ComplaintsforDORE Property Management

• Initial Complaint

  26/09/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  DORE managed a property on my behalf from Sept. 2020 to Aug. 5, 2022. On Oct. 18, 2021, DORE undertook an inspection of the property, which made it very clear that the house was in a deplorable state and was not being cleaned let alone maintained. The state of the property was disgusting (filthy carpets, holes in walls, etc.). At this time, DORE did not inform me that there were any issues, leaving me unable to make decisions about how I wanted to proceed to safeguard my property and stop/mitigate further damage/disrepair. DORE failed to conduct a follow-up inspection after the Oct. 2021 inspection to make sure that all necessary repairs had been properly/completely carried out. I didn't become aware of any issues until July 2022, when a third-party visited the property on my behalf. Due to DORE's lack of care and attention, my property was left with more than $10,000 of damage by the tenants (in fact, the repairs will cost considerably more than that). When I complained and expressed my disappointment at DORE's failure to adequately manage the property, DORE cancelled the contract between us. When I raised the issue of a DORE employee going to the property (after the company had terminated the agreement between us) and taking items from it without my knowledge or consent (I am still shocked at this unethical behaviour), DORE demanded its lockbox back. When I respectfully requested financial compensation given that DORE itself had acknowledged it was not adequately fulfilling its property management duties from Oct. 2021, the company owner told me I was on my own when it comes to trying to get any money out of the tenants to pay for repairs. It seems that DORE wants to keep its fees despite not having earned them, try to bully me into not making a fuss and, when that doesn't work, try to walk away from the situation it helped create through its negligence. I'm left to organize and pay for necessary repairs to the property and try to get redress from the tenants.

  Business response

  26/09/2022

  Dear ******,
  
  
  In the month of October 2021,  three issues of concern were brought to tenant's attention (namely dirt on the carpet that required a carpet shampoo, erasable marker on a wall that needed to be cleaned and a small hole in a wall that needed to be fixed). The tenant agreed to address our concerns and willfully cooperated. Shortly thereafter, he provided pictures to show the carpet had been shampooed, the wall had been cleaned and the hole was patched and pending final sanding/painting. Based on the tenant's cooperation, the matter was closed.
  
  
  In June of this year, 2022, the tenants provided notice to vacate. Upon inspection to prepare the advertisement, we did encounter concerns with the overall condition of the property. We communicated with the tenants about our concerns in order to address the matter, which the tenant voluntarily admitted and agreed to address. In the midst of working towards a solution with the tenants, you had the property inspected by a 3rd party to explore selling. Since obtaining the report from the 3rd party, you have persistently focused your resolve against our organization as opposed to the tenants. After numerous exchanges, it became clear that you would continue to focus your efforts against our organization and thus left us no other choice than to terminate our agreement. 
  
  
  As we indicated in previous exchanges, some of the damages you are seeking to recover were actually present when you rented your unit, and most would be considered normal wear and tear (ex: painting and cleaning).
  
  
  With respect to your claim about "...taking items...", we remain disappointed you would describe us taking canned food that the tenants left behind to the food bank in lieu of having you pay to dispose of them, as unethical behavior.
  
  
  We are sorry you are choosing this route to attempt to address your concerns. We were making progress with our efforts in collecting from the tenants responsible for some of the issues but unfortunately, your demeanor has left us no choice but to completely bow out of this relationship. 

  Customer response

  26/09/2022

  
  ********** ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  I'm afraid that DORE's depiction of the situation is incorrect in many ways. DORE absolutely had a responsibility in October 2021 to let me know what was going on at the property, but it did not do so. Had DORE communicated the issues to me as it should have done, I would have insisted on a follow-up inspection, which would have shown that the repairs were not completed. Instead, DORE trusted the tenants to do what they said they would do and closed the case with no follow-up. This was a mistake. DORE had a responsibility to me and to my property. By not communicating with me about the damage and by not conducting a follow-up inspection, DORE did not fulfil its duties as property manager. DORE has acknowledged as much to me in an email.

