ComplaintsforSouthern Properties LLC

• Initial Complaint

  04/03/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On 2/20/24, we paid $1,047.50 as a fee to sublease our property in accordance with the original lease we signed. Our subleaser was approved by the company and everything was ready to go until the owner of the company, *********************, called up our subleaser to tell her that we were "scamming" her. She then proceeded to verbally harass and assault both our realtor, and the subleaser's realtor until the deal fell through. So, to end this mess as soon as possible, we chose the lease buy out option available in our contract. We paid $5,237.50 on 2/27/24, as our lease says "A tenant may seek early termination of a lease that is not on a month-to-month basis by giving not less than 30 days notice before the proposed early termination date and paying a lease termination charge equal to three months' rent. The lease termination charge must be paid in full before the proposed termination date and is not intended as a penalty but rather is intended to compensate landlord for lost rent until the premises can be re-rented, for advertising and administrative expenses incurred in re-renting the premises, for lost interest on funds, and for other costs incurred as a result of rent not being paid until the premises can be re-rented. The tenant's security deposit cannot be applied toward the lease termination charge." They re-rented the property in 11 days, the lease termination fee is 3 months worth, and they are refusing to refund any extra we paid them. We've WAYY over paid and they are not refunding. We've tried to settle the matter via email, and they are denying everything. All we want is a refund, according to the contract/lease we all signed initially.

  Business response

  04/09/2024

  On 02/12/24, 02/17/24 and 02/20/24 ****** and ****** were sent emails detailing the sublease and lease buy out option and its associated fees. On 02/19/24 at 2:27pm we received an application for the property at **************************, after looking into the application further we saw that the applicant stated that they were applying for the property at ********************************* 305 Golden Eagle. 02/19/24 we found out that the applicant was trying to sublease the property at ************** from ****** and ****** without written notice. This caused confusion as we were not aware that the current tenants wanted to sublease, and the property was not even on the market. After further communication with the applicant, we also found that the applicant was promised $1200.00 rent for a $2200.00 a month property. At the point of the applicant applying, no written confirmation regarding the current tenants wanting to sublease had happened (written notice is required). We spoke with the applicant on the phone and explained to her that the property she was trying to rent was not a $1200.00 a month property but a $2200.00 a month property. We explained to the applicant that she on her own did not have enough income to prove 3x monthly rent for the property in question but was approvable for a lessor amount based on what she had provided.  We soon found out that the applicant and the current tenants were both working with relators who had no affiliation with the management company (Remax Rental Resources) or the property owner. After further digging we found that both relators went behind our backs to fabricate a plan to get this property subleased without going through the proper channels, as well as subleasing the property at a much lower rent. After this discovery and speaking with both the applicant and the current tenants we realized that the relators had been deceitful and were negotiating in bad faith as they had no ties to RRR or the owner. 02/20/24 at 3:14pm we received written notice via email that the current tenants (****** and ******) wanted to sublease their unit. After we received written notice that the current tenants of this unit wanted to sublease the home was placed on the market. Remax Rental Resources sent an email on 02/20/24 at approximately 6pm to both the applicant and the current tenant listing the two unconventional ways we could make this transaction work for all parties involved (see attached). The options that we provided to make this unconventional sublease happen, were in the best interest of the applicant, tenant and owner. The options provided are not only unconventional but unheard of under Remax Rental Resources as we have a very strict policy when it comes to subleasing and or buy outs. We understood that not only the current tenants, but the applicant has be sold a story by their relators that in most cases would not have been honored, but by the strength in our hearts we decided to find common ground and try to make this deal happen for the applicant and tenant. The current tenants agreed minutes later. The applicant emailed 02/23/24 at 8:14am stating that they would not be moving forward as they wanted to make their marriage work. As the current tenants home was already on the market and the subleasing fee was already paid, we continued our search for a sublessor. On 02/26/24 at 11:34am ****** emailed the property manager email stating that they would like to switch from the subleasing option to the buyout option (See attached). As the current tenants had already paid a fee of $1047.50 for subleasing already, we only required them to pay $5237.50 to equal the $6285.00 buy out fee. At the time that the charges were posted, a lease addendum was sent to the tenants changing the lease end date and confirming a second time that they would be completing the buyout option in their lease which has a fee equal to $6285.00 (See attached). ****** and ****** turned in the keys for their unit on 03/18/24 approximately 9:30am. The fee that ****** and ****** agreed to is intended to compensate landlord for lost rent until the premises can be re-rented, for advertising and administrative expenses incurred in re-renting the premises, for lost interest on funds, and for other costs incurred as a result of rent not being paid until the premises can be re-rented. The tenants first agreed to this clause when renting the premises in June of 2023, was reminded of this clause 3 times in February 2024 and gave notice of change from the sublease option to the buyout option February 2024 as well as signed an additional lease addendum agreeing to this section of their lease and the fees associated 02/27/24 at 10:45am. The statement is correct that we will not be refunding any money related to the buy-out as this fee is for more than just lost rent. ****** and ****** are correct, the property was rented within approximately 11 days. Both options provided in the lease that ****** and ****** agreed to and were made aware of multiple times have risk and rewards. In a buy out the risk for the tenant is that the property gets rented sooner than the fees associated, the reward is not getting **** with a unit that we cant get rented for months. The risk of sublease is that the property may not get rented and you must continue to pay rent and utilities on a unit that you dont live in, the reward is the chance to find a sublessor quickly which limits the amount of time you pay on a unit. As much as there is risk and reward for the tenant, there is also risk and reward for the owner. In your case you decided the risk of not finding a sublessor outweighed the risk of paying the buy out option. We did not course the tenant into a decision, nor do we really care which decision is chosen because a property that needs to be rented is a property that we will rent. In the case of 2809 *********, the tenants who ended up renting the unit our first interaction with them was on 02/27/24 at 3:22pm regarding 3 different properties. 03/05/24 the prospects viewed all three properties. They then applied for a property on Stanwood Dr 03/09/24. They were not the approved applicants for said property, so they switched their application to 2809 Amberwood at a later date. There was no over lapping time frame when it came to the current tenants signing the agreement to the first correspondence for the approved applicants for the property. 

