I want to clarify a few points. During a 4.5-year tenancy, this tenant did not leave any negative reviews until the very end, after a deposit dispute. This suggests that, for most of the tenancy, they viewed us as a reliable estate agency, effectively managing the landlord’s business and supporting the tenants. Any dissatisfaction would likely have been raised earlier rather than at the end of their stay. The review seems mainly driven by frustration over the deposit dispute. Situations like these contribute to the rental crisis, as tenants dispute deposits, and the Deposit Protection Scheme (DPS) often rules in their favor, regardless of the evidence presented. Even when we submit independent quotes for repairs or cleaning, DPS may still place the costs on the landlord, even if the tenant is at fault. This systemic issue drives rent increases across the industry. Reading the review raises questions about why we sought the full £1,500 deposit, the condition of the property, and the tenants' behavior during their stay. It’s worth noting that we don’t receive similar complaints from other tenants. Were these tenants necessarily in the right? These are important considerations. Regarding the rent review mentioned in the complaint, while unrelated, I will address it briefly. The existing contract includes a clause allowing rent reviews based on a government-published inflation index. For a higher rent increase, a new contract would be required. The tenants accepted the reviewed rent and signed a new contract, which contradicts the claim of a breach. They could have rejected the proposal but chose to accept it, avoiding the costs and inconvenience of moving out. This arrangement was practical, mutually beneficial, and fair. Criticizing the process and posting inaccurate reviews seems irresponsible. As for the comment on "superiority," it could reflect the tenant’s own feelings rather than any fault in our conduct. Professional communication can be interpreted differently by different individuals, but we strive to maintain factual, professional standards. The criticism seems to favour opinion-based communication, which is inconsistent with a professional approach. I am puzzled by her review that’s self conflicting in that she would call a factual based communication as unprofessional….. Overall, it is unclear how our service was considered unprofessional. This appears to be an instance of a tenant expressing frustration after not getting their way.