Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Mesa Properties Inc's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Mesa Properties Inc 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

• 

  Mesa Properties Inc

  417 N Central Ave Ste B Upland, CA 91786-7285

  
• 

  Mesa Properties Inc

  12555 Mariposa Rd Ste A Victorville, CA 92395-6010

  

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:08/05/2024

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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.

  We are currently renting a home with Mesa Properties and upon taking possession of the home, we noticed the A/C system did not cool the house down at all. So I submitted a work request to have it looked at. A tech came out and stated to me that the unit couldnt keep up with the temps outside and was an aged unit. He also stated that the ducting in the attic was falling apart as well. He then reported back to Mesa Properties his finding and said that the unit was working but not as it should. Mesa Properties closed the ticket and said the unit works. I complained again and opened another work order to which the owner of the house had their own tech come out and all he did was water off the condenser and said that if it wasnt cool, the unit needed to be replaced. The owner was then going to put in a split unit to help cool off the house, but then decided not to we were without air for two weeks at this point with temperatures outside of 108 and inside 85 once again they close the ticket and said nothing needed to be done so we opened up another ticket and they sent out another technician who stated that the unit was not in working order and needed to be replaced as well as the ducting which the first tech worked on, but not as he stated in his repair documentation. Mesa Properties feels that we should just settle with the temperature being as it is and weve stated that my nine month old and two-year-old are sweating at night as the house never cools off and the ** runs 24 seven. Our electricity bill is over $500 with solar to which they advertised a working ** unit and solar to help with the cost of the ** in their ad. We are still struggling to get it fixed after being in the house for almost 30 days now. The property manager accused us of harassing the tech and has been nothing but disrespectful to us. This is just outrageous that were being treated like this, but were still required to pay full rent.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/07/2024

  Hello,

  We have been working diligently to resolve this complaint from this customer and are in the process of installing a full new HV** system, even before the current HV** system has stopped working. We have responded promptly to all service requests and have ensured we are operating per the lease agreement and the law at all times. Below is a timeline of events which along with the attachments, should help bring clarity to the situation.

  April *** was the first vendor sent out after the tenants submitted the initial service request on 7/10/24. 
  I have attached the invoice labeled Invoice 1 for your reference which states the work that was done to improve the systems performance. There is also an estimate there to replace the ductwork that is noted as falling apart. 
  We shared this information with the owner and recommended at this time that she replace the system, even though it is not required at this point since it is still working, just not as efficient or optimally as a new system would.
  The owner wanted to send her own vendor for a second opinion, which is a reasonable decision to make. We never received a report from this vendor but the owner informed us that she received word from him that the system was operating as designed but she could add mini-splits to add cooling to the home to supplement the central system.
  On 7/19/24, the ductwork that was recommended to be replaced by April *** was replaced. Invoice 2 details this work. As you can see from comparing the photos on Invoice 1 and Invoice 2, the ductwork called out in Invoice 1 is what is fixed in Invoice 2. Additionally, invoice 2 has a photo of the thermostat showing that the home is at a temperature of 74 degrees. I understand that the tenants have stated that other rooms are warmer than the area where the thermostat is, but this report clearly shows the system is working as designed.
  With all that being said, even with the system working as designed as stated by April *** in Invoice 2, we still encouraged the owner to replace the entire system and even helped come up with a way to work through the financing. 
  After the owner agreed to replace the system at our strong recommendation, we sent a third vendor *********** to provide a second full replacement estimate, which we received on 7/30/24. This estimate was approved by the owner on 8/1/24 and ********* was given the go ahead to order everything and schedule with the tenants.
  We have been informed that ********* has reached out to the tenants to give them updates and has both left them voicemails and spoken with them over the phone. Ordering everything takes time but ********* is an excellent company that is working hard to get everything they need to start this job for the tenants.
  
  I have attached a flyer from the California Department of Justice that defines what a habitability issue is for your reference. We understand the urgency and desire to get this taken care of as quickly as possible and we are actively working to get a full system replacement done for the tenants, even though it is not required at this time.
  
  As has been stated, we have been informed that the system is working as designed. The prior tenants did not ever report an issue with the system not cooling the house adequately. We had no reason to believe the ** system was not functioning properly at the time we offered the property for rent. I understand that a comfortable temperature is subjective, but the claim that we advertised a working ** system and failed to provide it is difficult to substantiate, especially with the reports that we have that show it functioning properly.
  