  
  With regard to the tenants’ notice to vacate, again communication from DORE about this was very lacking. I was unaware of any damage to the property (although DORE was) until my realtor visited the property in early July. Having a realtor inspect the property did not in any way impede DORE’s ability to work toward a solution with the tenants. To suggest that the realtor’s visit was somehow a catalyst for DORE’s inability to continue working toward a solution with the tenants is absurd. However, had DORE made me aware of the situation when they were first made aware of the damage to the property, things might have been different, but they did not communicate with me as they should have done. It is also untrue that I have “focused my resolve against your organization”. Prior to DORE’s refusal to continue to pursue the tenants (which I received this morning), I have had no way to contact the tenants or to influence in any way whether they pay the amounts on the N5 or not. I can have no effect either negatively or positively on DORE’s abilities to pursue the tenants. DORE simply does not like that I hold the company partially accountable for the current situation. These two things (pursuing the tenants and discussing financial compensation for DORE’s inaction since October 2021) are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to have conversations about both things without one thing impeding the other. For DORE to suggest otherwise is, again, simply not true.

  
  With regard to the damages, I am at a loss to know what DORE means when it says that “Some of the damages I am seeking to recover…”. DORE issued the N5, which listed the damages with no input from me. In fact, I didn’t get a copy of the N5 until much later, one more thing that DORE did not communicate to me. I agreed that one item listed by DORE on the N5 was inaccurate when it was shown that the damage was already there when the property was rented. I am seeking nothing other than the amounts listed by DORE on the N5, have asked for nothing else at any point, so am at a complete loss to know what DORE is referring to. It seems that DORE is trying to make it sound like I am being unreasonable about the damages I am seeking, but that is not the case. I have never asked for anything other than the items and the amounts that DORE itself itemized as “wilful and negligent damage” by the tenants on the N5.

  
  Regarding the items removed from the property, this is not a “claim” as DORE would like to suggest. It happened. It is a fact. A DORE employee went to the property and removed items without my knowledge or consent. The excuse given for removing the items is immaterial. DORE had no way of knowing what my plans were for the contents left behind by the tenants. Had DORE asked, I would have happily engaged in a conversation with them about it, but at no point has DORE undertaken any real communication with me about any of this and that is the core of the problem. The bottom line is that to remove items (including artwork from walls) without my permission or knowledge is unethical. And no excuse makes it otherwise.

  
  I am also very sorry that I am having to go this route to try and get some compensation from DORE, but unfortunately the company has left me with no alternative. I have tried on numerous occasions (and have the emails to demonstrate this) to discuss this matter directly, politely and respectfully with DORE, but the company only wants to talk about pursuing the tenants. When I made a very reasonable and polite suggestion for compensation, the company replied “Effective immediately, DORE will discontinue all efforts to recapture any funds from the tenants…”

  
  As well, I am at a loss to understand how my “demeanor” has left DORE with no choice but to ‘bow out of the relationship”. I have never been rude or disrespectful to DORE or its employees; my demeanor has always been polite and respectful. I do expect DORE to be held accountable for failing to provide the service for which it has been paid. However, DORE has refused to engage in such a conversation and whenever I’ve raised the matter, DORE has acted in a bullying manner as it did again this morning. I did nothing to cause DORE to terminate the agreement other than ask questions about DORE’s management of the property, lack of communication and follow-up inspection. I believe that my questions and the concerns I expressed to DORE were entirely appropriate and would be what any property owner would have been asking in the circumstances.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** ********

  Business response

  03/10/2022

  On the matter of the Oct 2021 issues, the tenant willfully worked towards resolving the issues of concern and provided proof of such, but I digress.
  
  
  
  On the subject matter of items being removed from the property (notably the "artwork"), knowing the circumstances surrounding this claim, I remain baffled that you keep bringing this up. As we've indicated previously, we simply removed the artwork from the walls so that the junk removal company wouldn't forget to pick up and that the walls could be prepared for painting but again, I digress.
  
  
  With respect to the N5 notice, we do acknowledge that we prepared this notice while the tenants were still occupying the property (not knowing if any of these would still need to be addressed upon them vacating).  We were working towards negotiating a positive outcome with the tenants on your behalf. As you acknowledge, we have had subsequent exchanges with you to outline the fact that one of the items included in this notice was included by mistake as this damage was there when the tenants moved in. The bulk of the notice was for painting and cleaning and as we suggested in previous communications, unless the tenants willfully agree to pay, we cautioned you that our experience suggests that the LTB would consider this as normal wear and tear if the file advanced to a hearing. Furthermore, part of this notice included content removal, most of which has already been taken care of and as of the last exchanges, a revised quote of $680.90 +hst was provided, which was a fraction of what we included in the original notice. This leaves us with two items (ie: master bedroom door and sliding door replacement which were quoted for repair for a sum of $357.00 +hst each) which we support as being the responsibility of the tenants. Based on our interactions with the tenant, we felt confident that a reasonable amount was going to be collected.
  
