Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/21/2023

  Type:Customer Service Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Faros properties requested my doctor's documentation of my ESAs, which was promptly provided with photos as requested. I am a guest of a tenant, I do NOT reside on premise. They then reviewed and tried to charge a deposit and pet rent ILLEGALLY. They are protected by law and the property is required to provide accommodations for my ESAs as well as myself, as they support my disability. They harassed me into having the tenant add my ESAs with MY doctor's prescription (that the tenant is nowhere on), to their lease, and then proceeded to illegally resolve the matter. They are discriminating against me and my disability. This is illegal and needs correction and review immediately.

  Business Response

  Date: 01/08/2024

  I am writing in response to the above-referenced complaint received in your office on December 21, 2023 from
  a visitor at City View apartments.

  
  The visitor is not a resident at the property. The visitor is the purported girlfriend of the resident. The resident
  signed a lease for an apartment at the property on October 19, 2023 with a lease term beginning on November
  3, 2023 and expiring November 2, 2024. The resident’s lease very clearly and unambiguously states that animals
  are not allowed at the property, even temporarily unless they have been authorized by the landlord (Section
  27). The lease also provides that any unauthorized animals must be removed within 24 hours after notice from
  the landlord and includes a detailed provision regarding assistance animals, including emotional support or
  service animals (Section 27).

  
  On December 12, 2023 we received a complaint about a dog barking throughout the previous night on the third
  floor of the building. The resident making the complaint stated that they had not heard the dog before. Upon
  review of security camera footage on the third floor we identified the resident bringing a dog to his apartment.
  However, he did not have approval under the lease to have a dog in his unit. That same day we contacted the
  resident to discuss the unauthorized dog and explain the provisions of his lease regarding pets. The resident
  visited the office where he met with the Property Manager and the Property Manager again explained the lease
  provisions regarding animals as well as the process to add a pet to the lease. The resident stated he was taking
  care of his parents’ dog and that he would be returning it to them that day. The resident also stated that his
  parents’ dog as well as his girlfriend’s dog were both emotional support animals (ESAs) so he asked if that would
  create an exception to the lease language. The Property Manager explained the process to add ESAs to his lease.
  At this point the resident indicated that he understood the lease provisions, including the ESA process, and
  indicated he would provide the required paperwork to document the ESAs.

  
  On Thursday, December 21, 2023, the resident and the visitor approached the Assistant Property Manager in
  the lobby of the building to inquire if they did need to add the visitor’s ESA to the resident’s lease in order to
  allow the dog to be at the property. The Assistant Property Manager confirmed this was the policy since visiting
  pets are not allowed on the property under the terms of the lease. The resident seemed to believe that because
  the animal is an ESA that no documentation or paperwork would be needed. The Assistant Property Manager
  reiterated that some documentation is needed and explained the ESA approval process.

  
  At this point the resident and visitor provided the required documentation, which included photos, ESA letter
  (from a qualified professional confirming the status as an emotional support animal) and animal details regarding
  the two (2) dogs. The dogs were approved as ESAs based on the information provided and the resident
  completed the Animal Addendum to his lease, which allows the dogs to be present in his unit. The Animal
  Addendum is a standard form explaining resident obligations regarding their pets as well as standard deposit
  amounts and fees. It also contains the following language in Section 9 “***** AND **** ARE REGISTERED ESA
  ANIMALS. ALL PET FEES ARE WAIVED.” This is our standard policy regarding ESAs, as clearly stated in the lease,
  and is in full compliance with all applicable laws. The Animal Addendum does allow landlord to charge a resident
  for any damages to the property caused by the ESAs, and, for avoidance of doubt, we are not waiving that
  provision.

