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.

Hi Nikolett, It appears there has been a misunderstanding. We have already exchanged a few emails between you and my staff regarding your property search. For example, emails in our inbox and sent folder are dated 13th May and 15th May. In the last email we sent to you, we asked which property you were inquiring about, but we haven't received any further reply from you. We have had no further communications from you since then. As an estate agent, this is the best we could do, as applicants typically stop responding to our communications when they have found a property to move into. Therefore, it's perfectly acceptable for us to stop if you left the matter unattended. In fact, if we continued to follow up persistently, some applicants might mistake our efforts as unreasonably desperate for business, which could also be seen as bad customer service. So, we always take a balanced approach in handling customer communications. I'd like to request that you withdraw your review, as it does not accurately reflect how we handle communications with applicants who have left us inquiries. If you are still looking for a property, please get in touch at caterham@martinco.com or follow up on my staff's last email sent to you on 15th May at 11:36 AM.