified tenants for their properties, and we have developed an application to rent and screening criteria describing "in detail" what it takes to qualify to rent any property we manage. To be fair to all applicants, we give them "in writing" as part of the application to rent what it takes to qualify. The applicant must review the screening criteria "before" they apply and decide "themselves" if they wish to spend their money and be screened. We do not, and will not "prescreen" any application in an effort to determine whether it should go to screening or not. That is the applicants decision. We have chosen to use the services of a professional tenant screening company to screen the applicants against our criteria, and this screening company charges our company for their service. The below verbiage is part of the application to rent and part of what the applicant must agree to "before" we send them to screening: A $42.00 "Applicant Screening Charge" is a nonrefundable payment, for the purpose of processing the application. If the vacancy is filled before screening the applicant, or a screening is not conducted for any reason, the applicant screening charge will be returned to the applicant within a reasonable time. If my application is denied by Residential Property Management, Inc., the Condominium Management Company, or the Condominium Board of Directors, I will receive a refund of $0 from the application charge. The charge to screen this applicant was incurred by him and our company the moment the screening company began processing his application, regardless of the outcome. So unfortunately, no refund is due him. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2014/05/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I am accusing this company of what is commonly called an "application scam". Reading the numerous reviews on "yelp" I know it to be true. They will show a house while it is still occupied and collect as many application fees as possible. I am sure they profit off of this. We were finally denied (after several excuses) because of rent to income ratio? I make around $8000 a month, and the house in question only had a 1500 rent, according to their guidelines i must make 3 times the rent. ($4500) So that does not make sense. Before giving me that excuse, blamed it on everything under the sun. When I was talking with their "screening company" they said we were approved other then the fact that we had not given our 30 day notice at our current apartment. The house is still available for rent on craigs list,( and the current tenants have not yet moved out. We were up front and honest about everything with this company and they assured us it would be fine. When telling us that we could not move in, the office administration literally laughed and was very patronizing. It was shocking as I own a business and if my receptionist treated anyone that way she would be fired. please read all of the reviews on this company on including the reviews that are "not recommended" they do flag all negative reviews. in short, they are indeed scammers, they took the application fees with no intent what so ever on renting the place to us, they lied several times about the reason we were denied, (because there was not a valid one) the office admin had conflicting stories, and said they never said things that they did say. I am not happy with their response and I want the world to know that they are scammers. Why are companies like this allowed to operate? Is there a higher authority then the BBB i can report them to? I have heard the Oregon Attorney general? is there any validity to that? The 80$ is not a huge deal, I just dont like wasting my time and being taken advantage of.

7/12/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: On April 25 2013 we received a letter asking if we wanted to renew our yearly lease that expires July 12 2013, which we responded to April 30 with a yes. After contacting RPM multiple times asking why we had nor received an updated lease, we were notified in early June that the owner had passed away, but the spouse wanted to continue renting to us. We were told we did not need to look for another home to rent, that it would just take time to get the updated lease. This was reconfirmed multiple times by phone. June 18 we received a 30 day notice (with 4 days added per law for mailing) that has us paying rent until July 22. The lease states that either party has to give 30 day notice of intent to terminate the lease term, which RPM did not do. 30 day notice of intent to terminate lease would have to have been mailed to us by June 8, not June 17. Oregon law 90.220 states that we are responsible to the earlier of the dates of termination of lease or the termination letter. Which would put us at paying until July 12. We were led on by RPM and the owner, and not afforded the opportunity to be notified 30 days prior to the lease expiration, or to give that 30 days notice ourselves because they kept telling us that it was going to be renewed. I have spoken with an attorney that confirmed that we are only responsible until July 12. RPM sent us a prorated rent letter asking for $252.25 for the rent for July which we sent. We then received an email stating that they made an error and we would be responsible to pay $1008.99 and that they were sending our check back to us. I talked to ******** and explained what the attorney, CAT Oregon, and ORS 90.220 said, and that our calculated amount would be $550.36, and that I had sent that. She informed my husband that that would be returned to us as well. We are upstanding citizens, reasonable people, and have put up with so many mistakes in the handling of our case, and our complaints fall on deaf ears.