  
  
  To be clear, we initially only terminated the continuation of the property management services as the exchanges with you made it clear you were upset and that you directed your energy towards holding us responsible as opposed to the tenants. At that time, we did offer to continue to work with vendors to address the issues. Furthermore, we also stated that we would continue to pursue the tenants with the hopes of collecting funds for you. 
  
  
  After a vendor divulged to us how you characterized the relationship with us, he refused to provide a quote and didn't want to provide his services to you. Following this situation, we also advised you that we would no longer continue to work with vendors but would continue to assist with collecting from the tenants.
  
  
  Following those latest exchanges, you continued to pursue your energies towards us as opposed to the tenants. We finally decided we were going to bow out completely. And we did.
  
  
  With all due respect, subject to section 12 of our agreement, your suggested settlement is therefore denied.

  Customer response

  04/10/2022

  
  ********** ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  On the matter of the Oct 2021 issues: the fact is that DORE had an obligation to inform me about the damage to the property that was discovered following DORE’s inspection in October of 2021. DORE also had an obligation to make sure that all damage was adequately repaired and also that no further damage was done to the property. DORE did none of these things and yet continued to collect property management fees every month despite failing to adequately provide the services for which it was being paid. DORE has admitted that it made mistakes and yet seems to feel that, despite those mistakes, it should bear no financial burden. Rather, DORE seems to feel that full payment for less than adequate service is completely acceptable. However, no property owner should be expected to pay full property management fees when the property management company itself has admitted that it failed to deliver.
  
  On the subject of items being removed from the property: again the facts are the facts. Items were removed from the property after DORE had unilaterally terminated its property management agreement with me. Given that DORE had terminated its property management agreement with me, no member of DORE staff had any right to enter the property without my knowledge and approval, let alone remove items without my knowledge and approval. I am baffled that DORE appears to think that this is a minor matter. It is not. It was unethical behaviour on the part of the DORE staff member and the fact that DORE continues to defend this unethical behaviour speaks volumes about DORE as a company. I’m sure that no one would want a stranger to go into their home and remove items without their knowledge and approval. And no rationale or excuse for such unethical behaviour is defensible no matter how hard DORE might try to argue otherwise.
  
  With respect to the N5 notice, I had virtually no insight into DORE’s negotiations with the tenants because information and/or communication from DORE was extremely lacking and limited, and in many cases non-existent as in the case of the October 2021 inspection and the damage caused by the tenants prior to that 2021 inspection and subsequent to it. DORE was aware of significant damage to the property when the tenants gave notice to vacate and yet failed to share that information with me leaving me to find out weeks later from my realtor. It seems that DORE is now intent on explaining why the information on the N5 it created, with zero input from me, is incorrect. I’m at a loss to understand DORE’s behaviour in this matter. We could absolutely debate whether damage to the property would be considered by the Landlord Tenant Board to be wear and tear or willful damage (although I suspect that massive holes in, and burn marks on, walls probably would not be considered normal wear and tear), but that would be a matter for the Board. Again, DORE seems to be trying to change the narrative to suit itself and avoid discussing the real issue: DORE’s inaction and mismanagement of the property dating back to October 2021 when it was first made aware of damage to the property.
  
  To respectfully repeat myself: nothing I did or did not do in any way at any time impeded DORE from continuing its conversations with the tenant about collecting money for damages. DORE simply didn’t — and still doesn’t — want to accept responsibility for its inaction and mismanagement since October 2021. Whenever I brought up DORE’s inaction and lack of adequate property management services (services for which the company has already been paid in full), DORE behaved like a bully and removed one level of support after another leaving me to deal on my own with a situation that was partially of the company’s making. I am still at a loss to understand what is so wrong with me very respectfully and politely requesting a dialogue with DORE about compensation given that I’d acquitted my part of our contract by paying DORE in full for property management services, when even DORE itself has admitted that property management services were not adequately provided.
  
