Dear Almudena, Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback. We sincerely apologize for not meeting your expectations regarding friendliness and professionalism. We are committed to improving our service and would be grateful for any further insight you could provide. Please contact us directly for a more satisfactory resolution. Many thanks The Martin and Co Ashford Team

Hi Mo, Thank you for your review. We understand that you vacated the property managed by us in March this year, after residing there for the previous 12 months. Following your departure, we instructed an independent inventory company to carry out a formal checkout inspection. This is a standard practice to ensure an impartial assessment of the property's condition. The checkout report identified several issues, including cleanliness concerns, damage to furnishings, and damage to the decoration caused by a significant number of stickers on walls and ceilings in the bedrooms and lounge. You mentioned the broken fence and bath panel—these were indeed noted in the checkout report to evidence their condition. However, as you correctly pointed out, these issues were also recorded in the original inventory report, and therefore, no deductions were made from your deposit in relation to them. The report also noted a substantial amount of rubbish left both inside and outside the property. Among these items was a small, soiled foam mattress inner (without its cover). Given the volume and nature of the abandoned items, it was reasonable to conclude these were intentionally left behind. It’s important to note that you were provided with a copy of the checkout report, which detailed these findings, and at no point prior to or following the property clearance did you request the retrieval of any of the listed items. Based on the checkout findings, quotes were obtained to address the identified issues. These quotes totalled £1,720, which exceeded your deposit amount of £1,615. As a result, the landlord requested the full deposit be claimed to cover the costs, and this was communicated to you. Since you disagreed with the deductions, you were invited to raise a formal dispute with the Deposit Protection Service (DPS), who handle such matters independently. Both parties were given the opportunity to submit comments and supporting evidence. While you did provide commentary, you did not submit any evidence to support your position. The DPS subsequently reviewed the case and found in favour of the landlord, awarding them the full deposit amount. Regarding the cleaning: although you may have arranged for professional cleaners to carry out the end-of-tenancy clean, if the quality of cleaning does not meet the original move-in standard, the landlord is entitled to seek reimbursement from the deposit to bring the property back to that condition. If you believe the service provided by your cleaners was unsatisfactory, we recommend raising this with the cleaning company directly. Lastly, the property was freshly decorated prior to your tenancy, so we must respectfully disagree with your suggestion that it was in a better condition at the end of your tenancy than at the start. If you have any further questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact us directly. Best regards, Martin & Co Ashford

Thank you for taking the time to leave us a review Sharni. I understand that you have recently checked out from a property which we manage and it is our job to ensure that a property is returned in the same state of cleanliness as it was received, allowing for fair wear and tear. Unfortunately, following an independent assessment it was highlighted that the property required extensive professional cleaning, along with removal of waste in addition to damage having been caused by a cat, something which you had not sought permission for. We provided you with a copy of the inventory which set out the standard required and instructions on how to leave the property to avoid any deductions. It was your choice not to follow this guidance. As a result, quotes have been provided by the necessary contractors to complete these works which were then put to you. As you are not in agreement with these deductions from your deposit, the matter has now been passed over to the DPS for arbitration. I would suggest the above clearly demonstrates we are doing the job correctly but the fact a portion of your deposit has been withheld is the sole basis of your complaint. If this is not the case, we welcome you to contact us directly to allow us to investigate any outstanding matters fully for you.

Thanks for the review JJA however as you have never been a customer of ours I am not sure you are best placed to provide advice to potential clients. You are the neighbour of a property that we manage. For any readers of this review I would explain that a fence came down in a storm which we reported to our client, the landlord, who advised us that he would sort this via a contractor that he had. As an agent the matter is then out of our hands. Despite this we obtained a quote just in case and as it happened the landlord could not get his contractor to do the works so on Monday the landlord asked us to deal with the matter and we immediately instructed our contractor. JJA fails to understand that firstly competent contractors do not sit in vans waiting for jobs to come in, they need to be scheduled and secondly that working outside is dependent on the weather. JJA, you called today (4 days since the instruction was given to the contractor) to find out when the work would be carried out and Emma explained to you that it was instructed and would happen as soon as the contractor could get there. I listened to the call and she was not rude to you, she simply did not give you the answer that you wanted. We are not at fault, we have dealt with the matter promptly at all points and the repair will be effected next week. As a business owner it is frustrating hearing negativity when we are actually providing a great service to our clients. Kevin - Director