• Initial Complaint

  06/18/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I moved into my current rental residence on May 6th. With the help of my mom, we spent three full days deep-cleaning my apartment that was supposed to be move-in ready. I emailed ReMax on May 8th about my immediate concerns about rodent droppings, live and dead cockroaches, and cosmetic issues. I received no response. I have included this email in the additional documentation. In the month of May, I contacted the ReMax office eight times; five of which were phone calls, three were physical visits to the office. I did not move-in any of my belongings until June 1st. I worked closely with *******, the rental coordinator. I was told many maintenance requests were entered into the system to address the cockroaches that I was continuing to see. ******* shared that the empty apartment connected to mine had been undergoing many pest control concerns and they were coming to my apartment as a result. My initial complaint was on May 8th; a pest control company came on June 2nd to spray and fog my space for cockroaches. I still have a cockroach problem in my apartment. Since first moving-in I have expressed concerns about the rodent droppings. They were found under the kitchen sink, in the cabinets, and generally around the apartment. On June 10th, I saw a mouse run across my living room. I called the office first thing the next morning (8:20 AM, June 11th) to find that they were not open. I followed through the instructions to call the emergency line; I wanted to ensure they could have someone come with a resolution that day. The call connected to ***** *****- the realtor of the ReMax ***** group. She was unprofessional, disrespectful, and inappropriate in her response to my concern. I expressed to her that my concerns for the rodent droppings had not been addressed in the last month of living here. After a ten minute phone call, I felt dismissed in my concerns for my living conditions. The rest of my statement is included in the supporting documents.

  Business response

  07/20/2022

  Hello,

  Originally a work order was put in on 5/09/2022 to Guardian Pest Control to treat for cock roaches and mice. Guardian went out on 5/10/22 and marked the work order as complete but did not take care of the mice problem. Once I received this BBB complaint, I immediately contacted Guardian and they realized they had missed the mouse issue. They went back out to retreat for the cockroach problem and treat for the mice issue. Our internal maintenance team also went out to try to find the hole that the mice have been getting in through. On 7/15/22 we filled the holes with foam & put mouse bait behind drywall before repairing. 

   

  We will follow up with the tenants to ensure that further pest control issues are addressed immediately! 

   

  Thank you,

   

  ******

*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. ↩