  The property manager correctly communicated to the tenants that utilities are the responsibility of the tenant per section 1.22 of the lease agreement. This includes electricity and solar. I understand that the tenants are stating that it is high due to the system having to run continuously, but again, this system is operating as designed to provide cooling to the home with an adequate delta between outside temperature and inside temperature.
  
  As I said in a prior email, per the lease agreement section 5.55, rent is credited on a prorated daily amount in the event that the tenant has to vacate the premises for repairs, which wasn't the case with this ** issue. Temporary relocation did not occur at any point.
  
  I also asked what the tenants were requesting and they did not provide an exact amount that they were seeking, but having thoroughly reviewed this, I do not see grounds for a rent credit or any other financial concession in accordance with the lease agreement. We have photos of the thermostat after the ductwork replacement showing adequate cooling. We have successfully worked with the owner to replace the system, even before it has failed, in an effort to maintain the property and bring a satisfactory resolution to this issue for the tenants. Replacing an HV** system takes time, especially on the front end to get everything ordered. This step is out of our hands at this point but we have been assured by ********* that they expect the parts to arrive soon so they can begin the work.
  
  I definitely understand the urgency here but also have to ensure that we operate per the lease agreement and landlord/tenant law. There have been no unnecessary delays caused by Mesa Properties or the owner and both parties have gone above and beyond to provide the best case scenario solution which is the replacement of the system which is in progress with ordering of parts.
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/05/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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.

  On Aug 25, looked at an apartment they showed me the apartment and was very interested in it. so i asked how do we get the ball rolling so we can move in as soon as possible. They told me the needed credit check, back ground and access to bank statements, which I didn't think they needed. I have lived we my parents so this the first time looking for an apartment and was very excited. They had me send them my check stubs over five time's, same bank statement with detailed transactions and access to bank accounts. through a 3rd party Findings. This happened trough email. since it was impossible to to get a hold of *********** location. I sent request through their website, text message with number provided and email and phone, only when I wrote a review saying how bad communication then someone contacted and basically belittle me by asking if I did all this during business hours even though he was looking at phone logs. I knew then I was not going to excepted because of the way the manager was speaking to me. so from their I sent them what ever documentation needed. which was basically the same information over and over again even though they had access to my bank account, pay stubs and W2 for the last two years.This was the worst experience i have ever had with a business, especially when they have all personal information.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 09/06/2023

  Hello,

  This complaint is in regards to a group application consisting of three applications for three individuals that all wanted to rent a unit on the same lease. We treat all applications the same and require the same documentation from all applicants. Our rental criteria, which is clearly posted on our website and is agreed upon when the applicant submits an application, states that we will need the last three bank statements as part of our income verification. The applicant agreed to provide this before paying for an submitting the application since it is stated as required in order to apply with us. When we did not receive the correct documentation on the original application, we requested it from the applicant via email and had to request multiple times due to non-responsiveness of the applicant and the applicant sending incorrect information. We could have denied the application due to insufficient information provided in order to effectively process but we instead made multiple attempts to accommodate the applicant over several days of communication. It is true that we can verify income through bank account linking, however the link is only allows us to see deposits. If the income deposits do not show up, we have to request statements to verify, which was the case with this application.

  ************** claims that it was impossible to get ahold of us, yet we sent 28 emails and our team spent a combined 1 hour and 24 minutes on the phone with him. This far exceeds our average amount of time spent communicating with applicants about their application. For those applicants that provide us with the information we request with the original application, we do not need to spend so much time going back and forth asking for more information. Since ************** and his co-applicants failed to provide all of the requested information with the application, we had to spend more time communicating and requesting documentation so we could verify and process their application.

  This group of applicants was ultimately denied for scoring below the minimum score required to rent a property from Mesa Properties which is based on our objective rental criteria that is posted on our website. We understand how frustrating this can be and how difficult the rental property search can be. We wish these applicants the best in their search for a new home.

