Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Randall, Masri & Randall, Pc's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Randall, Masri & Randall, Pc has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Randall, Masri & Randall, Pc

  405 E Broadway St Monett, MO 65708-2331

• 

  Randall, Masri & Randall, Pc

  PO Box 151 Monett, MO 65708-0151

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. 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.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/14/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I hired Randall, ************************************************ P.C. back on 5/16 is when my first payment cleared my bank for $1000.00 this was for a foreclosure and Unlawful detainer, they had drawn up for lease option contract in March of last year on my home at 5 *************. Monett, MO *****. The reason that I was foreclosing on the house was do to preach of the contact. They had not paid the taxes nor maintained homeowners insurance. I contacted the law office approx. on 5/14 and retained them to handle the foreclosure and Unlawful detainer. My main contact was with a Ms. ***** a paralegal with the firm. I was never given a contract or fee schedule. Again I gave them another $1000.00 which cleared my bank on 6/10. Ms. ***** was telling me that I had a credit but I wanted to make sure that the funds were there. The foreclosure took place on June 22, 2024 tenants had been notified by law firm by certified mail and regular mail per court requirements, no one showed so the house was put back in my name. Then the unlawful retainer was started and ******* *** showed up in court. He met with the other attorney and they came to an agreement that 30 days tenants had to get their own financing or they were out Oct 1. ******* *** did not take this before the judge to make it and order so hence I have had to hire another attorney to try and fix this. I feel that the firm did not do their due diligence so I am out $2000.00 to them $820.00 for home owners insurance and $4000.00 in lost income from tenants plus $1000.00 to hire a new attorney. Bottom line this would have been all over 9/3/2024 if ******* *** had gone before the judge and had this entered as a court order. ******* *** did not do his due diligence so I feel that the firm is entitled to $1500.00 for the foreclose, but is responsible for a total of $6320 for lost income, insurance, hiring a new attorney and a refund of $500 from them for services not rendered.

  Business Response

  Date: 10/29/2024

  To whom it may concern, I am responding to a complaint from ****** ******** dated October 12, 2024 (ID:  *********.  *** ******** did hire our law firm to handle a foreclosure in an effort to regain real property.  We completed the foreclosure, however, the party being foreclosed refused to vacate the premises immediately, resulting in the need for *** ******** to file a lawsuit for unlawful detainer so she could obtain possession of the property and remove the tenant.  We did ***************** $1,000 to begin the foreclosure.  Our hourly billing rate is $200.00 per hour.  It was explained to *** ******** at the outset that the $1,000 initial deposit would cover publication fees necessary for foreclosure, as well as coverage for our hourly billing for work performed.  *** ******** then, at her own insistence, deposited another $1,000 in anticipation of suing for unlawful detainer.  Knowing that the two actions would ultimately likely cost in excess of $2,000, we accepted her additional deposit.  
  
  Ultimately, the unlawful detainer action was filed in a timely manner and the court gave us a date for hearing on September 3, 2024.  The opposing party in the case did hire counsel, and at hearing I had the opportunity to speak with opposing counsel.  Opposing counsel stated that her client still desired to purchase the property and needed time to obtain financing.  I explained this situation to *** ******** and her husband and they decided that they wished to give the defendant the additional time to obtain financing to purchase the home.  It was understood that we could not obtain a judgment at this initial hearing given the nature of the agreement to allow Defendant time to obtain financing. A new hearing date was agreed upon by the parties and by counsel for the parties.  A second hearing was scheduled for October 1, 2024, at which time it was understood by the parties and attorneys that we would obtain judgment for the property if Defendant did not have financing.  Attorney for Defendant, prior to October 1, filed a timely motion for continuance due to counsel's need to travel to ***** for an important medical procedure.  A new hearing was set by the Court on November 5, 2024, as Defendant's motion for continuance was sustained by the Court.  *** ******** was very upset that a continuance was granted and terminated our services shortly after the new hearing date was set.  This was not a matter of failure of due diligence.  *** ******** was clearly eager to obtain possession of her property and evict the tenant, and I believe the Court's granting of Defendant's motion for continuance, which was not my doing, resulted in our termination by *** ********.  

  All of our fees were reasonable.  I never unilaterally made any decisions in this case.  I always obtained the client's authority during negotiations with opposing counsel, and *** ******** and her husband were the ultimate decision makers throughout the process.