Public Mediation

AmericasHomeless vs. Wilhoit Properties Inc - Zimmerman Properties

  • 25% of recovery offered for best resolution
S. B. vs. Wilhoit Properties Inc - Zimmerman Properties
1329 E Lark St, Springfield, Missouri, 65807, United States
  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (1,000)
Statement of Claim
"On Jan 20, 2020 while applying for a tax credit home Cedarwood Terrace Management willingly stayed assisting with the completion of an application for CloverHill with an employee of Mercy Hospital. On Jan 23rd 2020 a denial to offer the same opportunity in regards to follow up documentation.
Jan 29th 2020 Cedarwood Terrance made uninformed statements regarding section 8 inspections.
On or around Feb 1st 2020 Regional Manager for Cedarwood Terrace made statement to OCAC personnel that an unapplied for Tax Credit home in Rogersville Mo would be made available in lieu of another tax credit home.
Inappropriate comments made by personnel include demeaning tones, out of scope discussion regarding male applicant applying for home on Oaklawn, and disrespect of prior management."
Reply Have a similar problem?
Additional Communication Between Claimant and Wilhoit Properties Inc - Zimmerman Properties Hide
  • Feb 14, 2020, Claiming party added:
  • For each Tax Credit Home listed, 5 applications are processed at a time. Each applicant is required to submit not only an application fee, but also the homes security deposit. Therefore 5 deposits are taken prior to the initial processing of each home. All 5 applicants are expected to wait up to 3 weeks for the duration of the homes processing period, Whilhoit continues to retain possession of all deposit amounts for an additional time frame of up to 30 days.

  • Jul 06, 2020, Claiming party added:
  • I appreciate People Claim forwarding my concerns to the Attorney General Office.
    Although the dept attempting to over see the statement provided was geared towards merchandise.
    The response provided by Ms Bower and her office at Oaklawn Estate did reveal many discrepancies when compared to the recorded conversations made during these interactions. Many details such as dates & times were also in error.
    Ms Brower made a blatant attempt to mislead with one comment in particular regarding appointments, which in this instance, had not been made prior to the individuals arrival as i was present upon the arrival of said party and I was also present when an incoming call received after hours was overheard to state that Oaklawns manager had left the remaining team member behind, commenting she was the one with a sick child at home. Provided are but a few of the discrepancies that were noted. In addition to these recorded conversations an additional discussion with the manager was made over speaker phone and took place at HUDS office. That statement included false allegations the Zimmermans state tax credit homes did not require inspections. After this particular conversation it can only be assumed there was an individual working at the HUD office during the time this particular speaker phone conversation took place and communication then took place between these 2 locations as my next stop was Oaklawn. Where it was stated contact with Ms Brower had taken place and i was to wait. Ms Brower arrived mins later with McDonalds fast food.
    An information release was never signed with HUD and no port requested was processed. So the additional comment regarding bedroom size can only establish a violation of the law. Just as a denial based on number of bedrooms would hold no validity.

    Again thank you Peoples Claim for your assistance regarding this matter. I am sorry to add these issues are not handled by the Attorney Generals Merchandise Dept.

  • Jul 06, 2020, Claiming party added:
  • OCAC and HAS are not one and the same. You state "housing authority" with full knowledge HAS Housing Authority of Springfield and OCAC Hud are not one in the same and with full knowledge which agency handles Battlefield, including Rogersville. A violation of much more than privacy laws has taken place.

  • Jul 08, 2020, Claiming party added:
  • Since these three representatives of Whilhoit feel as if they are expected to redirect and continually clarify -there are a few instances regarding the fair privacy act & possible violations I noted -perhaps with all their expertises this would better be explained by them also.

    Additionally the Attorney Generals Office was provided with a recording,
    which i feel, disproves the response provided. I asked it be shared.
    It was their comment this matter falls outside their scope as they are unable to investigate or bring charges.

    Myself, I feel providing the name of the individual stating a denial took place is a valid request.