Desired Settlement: I would like our payment to be accepted and considered paid in full for July's prorated rent. The mistakes made were not ours, and legally and ethically we should only be responsible for rent until July 12.

Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/07/11) */ Tenants have been charged rent through the last date of their rental agreement as noted (July 12, 2013). Tenants were provided a 30-day notice to vacate the property as per the signed owner request. There were personal circumstances that required the owner to change her previous plans to continue the property as a rental to the need for the owner to return to the property at the lease expiration of the tenants. Consumer's Final Response /* (2000, 7, 2013/07/12) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Their response is the resolution I had hoped for from the beginning, and as long as nothing unconscionable comes up with the processing of our deposit return I will be completely satisfied. Thank you.

5/23/2013 Billing/Collection Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: My name is ***** **********. I have been a tenant resident at * ******** *** for a year since April 10 2012, and moved out per owners request because he was trying to sell the property on April 10 2013. Since I have moved in the house had many cosmetic damages including, walls with blotches of drywall filler that was spread with a painters spatula and was never fixed with texture and paint. They property management stated that the carpets have been cleaned, yet after one day of walking with white socks they were brown. I honestly believe that the carpets were not washed properly before move-in. When agreeing to move in I have stated that I am ok with moving into this house as long as when I move out I will not be charged for the cosmetic damages on the walls and the couple stains that were in the carpets before I moved in. The property manager stated that they already know of these cosmetic damages and will not charge me for them. Since I moved out it has almost been 30 days, and when I confronted the property management about my refund for the security deposit, they charged me for fixing some damage and repainting the walls of the staircase, which when I left was in perfect condition. When I have moved in I invited all of my neighbors to be my witnesses to what the condition of the house was before my move-in, all of them stated that this should have been fixed prior to my move-in. The blinds also were in horrible condition, and the range was so old and malfunctioning that it was a safety hazard and eventually after many complaints to the property management, the owner was notified and the range was replaced, the blinds I personally bought and replaced and was later reimbursed by the owner through property management because they were so old that the plastics on the blinds was literally crumbling. After I have vacated the property I have made sure that everything was wiped down, carpets cleaned, all pin or nail holes fixed and painted. Today I have spoke with one of my neighbors and she has stated that after move-out, the owners invited them to see what kind of good job we did as tenants to clean the house. They were extremely satisfied with the cleanliness, yet the property management decided to charge me $690 for all types of fixes, painting, light bulbs that I know most if not all were working. I honestly believe that these charges are unjust, unreasonable and unfair. The owners and all of my neighbors say that I left the property in excellent condition, and property management says the exact opposite. I have picture evidence that the house was spotless, and in better condition then when I have first moved in.

Desired Settlement: I am seeking complete refund of my security deposit of $1,170

Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/05/14) */ The following response was sent to the previous tenants on May 10, 2013 with photo documentation and lease documentation to support the charge backs the tenant is disputing. Dear **** and ***** I have reviewed your concerns regarding the charges assessed against your security deposit for your final accounting. Based on the information that I have included in my responses below, the charges for which you were assessed are determined to be tenant responsibility. ________________________________________ Light Bulb Replacement: Dining Room: Photo 3617 that were burnt out and 062 from move in. 1 light in the kitchen. See photo 3580 from move out and 041 for move in. Heat Lamp bulb: Photo #3765 and #150 from move in. Bathroom: 1 #3712 from move out and Photo 161 from move in. ________________________________________ Carpet Cleaning: Photo 3669 from the move out shows a stain in the carpet and photo #109 shows the same area at move in. I have included additional photos showing the condition of the carpet clean at move in. ________________________________________ Wall Repair: See photo #3656 showing the damage that was repaired. ________________________________________ Heat Lamp Replacement: I cannot find any communication regarding the heat lamp in the bathroom not functioning properly. We did receive a request for the heat in the upstairs bedroom and the refrigerator light not working, which both were repaired. ________________________________________ CO Battery: Tenants are responsible for testing and replacing batteries as needed. Please review the Smoke Alarm and Carbon Alarm addendum noting your responsibility that a "10 year" battery may not last for "10 years" _______________________________________ As per the application that you signed, the property was provided to you in "As Is" condition with no cosmetic repairs made. ________________________________________ Cleaning: A very specific list of items that needed to be addressed where sent to the cleaning company to do. The list is as follows: The portion of the lease indicating cleaning. This can be found on page 12 of 15 of your attached Rental Agreement. The portion of the move out letter that was sent to you in January 2013 with your notice to vacate. I have attached this letter in the email. Previous tenants move out cleaning was completed on January 12, 2012 with a follow up clean just the day prior to your possession on April 10, 2012. Carpet cleaning was performed on January 13, 2012. Consumer's Final Response /* (2000, 11, 2013/05/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Business' Final Response /* (4000, 9, 2013/05/17) */ We have further reviewed your dispute regarding the charges. Invoice repairs from Rental Housing Maintenance: Tenant Charges $276.22 represent the following charges: * Drywall repair and painting * Labor for Light bulb and battery replacement * Materials for light bulbs and batteries * labor to remove the raised flower beds and place abandoned property on the side of the house * labor to dig up, spread and rake level the dirt from the raised bed * Trip charge The Owner has agreed to a refund for repairs in the amount of $114.12 to represent the following: * Drywall repairs and painting: $55.12 * 1 hour labor for light bulb and battery removal and battery installation: $49.00 * 50% of the trip charge: $10.00 The remaining charges for cleaning and carpets remain tenant responsibility.