  While this reviewer stated that no action was requested, we still wanted to provide a response to correct some of the statements that were made so that future applicants of Mesa Properties can have an accurate idea of what to expect when working with us.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/26/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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 have rented from this company in the past and had no issues until they realized i didn’t look the part for there perfect world , after kicking me out of the first property on New Year’s Eve during covid claiming owners wanted to move back into the property and giving me a reference to move being a good person i did so to please them then i tried to move back to a property that they had posted on the market i have had every single run around including my credit score is only *** , i have no outstanding debt and there is no reason to turn me down and i was definitely very first in line for the property but apparently myself and my kids should only be allowed to live in a roach infested house in the middle of the desert because we do not fit there narrative and that is very clear now after dealing with them directly .

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/30/2023

  Hello,

  Our rental criteria clearly state that any past rent or utilities owed are a reason for automatic denial. Our rental criteria is clearly available on our website and can be found attached to this complaint.

  Mr. ****** is a past tenant of ours. He moved out of a property that we manage on 4/18/2022. He recently applied to a different property that we manage. From his past residency with us, he currently owed $2,415.20 which is why he was denied on his current application since he owes past rent. Proof of owed funds is also attached.

  Mr. ****** is welcome to pay this balance off and then reapply to have his application considered again. We hold everyone to the same standard and since Mr. ****** owes past rent and we have evidence of that since we are his past landlord, his application was denied in accordance with our objective rental criteria. Mr. ****** can contact our office directly to make payment arrangements.

  Thanks,

  *** ******
  Managing Broker
  Mesa Properties Inc.
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/29/2023

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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 contracted for property management services through Mesa Properties on December 22, 2022. As a condition of management I was told that I would have to bring the property up to their rent ready standard and I was charged a 10% mark up to for the company to coordinate repairs with their contractor. The company assured me that the unit would be rent ready according to their high standards or my money back as shown on their website. I received an incomplete estimate and was told that the company charges a flat fee based on square footage but everything to make it rent ready would be included. Full payment had to be deposited into an escrow account before the start of the job. Once deposited, the entire amount was immediately removed by the management company and no requested Additional Information About You (optional) Statement documentation was provided after that point. The work was incomplete and not industry standard. As of April 24, 2023 my unit was still not rent ready. I threatened litigation, the management company and contractor agreed to finished as much of the job as possible and refund $1500 in fees. After I agreed to the settlement and the contractor performed his part, the management company added additional conditions and a complete gag order with a demand that I not talk about my experience, remove any unfavorable reviews, complaints, or legal filings as condition of releasing the funds. I agreed to sign a general release and they refused to refund my money. I am owed $1500 for nonperformance of contracted duties in keeping with the prior agreement and the company's own money back guarantee. That is not contingent upon my silence.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/02/2023

  We have been attempting to remedy this situation with this client for several weeks now. Unfortunately, we have been unsuccessful in coming to an agreement on how to move forward. The $1,500 that the client is requesting goes above and beyond actual funds that we have been paid for services. Since the funds are above and beyond what has been paid for services, we require a settlement release agreement to be signed in order to release the funds. The documentation attached shows the multiple different times and ways we have attempted to satisfy this client's expectations, but all have been unsuccessful. The attached documentation should speak for itself as it details the back and forth communication we have had with her as we have tried to perform up to her expectations.

  As a DRE licensed real estate brokerage in California, we adhere to strict trust fund accounting rules and regulations and all such rules were followed in this case. There was no escrow account as she alleges. The funds that she deposited were deposited into a Mesa Properties Inc. trust account. Half of those funds were paid to the third party contractor that was hired to perform repairs on her property and the other half were paid out to the contractor after completion of work. This activity is all in accordance with the duties and responsibilities assigned to us by the client in the attached Property Management Agreement. This client is dissatisfied with the work of the third party contractor and other third party vendors. We did not perform the work but merely helped coordinate it and provided her with updates on the progress. Even with all the efforts to remedy the situation and make things right, as detailed in the attached email threads, she has been unwilling to accept any offer that we have made to her.

  On 4/28/23, we set up a meeting with the client for 5/1/2023 to provide her with the $1,500 that was previously promised as well as to get the settlement release agreement signed. She then filed this BBB complaint on 4/29/23 after agreeing to the meeting. Unfortunately, the client did not show up to this meeting on 5/1/23, so we are still in the process of trying to work something out. This no-show to a pre-scheduled appointment as well as failing to respond to emails, texts, and calls confirming the appointment is just one evidence of this client's unwillingness to come to an amicable agreement so we can move forward.