  • Jul 17, 2020, Claiming party added:
  • The response provided by Ms Brower and her office at Oaklawn Estate did reveal many discrepancies when compared to the recorded conversations made during these interactions. Many details such as dates & times were also in error.
    Ms Brower made a blatant attempt to mislead with one comment in particular regarding appointments, which in this instance, had not been made prior to the individuals arrival as i was present upon the arrival of said party and I was also present when an incoming call received after hours was overheard to state that Oaklawns manager had left the remaining team member behind, commenting she was the one with a sick child at home. Provided are but a few of the discrepancies that were noted. In addition to these recorded conversations an additional discussion with the manager was made over speaker phone and took place at HUDS office. That statement included false allegations the Zimmermans state tax credit homes did not require inspections. After this particular conversation it can only be assumed there was an individual working at the HUD office during the time this particular speaker phone conversation took place and communication then took place between these 2 locations as my next stop was Oaklawn. Where it was stated contact with Ms Brower had taken place and i was to wait. Ms Brower arrived mins later with McDonalds fast food.
    An information release was never signed with HUD and no port requested was processed. So the additional comment regarding bedroom size can only establish a violation of the law. Just as a denial based on number of bedrooms would hold no validity. Additionally noted were a few instances regarding the fair privacy act & possible violations also taking place.

What Claimant Wants Hide
Just make me happy!
Claimant invites Wilhoit Properties Inc - Zimmerman Properties to make a fair offer to resolve this complaint.
  • 0
Do you agree with the claimant’s demands?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Respondent's Counteroffer Hide
The claimant's settlement terms were rejected with the following explanation:
  • I disagree with the explanation / grounds provided

    "Hello Suzanne - This explanation is inaccurate. We tried to explain the situation to you several times. You stated that the housing agency was saying one thing, when we confirmed this was not the case (signed release form). I am not aware of any inappropriate comments made in the office. If anything, you raised your voice at staff members in anger several times. There was a home available in Rogersville, as you told us that you wanted the one in Battlefield due to the swimming pool. As you did not qualify for the home in Battlefield, we denied the application and returned your deposit to you in full per state guidelines. We only take one application per unit available. Your statement about processing 5 applications per unit is incorrect. No further action is required at this time. "

This claim will remain posted until resolved.

  • 0
Do you agree with the respondent’s Response?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Get fast access to our Resolver community, for...
  • help with a PeopleClaim or any other complaint
  • assistance with a purchase or contract
  • expert advice
Other PeopleClaim resolvers
Get Free alerts when claims post in your area.
Get Alert

Need help resolving a dispute? Learn more.

Public Mediation

The shortest path from your problem to its resolution.
1
Peer to Peer

Engage the other party and use powerful tools to negotiate the best resolution.

Free
If Unresolved
2
Community Resolution

Post your case online and get help from legal professionals, industry experts, consumers & advocates competing to find the best resolution to your claim.

$14.99 + optional reward for best resolution
Full refund if not resolved to your satisfaction
If Unresolved
3
Private Mediation

Lets you mediate your case privately with the help of our professional mediators and industry experts.

Free to claimant. Mediator fees negotiable.
If Unresolved
4
Engage a Professional

Find the best community-reviewed professionals near you to resolve your issue in private online mediation or traditional court/mediation.

Resolution

A wonderful serenity has taken possession of my entire soul, like these sweet mornings of spring which I enjoy with my whole heart.

I am (not) alone, and I feel the charm of existence in this spot, which was created for the bliss of souls like mine...~ Goethe

Get a public verdict — create an online trial $50 public trial / $50 reward for successful resolution
Important: All information contained herein is the opinion of the posting parties, who are solely responsible for its content. PeopleClaim offers both free and paid services to help consumers, patients, employee, tenants, and others resolve disputes without lawyers or courts, through negotiated online settlement and public disclosure of wrongdoing or unfair treatment.
Claims against parties operating under bankruptcy protection, by law must be processed solely through the appropriate US bankruptcy court. Any claims against this party currently posted on PeopleClaim are available for purposes of public business review only and are not an attempt to collect money or recover assets subject to protections under the United States Bankruptcy Code.
*IMPORTANT: PeopleClaim is a public dispute resolution system, independent of the BBB, small claims court, or other dispute resolution services. PeopleClaim is not a law firm and does not provide legal services, opinions, or advice. PeopleClaim facilitates peer-to-peer negotiation and resolution and crowdsourced input on issues of fairness to help resolve complaints. Users should contact professional legal counsel on any matters of law or regulation regarding their claims. PeopleClaim does not review or evaluate the merits of claims submitted through its site, and users are solely responsible for all content filed in their claims.
© reserved by PeopleClaim