5/7/2013 Billing/Collection Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Our first issue with this residential company is that we had a water leak where the water comes into the house causing our water bill to go up in excess. The city water credited us half of that excess due to the leak. It took the city calling in to get them to fix and credit us. Ended up being 4 months to get it settled and even then they did not credit their full share. When we moved out our deposit of almost 1100 dollars, only 200 was returned. We had shampooed carpet and cleaned house when we left. Probably better than when we found it.

Desired Settlement: I believe what I am getting back from deposit is unfair and would like some of it returned. I think I deserve the whole amount. If not at least a fair amount.

Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/04/09) */ With due respect to the tenant, there is a lot that happens behind the scenes that tenants do not see. I see many, many email communications between a leak detection company, our office, companies to bid the repair, the property owner, selection of a company by the property owner to make the repair, a utility locating company before digging, and then trying to get the leak resolved, as it was determined by all to be an extremely difficult leak location. Our records show the tenant called our office on 1.17.13 telling us the City of Beaverton thought there might be an exterior water leak. We immediately asked a leak detection company to investigate, and moved everything forward from there. It takes the company who repaired the leak completing the job and then issuing an invoice, where we can then send it to the City of Beaverton, who then "on their time schedule" will issue a credit. "This all takes time". Once we learn the amount of the credit we can then issue a check to the tenant. A check for the other half was mailed to the tenant on 3.19.13. Hi Tenant (name removed for privacy), I've tried to explain below our thinking in performing your move out inspection. We may still disagree on some item, but you have a right to know how we try to determine what is a tenants' responsibility and what is not. I want to first establish how you received the home. In addition to the move in photos, attached are 2 invoices for work done immediately prior to you moving in. When you receive the photos, please let me know and we can discuss. Cleaning in the rental business is always a "****** if we do and ****** if we don't" situation, with property owners as well as tenants, as there are "as many" versions of "what clean is" as there are property owners, tenants, and cleaning companies. We have "tried" many cleaning companies over the years, and find the ones who are responsive, will take the time to do a deep clean, have the proper insurance, and who will gladly go back if someone is unhappy with their work, are the companies we continue to use. Because there are so many versions of what clean is, any company can quote low to get you to try them, but what actually are you going to get, and is the tenant "moving in" going to be satisfied with the level of cleaning? With your move in photos and the attached invoices, you can see the level we're trying to attain for a tenant moving in, and honestly, with about 130 tenants moving in every year, we might get one tenant who complains about cleaning "at move in". We then contact the cleaning company and ask them to go back out and take care of the complaint. That's about as good as we can do. Now, what the tenant moving in has to agree to when signing the lease, is to bring it back to that level after they vacate, and we do have tenants who bring it back to a level where we don't have to do anything for a new tenant to move in without complaining. But what we find is many tenants who try to clean the home themselves bring it back 50- 90% of the way there, and we still have to clean or the new tenant will complain. Cleaning deeply is very hard work. And it will probably always remain a "****** if we do and ****** if we don't". Regarding carpet cleaning, comparing the move in photos of the carpet to the move out carpet photos, it sure doesn't look to me like they were cleaned prior to you giving us possession. Based on our move out inspectors assessment of what he saw while onsite and the move out photos (both carpet and the rest), unless you can somehow convince me otherwise, I have to side with our move out inspector. But please send me what you cleaned at the top of the stairs after moving in. On the painting question, you do have a valid complaint. There were several walls repainted, but only 2 that our move out inspector thought had "new" damage since you moved in. We try to break out for the contractors when ordering work what should be paid by an owner and what work we believe is tenant responsibility, so when an invoice comes to our office for payment there will be one with tenant charges and another with owner