Hi Kaja, Fast is our middle name … thanks for the review, most appreciated.

Hi Imogen We are really sorry you weren't happy with the way we progressed the sale to you - We are very pro -active and in this instance the sale had been slow to finalise on your end. The seller was on the brink of withdrawing and we had to up the anti in order to keep the sale together. I'm really pleased our actions worked in the end and that you now have a lovely home to call your own.

Hi Manny - sadly you didn’t leave the property as agreed and the owner has claimed from your deposit. You have the option to dispute this with the independent dispute service, TDS, which is a free service if you don’t agree with the owners view, but you haven’t yet done so yet. We have reminded you a few times to start your dispute. Please do this as we would prefer your concerns to be addressed correctly and fairly.

Hi Manny - sadly you didn’t leave the property as agreed and the owner has claimed from your deposit. You have the option to dispute this with the independent dispute service, TDS, which is a free service if you don’t agree with the owners view, but you haven’t yet done so yet. We have reminded you a few times to start your dispute. Please do this as we would prefer your concerns to be addressed correctly and fairly.

Hi Olga - Although we know this is not your real name we are happy to reply as we absolutely know which property is being discussed. We are very sorry you are unhappy with the property and the service - Actually it is a beautiful 3 bedroom modern executive apartment in one of the most sought after developments in Plymouth. Yes there have been a number of maintenance issues, including that mice that had found there way in to the building in a number of flats - this was dealt with by the block management company, the towel radiators were repaired by our plumber after the first engineer couldn't find a problem and there has been a leak reported by the downstairs neighbour. We have sent you evidence of the leak downstairs and been very careful not to enter the property without your permission. We absolutely would prefer not to have to inconvenience you but where property management matters need to be addressed, it is unavoidable in order to resolve the issue and avoid undue and escalating damage to this or the neighbours property. The irony isn't lost on us that most complaints are about not addressing property issues, and this one is about us doing exactly that! That said, please do accept our sincere apologies that you have become so upset by the need for us to attend 4 times during your tenancy - we do hope that we can quickly identify the leak issue and have it resolved with the minimum of future disruption to yourself.

Hi Sambo - We're sorry you felt Emily was rude in asking you to wait while she showed another prospective tenant the property, however in fairness they were booked before you and you did turn up early! We tend to arrange viewings one after the other at lettings properties so that we can maximise the number of tenants that get the chance to apply, thereby giving everyone a fair chance to secure great homes in Plymouth - but this does sometimes mean a little waiting if others are slower to look around. As it was, we showed you the property at the agreed time on this occasion, and so we thought your 1 star review was a touch harsh! Our team work really hard, and often the 5 star reviews we attract are as a result of hours & hours of dedicated work. Reviews are incredibly important to both our team and our business, and we wondered whether it was fair and reasonable to give poor feedback on a fleeting moment of contact. Emily was quite upset to see her name on this a she tries really hard to keep people happy. We had a looked at your other reviews too, and wondered perhaps if you have ever considered the potential impact of your words online?

Hello John, We are sorry you weren't happy with the service provided during your tenancy - I have looked through the files and cant see any records of reported service relates issues until the checkout. Your review follows a trend; where we receive excellent feedback in general - with one exception; that is the small cohort of tenants who have had deductions claimed from the security deposit for damage or cleaning at end of tenancy. The checkout report did not record the property as clean, and you had every opportunity to dispute the claim using a third party adjudicator - The onus of proof is on the Landlord/agent to justify any charges, so we will only make a claim where the evidence is very strong - I assume you chose not to dispute the charge as you didn't feel you would be successful? We looked at your profile on Google and noticed that your last review of a letting agent follows the trend - they appear to have had to clear up after you too! The vast majority of lovely tenants who we work with leave property as found in the inventory, and no charges are needed to be claimed. We hope at some stage in the future you do leave a property as you found it and perhaps your view of the agent involved will be more positive!

Dear Andrew, Just to correct a few points to allow readers a balanced view and to draw their own conclusions accordingly. We remain very sorry that you weren’t happy with the property at handover. This underlines the importance of viewing several times before proceeding. We as agents do not regularly visit property once sold STC and aren’t aware of any changes in condition. Conveyancers recommend a final viewing prior to completion as there is no way to know whether damage has occurred in the period between initial viewing and completion. We haven’t seen evidence of damage either. As you were unhappy and we didn’t agree we were at fault, we used the ombudsman service of which we are members to adjudicate. After review they suggested an informal early resolution agreement. We both accepted this - meaning there was no formal finding, and no admissions of error from either of us. On our part, it was commercially sensible to conclude things at this stage rather than expending further time, and we felt it was better for everyone involved. We believed you had added 2 reviews on google about this event and you admitted both were associated with you. As we had said in our replies to them, our issue was not the initial review - We support the concept of reviews because as with us, good businesses have a high proportion of 5 star reviews. We felt that the addition of this second review was malevolent of you at the time and we asked you to remove one of them. They were both removed just prior to the adjudication, perhaps so that they didn’t prejudice you. All this said, we are glad that the matter is now resolved. For our part, in future we’ll stress the absolute importance to buyers that they must be diligent and make the effort to arrange a final viewing every time.

Dear Anna We are very sorry that ultimately we were unable to satisfy your expectations. Your property came to us from another agent who was retiring, and unfortunately there were six room lets with significant issues including rent arrears. We tried hard to resolve the problems, but ultimately had to assist you in regaining possession through the legal process. We appreciate that this was expensive as it took a large amount of time with little rent and each individual room being dealt with separately and you were very frustrated with the process. This is a risk of letting a home as an HMO. Just to correct a minor point for balance - There was no award of compensation from the Property Redress Scheme, we offered a small settlement as we felt was reasonable given the unfortunate position you were in, and we regained this from the original agent who had put us all in a difficult position.