  
  A few hours after signing the Animal Addendum, the resident and visitors returned to the leasing office to ask
  about the charges listed in the Animal Addendum. The Assistant Property Manager explained to them that the
  fees are standard regarding typical pets but that the added language regarding the classification of these specific
  dogs as ESAs is controlling so that no standard fees would be charged against the resident or the unit. At this
  point the visitor claimed that the ESA policy was creating a HIPAA violation. The Assistant Manager explained
  this is not a HIPAA violation and that our policy is in compliance with all applicable laws regarding animals at the
  property. The visitor then claimed that the Assistant Manager is “illegally turning away a service animal”. This
  was very confusing because at this time the animals were in full compliance with the lease as ESAs and no one
  had ever mentioned that they were service animals. Our Assistant Manager is aware of the different standards
  that are applied to ESAs and service animals so she asked the visitor to clarify if the dogs are ESAs or service
  animals. The visitor confirmed that both dogs are ESAs, not service animals. The visitor stated that her opinion
  is that requiring the Animal Addendum is illegal and asked for this issue to be escalated so that the Property
  Manager could review this policy. That same day, before the Property Manager could contact the resident to
  discuss this issue, the visitor submitted the subject complaint to the Better Business Bureau.

  
  To reiterate: we never charged any kind of fee or pet deposit to the resident (or, somehow, to the visitor); we
  did not discriminate in any way, shape or form; we have every right to prohibit visiting animals from our
  property; we never harassed the visitor (or the resident); and we never did anything remotely illegal.

  
  The visitor requests a billing adjustment as a resolution to the complaint. This is very perplexing because there
  was never any billing related to this matter so there is nothing to be adjusted. Additionally, the visitor is not
  subject to any kind of billing since she is not a resident under a lease at the property. We agreed to add the ESAs
  to the resident’s lease, even though the visitor is not a party to the lease, so that the animals would be able to
  visit the property with the visitor.

  
  We hope that this explanation sheds some light on the facts of this situation. Please note that our office was
  closed on December 22, December 25 and January 1, and multiple people with information regarding the
  preparation of this response were out of the office to celebrate the holidays which is why the submission of this
  response was slightly delayed.

  
  Please let me know if you have any comments or questions regarding this response or our position on these
  issues.

  
  Thank you,
  Debbie R******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/26/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  On March 6, 2023 I left the Belmont crossing apartments homes due to domestic violence which was verbal. My twin sister ***** ******* was the one threatening me and my unborn child. And I verbally stated to the leasing office that I put a to on my sister ***** *******. Then I signed a roommate removal agreement on March 23, 2023.And the company refuses to remove me of the lease and I don't live in the unit anymore or the state of Georgia. Also the property management told me and I quote " it's either you pay the rent since you're still on the lease, get an eviction on your credit, or get an attorney." Which was absolutely outrageous to hear that from the management.Especially after I told them that I'm facing domestic violence while pregnant. And lastly the property management told me and I quote “ once you sign this roommate removal agreement your name will be removed.” Which never happened unfortunately.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/03/2023

  I am writing in response to the above-referenced complaint received in your office on April 26, 2023 from a former resident at Belmont Crossing apartments.
  
  The former resident was a tenant, along with her twin sister, at the property.  As is the case in most residential lease, ours has a provision that provides for “joint and several liability” (Section 31).  Which essentially means that even if there are multiple residents on the lease, each individual is responsible for the entire amount of rent and utilities that are owed under the lease and that the landlord does not have to release any particular resident from this liability.  This is why the former resident would be responsible for the lease charges even after she moved out of the unit during the lease term.
  
  However, our apartment lease has a provision that allows tenants to terminate their lease if they experience family violence (Section 7).  In order to terminate the lease under this provision, as expressly stated in this section of the lease, the resident needs to provide the management team with a copy of the Temporary Protective Order issued by the court.  Unfortunately, some people will attempt to take advantage of this lease provision and try to use it as a means to break their lease early, even if they have not experienced any violence in the home.  This is why the lease states that a copy of the paperwork is required for verification.  Our assistant manager explained this to the former resident and has advised that she made multiple requests for a copy of the TPO but the former resident never provided a copy to the management team so the lease could not be terminated under this lease provision.
  
  Our management team did explain to the former resident that another option to remove her from the lease would be if both the former resident and the remaining resident could enter into a “Roommate Release Addendum”.  This would allow us to remove the former resident from the lease obligations if the remaining resident requalified under our income guidelines to rent the unit as a single tenant.  The former resident advised that she wanted to proceed with the Roommate Release option and she signed the form on March 23.  This was communicated to the current resident, however the current resident refused to execute the Roommate Release or to proceed with the requalification process.  As I’m sure you can understand, we do not have any ability or authority to force anyone to sign the Roommate Release form if they do not want to provide it.
  
