Dear Daiana, Thank you for your review and sorry to hear you feel that you had a negative experience. Our customers are the heart of our business. We however are not in agreement with the accusations made and our reasoning for this is due to the timeline of events that took place. Please see the following timeline to confirm all details: 1. We received a call from yourself on 25.08.22 at 2.34pm, you were registered and your details were taken to qualify you. During which you were also informed the landlord will be providing a fridge/freezer and a cooker but not washing machine. You then proceeded with wanting to view the property and were scheduled to view on the same day, 25.08.22 at 5.15pm, as agreed with yourself. 2. On 25.08.22 at 5.15pm, yourself and a male attended to view the property with a representative from Andrews residential. Upon your viewing, you mentioned you were happy with the property and would like to proceed with your interest. The representative then informed you with the next steps, which were to contact the agency to present your offer details. 3. You then proceeded to contact Andrews residential on 25.08.22 at 5.30pm, during which you presented your interest and offered asking price of £1000pcm. Your details were confirmed and necessary questions asked, to which you were also asked if you were happy with the property as seen and you mentioned you were and you really liked it. 4. On 25.08.2022 circa 6.15pm, we received 2 google reviews. Both reviews were negative and stated false accusations. 5. On 26.08.2022 at circa 9.45am, you were called by management to discuss your offer along with the reviews submitted to get a better understanding of why they were submitted. During this telephone conversation, you were informed an “offer” does not refer to a “bidding war” a statement you made many of times during the conversation. You were informed of the estate agency terminology and how this did not mean the highest offer is the offer the landlord would proceed with. The landlords decision is based on their decision and on how secure it is. You were also provided with an example, applicants view properties and show interest by either proceeding with a lower, at asking price or even higher offer. Regardless of this, all offers are presented to the landlords – who then make their decision and we endeavour to receive a response from the landlords withing 48-72 working hours. You then mentioned the washing machine to which you agreed, you were informed during your first telephone conversation would not be provided by the landlord. Knowing this, you still proceeded to view the property and also present your offer of asking price. The manager asked about the review in regards to the mould, to which you mentioned you did not write that review and the telephone was passed onto a male, who whistled down the phone stating “lady lady – listen to me” followed by the use of an abusive word. The gentleman continued to raise their voice stating they work in the motor industry and is aware of how a bidding war works. To which management listened and then asked if she could explain how the motor industry differs from the property industry. The gentleman did not want to listen and continued to shout and terminated the call. 6. On 26.08.22 at 10.43am, we received an email stating the following: “Regarding the viewed property yesterday, we are still interested in the property if it’s still at the rent price of 1000£. And then we will take off the review made under your agency. We have experience with referencing and we have all documents ready, therefore if landlord wants to go ahead we are keen to take the rental.” It is evident from the events taken place, you are in fact happy with the property as seen and had no issues, yet two negative reviews were submitted. To then receiving an email which states you will remove the reviews if you are to rent the property. This is unfair and the reviews do no reflect the service.