ComplaintsforRental Home KC

• Initial Complaint

  07/17/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Rental Home KC (RHKC) charged $120.00 upon move-out for items not disclosed on the move-out inspection and an additional $50.00 to move a refrigerator. I am asking Rental Home KC for a refund in the total amount of $170.00. Please reference "moveout list." This is a list provided by RHKC as an addendum to the rental agreement to ensure a smooth exit process. Please note item 22 which gives instruction to leave mounted items in place. RHKC later sent a summary of items for which they were keeping money, please reference "charged items." The removed items were a trellis and vine in the flower bed and a camera which was part of the home security system. Not only did they fail to mention these items on the final inspection, RHKC added it to the final inspection checklist, please see "addition" and notice how mention of the trellis/vine and camera were added to the right of the line indicating nothing follows. In comparison the inspector noted the air filter was dirty and made the same mark, which I was charged to replace, along with other "same" just above. RHKC gave me a list of move-out instructions which told me to leave mounted items in place, then charged me to remove those items. I was also charged for the movement of the homeowner's refrigerator from the basement to the kitchen. I had my own refrigerator and, upon move-in, requested the existing fridge to be removed from the property. The homeowner insisted it stay on the property so it was moved, by RHKC, to the basement. After move-out and not mentioned anywhere prior to receiving the statement of charges, RHKC decided to charge $50.00 to move an appliance that belongs to the homeowner. Again, I would like a refund in the amount of $170.00 for charging me to remove items after telling me to leave them in place and for moving a kitchen appliance that did not belong to me. I am able to send the rental agreement and moveout list upon request. Thank you, Curt

  

  Business response

  09/04/2023

  When ** ****** moved out he failed to disclose that he had mounted a trellis to the home. (He was contacted immediately when discovered)  It had to be removed and RHKC had to pay someone to do the work.  He had also asked to have the refrigerator removed from the property and the owner didn't want it removed.  It was moved to the basement.  When he moved out he failed to move it back to the kitchen.  RHKC had to pay the next renter's movers to move it back to the kitchen.  Vendors have to be paid to do the work.

  *** ****** failed to mention that he was refunded $3200 in security deposit and pet deposit.  I will refund the $170 if he removes this complaint.  

  

  Business response

  10/02/2023

  The security camera was installed by the renter without permission.  It had had cables screwed to the exterior of the house. The cables were unsightly and that had to be removed. 

  Customer response

  10/02/2023

  
  Complaint: ********

  RHKC: PLEASE READ!

  
  I will go ahead and attach the move-out list provided from RHKC (again) which gave instructs on the move-out process. Line 22 on the list provided by RHKC states "Permanent attachments made by Renter, with or without owner's approval, become sole property of the owner and must not be removed..." 

  RHKC charged me to remove something that was, in fact and by their own policy and guidance, the sole property of the owner. The same goes for the vine/trellis. The fact that I didn't "get permission" before installing a security camera as part of the security system is not relevant. What is relevant is the simple fact that RHKC is charging people to remove things (that have become the sole property of the owner) they are telling people to leave. If a new renter comes in and deems it to be an eyesore and wants it removed, the homeowner is the person responsible for that removal because it has, according to RHKC guidance, become the sole property of the owner.

  I have no problem getting a lot of attention on this matter in order to maximize the number of people in the KC Metro area aware of this shady business practice RHKC seems to think is acceptable. 

  
  Sincerely,
  
  Curtis Bailey

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