  After we received the BBB complaint, we were able to contact the former resident and she was able to finally provide a copy of the TPO which was filed on March 23, 2023.  We were also given a copy of the Dismissal of Temporary Protective Order which was filed on March 29, 2023 because the former resident moved to Miami, Florida.
  
  Even though the TPO has expired, in order to accommodate the former resident, now that we have been given the appropriate documentation, we have agreed to terminate the lease early, without any penalty.  The current resident has advised that she will be vacating the unit by May 30 and the lease will be terminated on that date.
  
  We are very sorry about this former resident’s situation and what she went through with a family member.  We hope that this resolution provides some sense of relief.
  
  Please let me know if you have any comments or questions regarding this response or our position on these issues.
  
  Thank you,
  Debbie R******
  

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/16/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  For the past year me, my husband and our children (ages 10,8,6 and 4 months) have been living in unlivable conditions. It has affected us mentally, physically and financially. We transferred from unit 34 to 48 after 10 months of living in these conditions we were informed that our rent would increase from $1565 to $1940. We opted to transfer to a cheaper unit however we were informed that we had to pay a $100 application fee, $100 administrative fee, $782 transfer fee, one months rent as security deposit ($1640) and one months rent ($1640). We paid these fees but noticed the new unit had a ranch infestation, we notified management (Josh K*****) about the roach infestation and droppings in the new unit (apt. 48). Josh K***** informed us that he already knew about roach infestation in unit 48 and the cleaning team was supposed to come clean it. Prior, to us moving in we had to throw away several personal items to ensure that we would not transfer roaches from one unit to the next. Since December first when we moved into the new unit the ranch infestation is more severe. It has caused my children to have skin problems, problems with their asthma and its affecting me nursing my baby. I also noticed that there is a mold problem in this new unit. We have reached out to management including the regional manager but I haven't gotten a response. This company's negligence has taken a toll on my and my family and I would like to be refunded for my inconvenience including fees that I paid, medical fees and be moved to a new unit honoring my rent payment now ($1640). I appreciate your support.

  Business Response

  Date: 12/23/2022

  I am writing in response to the above-referenced complaint which we were notified about on December 16, 2022 from a resident of our community, the ******* ******.  The resident is a current resident at ******* ****** apartments.
  
  The initial lease that the resident had for an apartment in the community was expiring and they did not want to pay the increased rent that would be required to renew the lease on that apartment.  We offered to let them transfer to another unit, with lower rent.  It is our policy to require residents that are transferring to pay for an application fee, administrative fee, transfer fee, security deposit and one months’ rent in advance.  The resident and her family inspected the new unit multiple times before deciding that is where they wanted to move.  They completed the move on December 1.
  
  Regarding the complaint that the new unit was infested with roaches, promptly after the resident complained about this to a leasing agent, our property manager arranged for our pest control company to visit and treat the unit.  The unit was treated by the pest control company on 12/13 and on 12/20.  The unit is scheduled to receive additional treatments during the next few weeks.  We strongly dispute the assertion that our property manager was aware of the pest problem in the new unit prior to the resident moving in.  This is a misunderstanding.  The property manager overheard the discussion with the leasing consultant, that is what he was referring to when he told the resident that he was “aware of” the infestation.
  
  The resident stated that they also had roaches in their prior unit.  The resident stated that they took some steps in an attempt to avoid taking the roaches to the new unit.  Unfortunately, we know that roaches are easily transportable and all it would take was for a few of them to be on clothes that were put into a suitcase and taken to the new unit for the new unit to quickly become infested.  We were not aware of a roach issue in the new unit, when we were made aware we scheduled the unit for multiple treatments to attempt to eradicate the pests.  Regrettably, this is not an easy thing to accomplish and will take some time.
  
  The resident also complained on December 9 and claimed that there was mold on the kitchen cabinets.  Our property manager had a maintenance technician inspect the cabinets that day.  The maintenance technician reported that there is no mold on the cabinets, they are simply discolored.  The resident did not believe this was correct, so we are treating the cabinets for mold today (12/21) to address their discomfort.
  
