Response from the owner - a month ago
The tenants we were carefully screened and met all established rental criteria, their parents also co-signed for them since they were first time renters, we had no problems collecting the rent, and they paid a large security deposit.
Management began on May 25 and the tenants moved in on June 29 so it took just over one month, not 7 weeks, to fill the vacancy and not from any lack of effort. We showed the home many times and were being careful to place qualified tenants, not just anybody.
This unit was a duplex and the owner lived next door. It was very clear that the owner was being discriminatory towards the tenants based on their age and was looking for any reason to evict them right from the start before there were any alleged problems.
The tenants did have guests over frequently, but not 7-10 cars, no guests staying the night, and never any parties or loud or disruptive behavior even according to the owner’s own account. We also performed an inspection and found the second bedroom to be vacant. There is nothing illegal or wrong with having guests over.
The “public nudity” issue was actually “urinating in public” and nobody was identified despite the fact the person who reported it was supposedly looked right in the eye as they drove past. The tenants were shocked to hear of the accusation. I firmly believe the owner filed a false police report in order to push the issue of asking the tenants to vacate. If there was in fact a real public urination issue then I would suspect the owner’s unlicensed and unprofessional landscaper or one of her guests, not the tenants.
The day the tenants vacated there was a brush fire nearby and the owner had the nerve to call the police and make the wild accusation that the tenants may have started that fire. Rescue is very dry and fires are not uncommon, the tenants come from good homes and have no criminal backgrounds, they are always very polite and well-mannered, and their parents live very close to the property. For her to call the police on the tenants was completely out of line, and demonstrates how little credibility a police report from her should be given.
The tenants left the home in an acceptable condition except for the need for a light cleaning and a spot treatment of the carpet near the front door where they accidentally tracked dirt after having the carpets steam cleaned. There was no need for the unit turn to take more than a day or two at most. There was no damage to the unit.
The owner would call us on a daily basis for the most absurd reasons from day 1. Even before they started having guests over she would call us, text us and email us relentlessly, obsessing about such things as why the tenants were home that day or that they keep the blinds closed, and trying to use those things as leverage to ask them to leave. The tenants had done nothing wrong and were always very respectful, but were already being attacked for no reason right from the start. It quickly became necessary to have the difficult conversation with the owner about her unacceptable and discriminatory behavior. We are always interested in hearing about legitimate concerns.
In the end the owner got what she wanted and the tenants left peacefully, without incident, without owing money, and without the need for an eviction. They left not because they had done any wrong but because the owner had an agenda to push them out and was willing to go to incredible lengths to make that happen.
I did charge 50% of the monthly rent amount to place the tenants and did place qualified tenants as I was hired to do. The owner violated the lease agreement and ended the lease early, not the tenants. The commission was hard-earned, but was not worth all that we’ve had to endure from this client.
We have never done business with Suzie Diamond either. The owner is posting her review from someone elses account.