...left to get your reviews in for the
2024
allAgents People Awards
You can use this form to reply to the above review or a displayed comment on the above review.
G & T Properties
21 Dudley Road
Brierley Hill
West Midlands
DY5 1HA
01384 261997
Services | Valuation Accuracy | Fees Satisfaction | Min Price of property reviewed | Max Price of property reviewed |
---|---|---|---|---|
Sales | 97% | 99% | £27,800 | £2,500,000 |
Lettings | 92% | 97% | £325 | £1,350 |
From Landlords | From Tenants | From Vendors | From Buyers | Other | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
48 | 2 | 126 | 18 | 141 | 7 | 65 | 5 | 23 | 5 |
No Properties
Your ex business partner Simon Townsend contacted me just after you began your agency and categorically stated that you had a local nurse on your books who wanted to rent my property. There is no need to go into detail, but suffice to say, this was a blatant lie that you both subsequently acknowledged.
Secondly, you don't acknowledge that whilst you and I were in constant contact about this end of tenancy dispute, you witheld the alarming fact that you had actually recently employed said tenant as your Lettings Manager. You went to great lengths to tell me that although you knew the person in question before you recommended her as a tenant to me, she was merely an acquaintance. You made no mention of the the fact that she was now on your payroll.
Can you see a pattern forming here? Duplicity perhaps? Lacking in integrity?
The facts that you have highlighted are shamefully, just one side of the story. Allow me to explain.
Firstly, due to the number of libellous and completely untrue statements your Lettings Manager/my ex tenant made at the first stage of the deposit dispute, I made the decision not to use the dispute resolution service offered by MyDeposits and chose to take the case directly to the Small Claims Court so that the claims could be examined and answered in person. In other words, you are wrong in claiming that the deposit agency found in her favour. They were not asked to adjudicate.
The court was overflowing on the day and we were warned that the Judge was not in the best frame of mind due to the high number of cases he had to get through that day. Once in front of the Judge, your Lettings Manager / my ex tenant, put in an Oscar winning performance of a helpless victim being bullied by a greedy landlord, feigning sickness with a dire need to visit the ladies toilet due to being 5 months pregnant. This was in stark contrast to the same person who had screamed abuse in my face and shouted every vile profanity known to man at the top of her voice in the street during the check out meeting a few months earlier in front of two witnesses one of whom was also present in court on the day.
My witness and I had made the decision to allow our very detailed evidence to speak for us on the day as we were worried about being subjected to further intimidation outside court if we confronted her in court. This subsequently proved to be the wrong tactic as it became clear in his summing up later, that the Judge had not had time to read most of it. He made no mention of most of the points we had put in the evidence pack to support the claim.
Your Lettings Manager / my ex tenant claimed that she had not received the evidence pack from me before coming into court and was therefore unable to verify the photographic evidence and witness statements that had been prepared to prove the poor state that she had left the property in. Despite being able to show the Judge indisputable evidence that she had in fact received this information electronically, he had no choice than to adjourn the case to enable her to read the evidence pack thus causing yet more delays and further displeasing the Judge.
Ultimately, it became clear that due to lack of preparation before coming into court, the huge amount of cases being heard that day and the delays caused by your Lettings Manager / my ex tenant whilst he was hearing the case, the Judge made a 50/50 award to both parties. Therefore, your statement above that the tenant, the deposit company and the Judge had declined the claim is again, wrong.
For your further information, a complaint was filed with the court about the unfair circumstances detailed above. We are told that the Judge would have been informed of the complaint. After taking legal advice however, it was decided not to pursue an appeal as the cost of doing so was greater than the sum left in dispute.
And I reiterate what I said in my first review. Getting good quality tenants from G & T Properties is a complete lottery in my experience and reviews are left to give everyone the chance to learn from someone else's experience so that they can make an informed judgement. Wouldn't you agree?