  Based on additional communication from this resident, it seems as though they will not be satisfied with the steps that we can take to rectify the roach infestation.  We have offered to let them terminate the lease so that they can relocate to another community.  We are waiting for the resident to respond to our offer.
  
  
  Thank you,
  Debbie R****** 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:10/18/2022

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I rented an apartment from The ******* of Duluth apts in Duluth, GA, which is owned by Faros Properties. On my scheduled move in date in July of 2022, the apt wasn’t ready and it needed numerous repairs (carpet, paint, ac). After move in, I also discovered there was a fruit fly infestation which it took about a month to remediate. About 2 or 3 weeks ago, I informed maintenance that the furnace wasn’t working. They came two or three times and couldn’t light the pilot. After complaining to corporate, it was concluded that a new furnace would be needed. During this time the manager was fired and the maintenance staff quit. The regional manager (Alex) and Deborah R****** at corporate know about this issue. The home is uninhabitable without heat and there is still no furnace. I keep getting the runaround and I have grandchildren in this apt. One with asthma.

  Business Response

  Date: 10/28/2022

  I am writing in response to the above-referenced complaint received in your office on October 18, 2022
  from ******* *******. Ms. ******* is a current resident at ******* Duluth apartments.

  
  Regarding the complaint that the unit was not ready on her move-in date, our Regional Manager spoke
  with the resident she stated that she had identified the issues with the leasing office and all the items
  had been addressed to her satisfaction. We do provide all residents with a Move-In Condition
  Statement to complete, so that they can document the condition of their unit and notify us of any items
  that need to be repaired. Submitting that form would have been a way for the resident to document
  that they were not satisfied with the condition of the unit and put us on official notice that repairs were
  needed. We can’t find any such Statement from this resident, which means that she did not submit the
  form. In our experience, if residents are really not satisfied with the state of the apartment they usually
  submit that form.

  
  Regarding the complaint related to the fruit fly infestation, the resident submitted a work order for this
  problem on 8/17. Our notes indicate that we put this unit on the pest control service list that day. We
  didn’t hear back from the resident on this unit until 8/29 when another work order was submitted. At
  that time we again put the resident’s unit on the pest control service list. Unfortunately, sometimes it
  takes awhile for pests to be eliminated. We feel that our response times regarding this issue were
  adequate and appropriate.

  
  The resident made the first complaint about the furnace on Thursday, 9/29. Our maintenance team
  responded to her unit that day and repaired the heating system. Unfortunately, it broke down again a
  couple of days later. After further investigation, we learned that we had to order a new furnace, which
  was delivered on Friday, 10/14. Due to staffing issues, we did not have any staff that could install this
  new equipment until Tuesday, 10/18 (which is the day that the resident filed this complaint). The new
  furnace was installed that day. We followed up with the resident on Wednesday (10/19) and the
  resident advised that the heat was now working. Given current supply chain issues and the
  extraordinary staffing issues we had at this property at the time, we also feel that this response period
  was faster than normal. While it was a little chilly at night during the time that the heating system was
  not working, it was not nearly cold enough to be considered uninhabitable.

  
  To our knowledge all of the issues that the resident mentioned in the complaint have been resolved to
  her satisfaction.

  
  Thank you,
  Debbie R******

  Customer Answer

  Date: 10/28/2022

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  

  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 18240296, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

  
  

  I was never provided the move in form, by the staff, that Ms. R****** is referring to.  The ******* eventually fixed the problems; however, the way that it was accomplished was extremely inconvenient and it took way longer than it should have - 3 months.  When this company accepted my money and established a move in date, they knew the apartment was not in move-in condition.  They also should have known that the furnace wasn't working properly.  I would like a rental concession for the inconvenience of not having heating for 2 weeks.  Then, I would at least feel like management cared about rectifying their poor customer service.  Ms. R****** can not make a determination of whether my apartment was or was not cold enough to be uninhabitable for me and my grandsons.  I'm offended that she would do so.

  
  

  Regards,

  
  

  ******* *. *******