charges. It's a rarity, but once in a while they come with owner and tenant charges on the same invoice. If someone in our office isn't on their toes, they could easily miss that. There is another invoice for painting that you have not seen because it's not your responsibility, and the painting company had 1 gallon on the wrong invoice. We will be sending you 60% of $39.02 or $23.41. The following just describes how we paint and why. Unless the property owner is willing to have "swiss cheese" looking walls at some reflected angles, it is not possible to "touch up" the spackle spots and have the walls look correct. So we paint a wall we've determined to be damaged and stop at the corners or edges. We then pro-rate the expense of painting that one wall over 5 years, under the theory that a property owner is going to repaint inside about every 5 years. So, if a wall had new paint 2 years ago, and you lived there for 1 more year and damaged that wall, what has the property owner lost? 2 years of paint life on that 1 wall, or 2/5ths the cost to repaint that wall. It's splitting hairs, but it's the only "fair" way to handle wall paint. Regarding the bathroom drain, the first thing we do upon arrival at a home when performing a move out inspection is to walk through the entire home and turn on all faucets and let them run, and flush all toilets. After 10 minutes or so we walk back around and turn the faucets off, looking for slow drains. Regarding Draino, that decision would be up to the plumber we hire as to which would be less expensive, snaking the drain since he's there, or to see if Draino works. We do not diagnose the problem ourselves, we hire professionals in that trade to diagnose and repair. On the few miscellaneous items left at the property, landlord tenant law does not allow the landlord to make the decision of what to throw away and what to keep. We actually are required to collect, store, and send the abandoned property letter mailed to you on 3.8.13. When there's a new tenant moving into the property immediately, we cannot store the items at the property and need to have the repairmen bring the items to our office for storage. If the tenant doesn't pick the items up by the date on the letter, the landlord can dispose of them and charge the tenant for collecting, moving, and disposing. I hope the above helps you understand our thoughts, and I'm open to hearing yours. That's as good as I can do. Residential Property Management, Inc. XXXXX ** ****** ***** ***** *** Portland, Oregon XXXXX Consumer's Final Response /* (3000, 7, 2013/04/19) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) It looks like the business response is just a copy of a email they sent me, just to explain since I never mentioned some of these things in my complaint. The water leak took 2 months to get fixed as the business shows in their response. During this time I had to put the money up front to pay for a bill that in one case was 500 dollars compared to 50-70 dollar normal bill. In all the City of Beaverton figured I was due 710 dollars total. Half of which they would reimburse and half the owner/property management should be responsible for. Residential Property Management took it upon themselves to give me 50 dollars less than what they were responsible for. I have all the records from the City water. The photo claim is skewed. The move in photos are taken far more zoomed out than move out. For example the carpet was stained when we moved in at top of first set of stairs. The move in photo of the area is taken from across the room. The Move out is taken directly above and zoomed in. When it comes to the cleaning if they want to sanitize that is up to them. If a tenant takes the time to clean they should not be charged for full cleaning. The photos arguing we did not cleaned are skewed as well. There are photos zoomed on things and there is no proof it wasn't there when we moved in. I can understand painting but there were areas when we moved in that were not painted. For example the guest room closet was patched all over with no paint on it. So if I am going to be charged for painting because it is important when renting the home again. It should be that way when I move in. If I hadn't said anything I would have been charged for that third can of paint. Why am I only getting 60 percent back of something I shouldn't have been charged for to begin with? That doesn't make any sense. I was charged 90 dollars for clearing a sink drain that was not clogged in any way when we moved out. I was had just stated in a previous email that I could clog the drain easily with Drano for much much cheaper. When it comes to the abandoned property, I understand except for the fact I was given things that were not mine. Things that were at the property when we moved in. Things that were in the move in photos before we moved in. In conclusion. I am a homeowner whom rents my house out. I do not understand this whole thing. I have