Waste Dumped in Communal Bin Store - Tenant Denying Was Him

[romeogolf]

bad company said:

That’s more like it. I’d have gone through the process without paying them first though.

Good luck and keep going.

Thank you. It was tempting to ignore the charge, but as Donkey Apple has said, by paying it I've disarmed them and they no longer have ammunition (the fees/interest) against me. They also ignored my last email to them for 48 hours before I made the payment, but then replied within 25 minutes when notified of the payment - So I was further supported in my belief that their decision would be to ignore me and just add late charges.

Slowly, slowly, catchy monkey and all that.

[romeogolf]

You know when you receive a reply to an something and you just think, "did you even read my email?"

Property Management Co's reply to my complaint said:

Dear R

This matter has now been passed to me. I have reviewed the footage and the time logs. Everything appears to be in order and the charge stands. The reason for the charge as agreed with the Directors of (block) is to allow (PMC) to reduce the burden on the other leaseholders who have to foot the bill for such behaviour. I understand your frustration but I think your best course of action is to go to your tenant with the clear evidence provided and recharge them for their antisocial behaviour.

I’m sure that you would object if you as a leaseholder you were charged through the service charge for other leaseholders who’s tenants behaved in such a manner.

I am happy to send you a link shortly to all of the footage if it would assist you in approaching you tenants.

Kind regards,
T

I'll see how much better the footage is when they send it and then reply. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that, as I keep saying, those people in the footage are not my tenants - And that their fob record seems to make no sense. I want them to respond to each of the points I raised in the original complaint.

[romeogolf]

Draft response back to PMC. Not sure if my tone is a little too snarky so will mull this over for a bit before sending.

Draft Response said:

T,

Thank you for your response. I would be grateful if you could send the footage discussed.

I would also appreciate a response to all other points raised in my initial email which you have not addressed here. While you may be satisfied with the footage and time logs, as the one to whom the charge was presented it is my satisfaction which is of importance and which is currently in short supply.

Kind regards,
R

[romeogolf]

Thanks all. Have replied as below;

Email to PMC said:

T,

Thank you for your response. Could you please provide the information requested in my original email as below;

a. An explanation of the fob entry showing access at a secondary door while the fob holder was in-shot on CCTV
b. A full and unadulterated download of the fob records for both fobs associated with my property for the 14th April, and also for the week of 4th to 10th February including all access points used even where entry was denied and contact details for the source of this data so I can verify it independently if necessary.
c. Original copies of the CCTV, especially that within the basement car park where the face of one individual is most visible
d. CCTV footage of any other usage of the fobs associated with my property on the 14th April
e. Your explanation for how my tenants would have gained access to the basement car park and from where the washing machine was removed, as it was not from my property.
f. The clauses of my lease which permit you to charge this cost directly to me, the associated administration charges, plus any interest.

I appreciate that the third of these you will be sending me shortly and which I look forward to receiving with your other responses.

Kind regards,
R

[romeogolf]

DonkeyApple said:

Don’t forget to reiterate in each correspondence that you paid because of their threats and unreasonable time frames and that you have in no means accepted responsibility or settled etc.

Thanks Donkey, will do going forward.

[romeogolf]

So the person who has picked up on this case has just called me and we spent 20 minutes discussing this by phone.

A few pertinent points;

• He wasn't aware of the second fob usage 14 seconds later and needs to "review" that
• He wasn't aware fobs can be duplicated. I have sent him the email I received from the distributor with clarification that they can be copied and again he is going to "review" that.
• He isn't sure if they can send direct footage from the CCTV because apparently it's "just on a screen in the office" and that I might need to come and see it for myself. I politely declined that offer and suggested he look into downloading it to a USB drive as is often possible. I suggested that if clear images can be provided, at the very least my tenant may recognise the person in them.
• He said he wants to come to an amicable agreement - Whether that's a case of them reducing the charge or splitting it. I confirmed that if he can provide sufficient evidence that it was my tenant then this shouldn't be necessary, but until then I don't believe that I should be liable.
• He would prefer to discuss this by phone rather than exchanging lengthy emails. I reminded him that this was my first choice, too, but the way his colleague spoke to me left me with little choice. Perhaps I "got her on a bad day" he says.