We are sorry to hear that you are dissatisfied with your experience. As with all properties we manage, we keep comprehensive records of all communication and works carried out. We therefore wish to clarify several points, as several comments in your review do not accurately reflect the circumstances of your tenancy. The tenancy began on 1st July, keys were collected, and you confirmed that the property would remain unoccupied throughout the summer while you were abroad. Prior to this, on 24th June you advised that you expected to move in on 9th or 16th September. With your agreement, the landlord arranged a programme of improvement works, beyond the obligations of the tenancy agreement, including renovation to five bedrooms and the kitchen. Difficulties arose when we were informed that you intended to return earlier than the planned dates, by which time the works had begun. Nevertheless, at no point was access denied to you or any tenant. As stated in our email of 16th August: “They have been working towards the 24th August as per your email dated 10th July; you are more than welcome to come on the 22nd August and I have asked them to get your room ready first” There was a short period where access was temporarily limited when contractors, unaware of your early return, were actively working with tools and materials on site which posed as a health and safety risk. They limited access to make the area safe, which is entirely standard practice. Photos you provided show the property mid-renovation, not after completion. As each tenant arrived on their agreed date, their rooms were cleaned, inspected, and furnished in advance with photos being taken and recorded. When your tenancy was agreed, the planned works were to repaint one wall affected by a historic leak. Further investigation revealed an additional leak left unreported by previous tenants, necessitating roof repairs and scaffolding, which were completed promptly. A full council HMO inspection took place, confirming that the property was compliant and certainly not uninhabitable. Throughout the process, we maintained regular communication with all parties, including on-site meetings. Any delays were communicated in advance. Tenants and guarantors also confirmed that they wished works to continue rather than pause. Regarding the shower: the unit had been installed only two years earlier. When it cracked a few months into the tenancy, a contractor was immediately instructed. Unfortunately, although the contractor was known to the landlord, the standard of their work proved disappointing. As soon as this became clear, we arranged for a new contractor to rectify the issue as quickly as possible. We acknowledge the delays caused by the first contractor; however, these delays were not due to a lack of effort on our part. The reference to a hole in the ceiling, the ceiling had a wallpapered finish which had begun to peel. To avoid multiple disruptions, the landlord instructed contractors to remove the original lath ceiling and replace it with new plasterboard. While this looked untidy during the process, the ceiling was never unsafe. All proposed deposit deductions were made strictly in accordance with TDS guidelines. You exercised your right to dispute these, and the matter was independently reviewed through the official adjudication process. While we regret that your experience did not meet your expectations, we remain committed to providing professional, transparent, and fair management for all tenants, including our student residents. Many of our student tenants choose to stay with us for multiple years or move into other properties we manage, and we believe this reflects the standard of service and accommodation we aim to provide. Kind Regards James King Associate Director