  As of today, we have proposed the following in the attachment titled "Settlement Negotiation:"

  Option 1: No release of liability or settlement agreement will be signed and Mesa Properties Inc. will refund the $820 [that have been paid to us by the client for services rendered.] (This constitutes a full 100% refund and we are willing to provide the refund without any release of liability being signed by the client).
  Option 2: [We] will remove Section 6 (Confidentiality Provision) of the Settlement Release Agreement and update it to reflect which portion are refund monies and which portion are settlement funds for the sake of clarity. We will both sign it and then a total consideration of $1,500 will be released to [the client]. (This would allow the client to receive not only the refund but also settlement funds in exchange for a signed release of liability, which will be edited to remove the so-called "gag order" that she mentions in this complaint as being unfavorable to her0.
  
  We truly want to remedy any inconvenience that we have caused by failing to meet this client's expectations, even though we have performed with full compliance to the signed Property Management Agreement. We hope that the client will accept our goodwill offer so we can all move forward professionally.

  Sincerely,

  S** S*****
  Managing Broker
  Mesa Properties Inc.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/04/2023

   I am rejecting this response because: I do not agree with the details of the response, but after speaking with S**, we were able to reach a compromise and I am satisfied with the outcome. There is no need for any further action.  This matter has been resolved.
  
  
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/09/2023

  Hello,

  As the client has stated, we have resolved this matter between the two of us. The fully executed agreement that details the resolution is attached. In her own words, no further action is needed and this matter has been resolved.

  Thanks,

  S** S*****
  Managing Broker
  Mesa Properties Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/19/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore 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.

  2 issues. 1st, we saw a property on Mamoth dr. in Victorville. The house was not move in ready, there was dirt, bugs and filth in the windows, kitchen, baseboards. ALso, the entire back yard was covered with food, trash, beer cans, etc. this was a disappointment as we made appt to see house in advance and my wife has Stage 4 cancer. 2nd issue, we wanted to see house on Zircon Dr. I had applied, got back my credit report and was ready to proceed on. THey demanded my wife have an app. on file, even though she is bedridden 3 days per week with cancer treatements. I explained we could use mine as I am the one working. They said they would link her info to mine. We willer her info out, they ran a credit check on her, then denied our app to get a place, even after i explained to them. I have left 2 messages for the company to return my call, I had to call to follow up, and no one has called back, plus they ran my wifes credit without my authorization, dinging our report, denying our app. plus getting $100 of out money. I want them to re-do without my wifes info, otherwise I will be filing a civil complaint as they are showing houses that have not been cleaned, are not ready to move into, thus causing a helth concern for those seeing them. I expect my money back otherwise, remove from my credit report the ding, plus a formal appology, otherwise I will seek legal counsel for HEPPA violations and attempted fraud.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/20/2022

  Hi ******,

  
  

  I am sorry that we were unable to approve your application to rent one of our homes and that one of the homes that you viewed did not meet your expectations.

  
  

  Our rental criteria is posted clearly on our website, left in the rental home for you to take a hard copy, and also displayed on the application. When you submit the application you even have to acknowledge that you reviewed the rental criteria. On the rental criteria, it clearly states that all adults living in the home must apply. It also says that you must have a Transunion Resident Score (FICO) of at least 620. I understand that you want to proceed with only your application, however since you have told us that your co-applicant will be living in the home as well, she was also required to apply.

  
  

  You stated that we ran your wife's credit without your authorization. We do not receive the authorization of a third party, even the spouse of an applicant, before proceeding with the processing of the application. Attached to this response is the signed release from your co-applicant which authorized us to obtain a credit report.

  
  

  With that being said, the method that we use to run credit is a "soft" pull meaning it does not have any effect on the credit score. In your desired resolution you put that you wanted a correction to your credit report so I can assure you that when we ran your credit it had not effect on it, so this desired resolution is already achieved.

  
  

  I know how frustrating it can be when you are not approved to rent a home. However in order to be in compliance with Fair Housing Laws, we must hold all applicants to the same objective criteria.

  
  

  You also stated that we charged you $100 but we only charge $45 per application.

  
  

  I have gone ahead and refunded the application fees as an act of good-will. If you have any further questions or concerns, please respond to this complaint response.

  
  

  I wish you the best in your search for a new rental home.

  
  

  *** ******

  Managing Broker

  Mesa Properties Inc.