kept deposits for breaking a lease but all my tenants have done a decent job at cleaning. I did clean some more to make it more presentable to the next renter but that is my choice and have not charged the previous renter for this. Business' Final Response /* (4000, 9, 2013/04/25) */ With due respect to the tenant, he first stated it took 4 months to repair the water leak (see "Case Description"), now he claims 2 months, based on the day he called it in to us to the day he received his reimbursement. It did not take 2 months to "repair the water leak". The actual water leak repair was completed on 2.20.13, and there is a lot that happens behind the scenes that tenants do not see for it to take that long. I see many, many email communications between a leak detection company, our office, a plumbing company who started digging where the leak detection company marked the leak location, only to find the leak was not at that location but instead was under the garage floor and much more difficult and expensive to repair, then the need for plumbers to bid the repair, get the bid to the property owner, have her select one of 2 bid options, then the plumbers scheduling a utility locating company before digging, and then trying to get the leak resolved. Our records show the tenant called our office on 1.17.13 telling us the City of Beaverton thought there might be an exterior water leak. We immediately asked a leak detection company to investigate. They made an appointment with the tenant for Monday 1.21.13 at 2:30PM. By 3Pm 1.21.13 the leak was confirmed, and we immediately asked a plumbing company to repair it. Unfortunately, things take longer than someone untrained in plumbing might assume they should. It takes the company who repaired the leak completing the job (completed on 2.20.13) and then issuing an invoice (received by us on 2.27.13), where we can then send it to the City of Beaverton, who then "on their time schedule" will issue a credit (received by us on 3.12.13). The time between 3.12.13 and 3.19.13 was our office trying to make contact with the property owner and discuss the amount of the city credit. Check #XXXXXX was mailed to tenant on 3.19.13. On 4.11.13 the tenant brought to my attention he believed he received $52 less in water reimbursement from the property owner than he should have received. I then read (a couple of times) what the City of Beaverton had faxed us. The property owner and one of our staff had misinterpreted the writing from the City of Beaverton, and reduced the amount by the "low average" of water usage ($52.00) as the tenant should still pay a "low average" of water usage for the time there was a leak (he shouldn't get free water for the time the leak was being repaired). Regarding the tenant's claim the photos were skewed, we have presented him with all move in photos taken prior to his moving in. He also received a copy of these photos the day he first signed his lease. There are 186 of them. He is also given and signs his acknowledgement he is given, 2 weeks after he gains possession of the property to add his own photos and move in documentation to our file, which he chose not to do. At move out (after reviewing all 186 move in photos), we simply take photos (close up if needed) of items we believe document tenant damage, including the need for cleaning and carpet cleaning. We think 186 photos and a housecleaning and carpet cleaning invoice for work done immediately prior to the tenant gaining possession tells a pretty good story of condition at move in. It is impossible to take photos at move in of every square inch of a home, "hoping to capture ahead of time and have knowledge of" the items we will need to document at move out, which are unknown at move in. Item24 of your rental agreement states: The security deposit may be applied to past due rent, cleaning, carpet cleaning, damage to the premises, to remedy any breaches of the agreement. Manager may deduct from security deposit in final accounting all costs for carpet cleaning regardless of length of tenancy or whether tenant cleans the carpet prior to vacating. Item 7 of your rental agreement states: Manager's definition of clean shall be the final definition. The reason for item 7 is: it is unfortunately a fact of human nature that the person "paying" for the housecleaning has a "lesser standard" of "cleanliness required" than they do when they're moving in and someone else is "paying". Regarding painting, you were refunded 60% of one can of paint because that is all you were charged. You state under "Desired Resolution": I believe what I am getting back from deposit is unfair and would like some of it returned. I think I deserve the whole amount. If not at least a fair amount. Even though we don't believe you're owed it, we've offered you $200 to settle our differences, with no response from you. What is: "at least a fair amount?"

2/7/2013 Problems with Product/Service
8/30/2012 Problems with Product/Service