I disagree with the explanation / grounds provided"In reply to Ms. Todd’s fraudulent claims against me, the only thing that she said that has any validity is that she paid a $1,000.00 deposit. In the section labeled: “Grounds for this matter”, there was a lot more damage to my property than simply crayon on the inside closet wall. Ms. Todd was given a brand new stove, and a refrigerator that looked like new, freshly painted walls, 4 brand new doors, new locks, a new doorbell, new floors, etc. Everything had been completely redone prior to renting my home to Ms. Todd. The condition that the property was in when she moved out included a filthy refrigerator, a filthy stove, dirty floors and walls with heavy crayon; doors that needed to be treated and varnished, broken locks, a sink that needed to be reattached to the bathroom wall, floor boards that needed to be reattached, glue and other materials showing on the outside of the house as the result of a poorly installed air conditioner, which was installed without permission, trash and other debris in the yard, and the list goes on. “Clean” is not a word to be associated with the condition of the premises returned to me. “Spotless” would be grounds for perjury in a court of law. Ms. Todd falsely claimed that I did not provide her with a breakdown of the damages or receipts. To the contrary, my fiancee spoke with Ms. Todd on Saturday, April 5, 2014 at approximately 12:00 noon and volunteered to e-mail the breakdown to her as well as to meet her and review the damages claimed in person. Ms. Todd stated that she had to go back to class and would contact my fiancee later with the e-mail address and a time for the 3 of us to meet. This never happened. Ms. Todd also falsely claimed poor customer service. Any issue Ms. Todd brought to my attention was immediately addressed. And, in regard to her claims about me not cleaning up ice and snow, and cutting the grass only twice throughout the year, Ms. Todd needs to refer to page 1 of her lease under “Upkeep of Property”, which clearly states that “she has the responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of the premises for the term of the lease agreement, including, but not limited to, mowing the lawn and performing other relevant tasks both on the inside and outside of the premises.” Therefore, when I did come to the premises to cut the lawn, it was only as a favor to Ms. Todd, and to avoid getting a ticket from the City of Chicago, since she had allowed the grass to go uncut for several weeks. I knew Ms. Todd couldn’t afford to pay the cost of a ticket, even though this task was clearly her responsibility. The lease agreement further states that, “any citation issued by the City of Chicago as a result of poor maintenance of the property would be the responsibility of the Lessee.” So instead of complaining because I didn’t come more frequently to perform a duty she was contractually obligated to perform as per her lease agreement, if anything, she should have been grateful that I never billed her for the cuts, which occurred a lot more than 2 times, as well as for my gas and time in traveling from South Holland to Chicago just to maintain the lawn. As far as snow and ice, the same principal applies: this was clearly her responsibility as spelled out in the lease.
Next, Ms. Todd claims inadequate disclosure or misleading information, breach of contract, unfair terms, bad faith, and lack of communication,. Yet, Ms. Todd offers no evidence to support any of these claims. Therefore, I consider them as words she probably doesn’t even understand, because if she did, she would know she has no basis for including them in her complaint. Accordingly, I see no reason to address them. She also claims that I would not rent the garage. On page 1 of the lease agreement, under “Description and condition of the property”, and as per advice from the CHA inspector, the agreement clearly states that “This lease is for the single-family home with 3 bedrooms and 1 bath.” There is no mention of the garage, and I was told by CHA that the garage is not part of the rental of the property.
Next, Ms. Todd claims she was wrongfully billed; however, I have offered to send her an itemization of every expenditure necessary to restore the property to an acceptable condition for the next tenant. She claims there was no damage; yet she knows that she and her children completely destroyed my property.
Ms. Todd further falsely states that she complained about rats, and I didn’t respond. I responded the same day of Ms. Todd’s complaint and had an exterminator out the following day, who, by the way found only her live-in boyfriend who was not on the lease on the premises, along with 3 pit bulls who were also not on the lease. According to the exterminator, who will testify if necessary, the rat problem was more than likely caused by the feces left by the pit bulls, and not cleaned up by the tenant. So, in essence, she created the problem about which she complained. I am certain that the exterminator’s assessment of the cause of the problem is accurate since I personally lived at the property for more than a decade, with animals, and never had a problem with rats, because I cleaned up after my animals. Ms. Todd didn’t clean up behind herself and her kids, let alone her animals.
Furthermore, in Ms. Todd’s lease, it clearly indicated that if she intended to have a pet on the premises, she needed to pay a pet deposit. Ms. Todd never intended to pay such deposit, and lied about the fact that she had animals on the premises for several months; yet they were present each and every time anyone was sent to do maintenance on the property, and workers often had to request that she restrain them in order to complete the tasks they had been hired to do. After so many instances of her intentional deception and after being verbally abused by Ms. Todd, when I personally came to cut the grass that had grown several feet high, and saw the pit bulls myself, Ms. Todd was told that she and the animals had to leave the premises. Ms. Todd should be very glad that I am not the one seeking charges against her. The only thing I owe her is an additional bill for the damages not covered by her $1,000.00 security deposit. And, with all the evidence that I have in my possession, if she wants to add attorneys’ fees and my court costs to that bill by pursuing this matter in court, I welcome her to litigate this matter. Everything she is claiming is contradicted by the terms of her lease agreement, and the testimony of my fiancee and the contractors who have done work at the house.
Thank you for allowing me to respond to this fraudulent claim.
Sincerely,
Delmar Bush"