  As I have already stated, I was in absolutely no position to be able to direct any energy toward the tenants as I was unable to have any contact with them until DORE decided to ‘bow out’ and informed me that I was on my own. For DORE to suggest otherwise is patently untrue and is simply a further attempt by DORE to muddy the waters. I’m not sure what kind of action DORE believes I could or should have taken with the tenants when I was unable to have any contact with them.
  
  DORE did indicate that they would continue to pursue the tenants with the hopes of collecting funds for me. I was happy for the company to continue to do that and communicated that to the company on more than one occasion. It was DORE that unilaterally decided that it would no longer continue to pursue the tenants with the hopes of collecting funds because I continued to politely request a dialogue about DORE’s admitted mismanagement since October 2021. Again, these two things (collecting money from the tenants and discussing compensation for DORE's admitted mismanagement) are not mutually incompatible; it is perfectly possible to do both things at the same time, and for DORE to suggest otherwise is untrue.
  
  I believe that any property owner would quite rightly want to discuss DORE’s inaction, mismanagement and lack of communication since October 2021 and the resulting significant damage to the property, as well as the question of whether the company should retain full payment of property management fees when the company itself admits that property management services were simply not adequately delivered. No one wants to pay for services that have not been delivered and this is the crux of the issue with DORE.
  
  To be clear, DORE terminated the property management service agreement, peremptorily demanded its lockbox back, reneged on its promise to provide support to get necessary repairs done and, finally, walked away from its promise to continue to pursue the tenants for payment for damages for no other reason than because I wished to discuss DORE’s inaction and lack of adequate property management services following the property inspection in October 2021. I was at no time disrespectful or discourteous to any members of DORE’s staff. Despite this, DORE has made it very clear to me personally and continues to make it clear through its disingenuous responses in this forum that it is not willing to have that discussion with me.
  
  With regard to DORE’s vendor, as I have said to DORE previously in emails, I do not agree with DORE’s characterization of the conversation. The vendor actually told me how poorly he thought the property had been managed and how terrible he felt the damage was. He also communicated to me that he was concerned about whether or not he would be paid for any work he undertook. I told him that DORE had informed me that I would have to pay 100% of all costs upfront before any work could be started, which would seem to guarantee that he would be paid. Having to pay 100% of all costs upfront naturally concerned me given DORE’s proven history of being unwilling to discuss compensation after it has been fully paid to provide a service and then failed to adequately deliver that service. I also know that following my conversation with the vendor, his wife called to discuss real estate services should I want to sell the property. I don’t think that would have happened had the vendor not had a reasonable and constructive conversation with me. However, DORE used its unsubstantiated characterization of my conversation with the vendor as a reason to remove one more level of support that it had undertaken to continue to provide to me: support with contractors to complete the necessary repairs. And, at no time, was it communicated to me by DORE that this support was conditional upon me using DORE’s sole contractor and only DORE’s sole contractor.
  
  Throughout this whole affair, DORE has sought to bully me into not pursuing the company for fair compensation for DORE’s failure to provide an adequate level of property management, for its failure to communicate with me and for its failure to provide me with vital information about my property. That is why DORE bowed out completely. The company does not want to do the right thing. It has been paid for its services, despite not having adequately provided those services, and is now quite happy to attempt to walk away without shouldering any responsibility.
  
  With all due respect, no company should expect to be paid in full for services that it has failed to deliver. And no property owners would expect to pay in full for property management services that have not been adequately delivered. DORE has admitted that it did not deliver adequate property management services to me, and yet the company still seems to think that it is appropriate for it to be paid in full.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** ********

• Initial Complaint

  24/08/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  DORE Property management was responsible for managing my property in Orleans. At walkout of my tenants, they left a window on my house open at 30+ degrees and air conditioning on, they left the back patio unsecured (not locked), they left a completely wet washer closed which caused mold to develop. I also had issues at start of the tenancy where they let the tenants in prior to start of contract. They don't seem bothered by these failures and just have reminded their subcontractors that these should be checked. They have not tried to make this right or offer any actual corrective actions. I am very disappointed by the work ethic and professionalism of this company and would not recommend to anyone.

  Business response

  07/09/2022

  We are sorry you felt you had to go through this channel to voice your concerns. As you know, we have been actively communicating with you with respect to the issues you pointed out. A manager visited you in person to attempt to make things right for you. We await your response on hopefully closing this file on a positive note. 
  Respectfully yours.

  DORE Property Management

*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. ↩