Dear Robin,
I am disappointed with the review that you have given us as agents, as we only acted as a tenant finder for this particular property. As you have stated within your comments, you did not view the property, however, your housemate emailed us to advise that you wished to secure the property without seeing it. This is not normal practise. The property in question was advertised at £1105 pcm (attached) which is the equivalent of £85pppw which is the exact rent on the tenancy agreement. I am unsure as to why you think it is £92pppw that you are paying and that we have overcharged you? The flat was not advertised as being double glazed and nor is it a legal requirement to have double glazing. The advert also lists all of the rooms within the accommodation. There is no living room advertised, again this may have been something that you and your housemates overlooked, however, had you viewed it you would have seen this. The condition of the flat, if not up to standard when moving in should have been brought of the attention to the landlord or his managing agent at the time. As previously advised, we do not manage this property and as a result the details of the landlord and their manager was provided at the start of the tenancy in August. I would advise that prior to securing any property in future, you inspect it and any necessary repairs/maintenance/cleaning is agreed and arranged in advance. Should double glazing be a necessary requirement then this should be requested in advance. I am sorry that you have not been satisfied with RMS but I hope that once you have read my comments and viewed the attached advert, you will appreciate that RMS are not at fault. If there is anything else we can do to assist then please let us know.
Kind regards
Marie Jacques
Branch Manager