Business ProfileforReal Property Management Service

All information are enclosed in the attachments in particular the email sent on September 3, 2021 - Letter of complaint escalated to President (3 Sep 2021) - Communications emails (8 & 15 Sep 2021) - Original contract prior to change of date to April 15th - Confirmation of Contract Change of date to April 15th Thank you! he disputed issues are regarding to inaccurate billing practices, overbilling and billing for services not rendered, or billing for services not authorised or agreed to (in case specifically against direct instructions) a) 06/18/2021 Leasing Fee $3459.18 This fee shouldn't apply in its entirety since the agreement was terminated (as per agreement) before leasing services were required. It doesn't provide the itemized breakdown of the costs it was supposed to cover. b) 06/11/2021 Early Termination Fee $730.95 Although I believe to be entitled to cancel the agreement with cause due to lack of service provided without paying any penalties. However this amount is incorrect as the notice of 3 months cancellation penalty would be $423.75 (as 141.25*3 months) as the amount of $141.25 since the beginning of the contract and during the vacancy of the property was being charged. RPMS' response on August 27th was that "the most recent market rent posted during termination was $3125 on June 3, 2021". This amount was used as the basis of 6.9% standard rate for the property which has been vacant since the tenant - who was paying $2300/m - vacated the property in May 2021. It seems that RPMS is trying to have it both ways, not only charging 3 months penalty on top of 30 days notices (in total 4 months) but also based on an assumed rate which had not yet been put into a tenancy contract. Service fee is supposed to be based on the actual rent not an assumption which could be fluctuating at best and not guaranteed at least. Moreover, the payment of the notice fees was already accepted by RPMS and applied to the account (06/16/2021 Ref: XXXXXXXX). No objection or comments were raised at the time by RPMS. c) 06/02/2021 Move-Out Inspection $270.00 The invoice for the service should not apply as it was NOT agreed to or authorised by me. I had already declined two complementary inspections that were offered at least on two occasions previously believing no inspection was required. If I had even been given a heads-up - as I always and repeatedly requested for - I would have reminded RPMS staff that no inspection was required. Moreover, the inspection failed to notice the costly damages to the interiors of the fridge (major), dishwasher (minor) and washing machine (minor). For example, all three drawers of the fridge were completely broken and lots of shattered glass was recovered from the range. I also don't think that you have contacted the tenant to demand payment for the damages already noted. RPMS' response of Aug 28th was "it is a fact that the offer to have 2 complementary inspections were there IF the service was up and running for one whole year." It seems that it was another example of "unwritten assumptions" which was not communicated in any form. Again, by charging of almost 6 months of service fee one might conclude that at least the offer for one of the free inspection would still stand. d) 04/15/2021 Main. Other $147.47 The invoice ***** (04/12/2021) regarding the cutting of the keys should be rescinded for the following reasons including but not limited to; - Cutting extra key(s) were not discussed with nor authorized by me at any time. - Even though while providing the spare key - as requested specifically for the purpose of Lock Box for future showings - and occasionally afterwards in various discussions with your team, we kept reminding everyone that the keys and lock to the unit have high security features and that additional keys cannot be cut or duplicated conventionally, and if necessary more keys would be available and provided ONLY by me. RPMS' response of August 28th ignores my prior specific instructions and says "The reason why we performed this service is that we got the information from the condo that copies can be made at any reputable locksmith. Since we got this info from them directly, we did the service" which seems to deflect the blame and while still acting against my specific requests and instructions after I had clearly and repeatedly made them and he adds "Then, that's when we had the outcome that duplication was not possible. Despite that, one of our staff was able to physically attend this and has billed time for this, thus having this bill present in your statement." So in Summary, RPMS ignored my prior requests and instructions, tried without my knowledge to make a key the first time, I objected to that and raised the issue with ***** and notified RPMS a second time that I do not authorize making another key unless through me and my specialized locksmith, RPM still sent someone to go and try duplicating a key anyway while keeping me in the dark, and then try to charge me for the time and parking expenses your staff incurred. RPMS acted against my repeatedly communicated instructions and would bill me for it too? e) Management Fees Owner Statements March01-March10 and March11-April12 should be rescinded including the 04/09/2021 and 03/09/2021 Fees ($141.25+$141.25=$282.50) since the agreement date was changed to April 15th (see confirmed in writing via email of April 7th, 2021) f) 03/09/2021 Set Up Fee $211.31 RPMS has agreed to credit this fee as previously agreed to, however the bill hasn't been adjusted to reflect that. g) 06/15/2021 NSF Charges $5 + $25 These two separate charges (why and what for?) should be reversed on the latest statement of Jun11-July10. Previous requests for cancellation of PAD on the account and its unavailability for PAD has been communicated to your accounting staff every month since April. The last communication was on June 8th via email requesting to confirm that PAD has been cancelled. This oversight has resulted in a $50 penalty per incident by the bank to me which in fairness RPMS should reimburse the account due to its error. Although I have consistently requested that we pay our bills through credit card or certified cheque, this account was provided - as was discussed with the person requiring the information - months ago for the sole purpose of rent payment into the account rather than PAD withdrawal from it. I made this clear at the time and kept mentioning it ever since in every conversation with Accounting as well as other staff.