The Property Redress Recenzje 122

PRS Redress Scheme have been amazingly helpful to me in recovering my £5K from an investment company who were fobbing me off and not responding at all. PRS Redress Scheme stepped in and I finally got my funds back - I cannot thank them enough!! Thank you so so much 🙏

My experience with the Property Redress Scheme has been bitterly disappointing and outright frustrating. Despite their assurance of impartiality, it's essential to highlight the concerning issue that their funding comes directly from estate agents, raising immediate questions regarding their genuine fairness towards landlords. When we engaged Martin & Co to find and vet a tenant, what we received was a disaster — a tenant who caused extensive damage by using our property for illicit activities. The tenant was working as an prostitute. Alarmingly, the Property Redress Scheme showed a clear bias, arguably safeguarding the agents' interests over ours. Proceed with caution and skepticism if you ever have to engage with them, as their partiality significantly undermines their credibility.

Awful experience. Clearly acting on behalf of PAID members rather than landlords. I wish I'd just gone to the small claims court instead - perhaps I still will about the catalogue of evidence the PRS ignored. I've basically wasted 4 months on an inefficient service for the sake of £50 compensation. And no, Mike, I would not waste another second of my life on your ridiculous set up. I'd advise anyone looking into the PRS to simply go to small claims.

Oh, by the way, Mike, can you read? The above paragraph was addressed to YOU.

Yes Mike you did reply direct to me via email about my concerns however as it stands my opinion has not changed as neither has your decision

You still choose to accept a dishonest email over cctv footage the bin was there it's been proven with cctv it's not been made up nobody has been in the property because the landlord has been unable to go to the property due to health reasons therefore the only other explanation is the bin was there since checkout unless you think someone has broken into the property leaving no damage and only taking a bin and leaving it outside the property cos there was no furniture in there if you look ad the advert on accommodatingu Dorchester

My experience has been similar to most others here. I provided detailed evidence whereas the agency I complained about provided just their opinion and no hard evidence. PRS did rule in my favour, however after having paid tens of thousands of dollars in rent over the years what was their suggested compensation? £150. It's no surprise that agents ignore their legal requirements. I agree with others here, the PRS is set up to shield its members from legal action and is heavily biased towards them. Members will not be required to provide any hard evidence whereas you will need to go out of your way to do so. Even if you win it's the smallest of slaps on the wrist for the member. As others have said - skip pursuing your complaint via the PRS, it's a waste of time. Do as I wish I'd done earlier and find a good no-win no-fee lawyer instead.

The estate agent managing my two HMO's was supposed to manage and market the properties. All they did was collect the rent and take fees from the few tenants in residence. There was no marketing and I was running for 2 years at 30% occupancy. The changed the locks so I could not gain access. When I sacked them, they refused to hand the properties back at the end of the notice period. When I did get the properties one was badly damaged, filthy and many of tenants were in severe arrears. Gas and electric certs were expired and many of the keys lost. Having paid the agency over £10,000 in fees, I contacted PRS. After providing tonnes of evidence and compiling extensive reports, their conclusion was to award me £200 compensation for the inconvenience. They are a complete waste of space. They need to be reported to trading standards!

AVOID AT ALL COST! Avoid any real estate firms linked to PRS. It's a bad joke, you will regret it for sure. The real estate agency letting our home (Chancellors) was supposed to manage our property. The management has been a nightmare for everybody involved: the tenants, the private contractors and ourselves as landlords. The level of service has been extremely poor. We have been forced to manage the property ourselves almost from the start. In other words, we do all the work despite paying Chancellors a monthly letting / management fee in the hundreds of pounds. We asked PRS for a full fee refund (worth at least £1600) and further compensation. Despite the evidence presented and the fact that no one wants to deal with Chancellors, we were offered a measly £100 due to ‘lack of evidence’. Our experience with PRS is much in keeping with what is found on Trustpilot; the decision making is highly biased. For instance, their primary client is the real estate agency grossly underperforming. Moreover, PRS never bothered to call or meet us in person to discuss the evidence. Furthermore, to my knowledge, they never got in touch with the other parties involved to confirm or refute the evidence. Indeed, any excuse from the real estate agency will be used against you; their word and evidence is gold. In other words, they are not here to protect you. Disappointing and unethical particularly when landlords and tenants are struggling with inflation. Shame on you PRS for letting big companies abuse hardworking people (and keep your £100, we have something called integrity). Considering the number of negative reviews, the media should know about this type of practice.

Beware!!! Avoid real estate firms linked to PRS. It's a bad joke, you will most probably regret it. The real estate agency letting out our home (Chancellors) was supposed to manage our property. The management has been a nightmare for everybody involved: the tenants, the private contractors and ourselves. The level of service has been extremely poor. I have been forced to manage the property myself almost from the start. In other words, I do all the work despite paying Chancellors a monthly letting / management fee in the hundreds. We asked PRS for a full fee refund (worth at least £1600) and further compensation. Despite the evidence presented and the fact that no one wants to deal with the firm managing our property, we were offered £100 due to lack of evidence, among others. Our experience with PRS is much in keeping with what is found on Trustpilot; the decision making is highly biased. For instance, their primary client is the same real estate agency performing below expectation. Moreover, PRS never bothered to call or meet me in person to discuss the evidence. Furthermore, to my knowledge, they never got in touch with the other parties involved to confirm or refute the evidence. Indeed, any excuse from the real estate agency will be used against you; their word and evidence is gold. In other words, they are not here to protect you. Disappointing and unethical particularly when landlords and tenants are struggling with inflation. Shame on you PRS for letting big companies abuse hardworking people (and keep your £100, we have something called integrity). Considering the number of negative reviews, the media should know about this type of practice.

What a waste of time! The people who operate this commercial business are very keen to ensure their paying clients keep paying. This scheme is NOT in the interest of anyone else but them. If a property owner has selected the TPO then it stands to reason. The tenant fee rules are certainly NOT adhered to by them, there was no substantial evidence in place, yet their agent decided otherwise. The TPOs insurance company is underwritten by a mainly cosmetic business! Need I say more? Just look at the generic response they send people who have left feedback. Here is a message received from their rep named in the feedback response: any further communication relating to your service complaint will be filed but not responded to.

The words chocolate teapot come to mind.
Reported a management company PMS Managing Estates. Over more than 2 years been fighting them saying the roof had issues, PMS stated tenant activity was causing damp problems. Paid out over £8,000 in remedial work/replastering etc to remedy the problem. Fast forward to 2023 Tenant has water coming through ceiling. Best PMS could do was send out a locksmith (yep a locksmith!) to board some of the ceiling. PMS demanded I pay for a roof survey if survey finds tenant activity was caused. I refused but a survey was done. Surprise!! It's the roof. PRS offered a resolution of £1500 to be paid to me by PMS which we both refused. PMS have still to get the roof repaired, keep fobbing me off saying they're getting quotes, tenant still has a boarded ceiling waiting for the next rain when it'll probably fall in. The PRS will not take my phone calls or call me despite telling me a decision would be made soon.
What an utter waste of time requiring management companies to be members of these organisations. They do not represent the consumer and are utterly toothless. Judging by the reviews before me everyone else is experiencing the same lack of action.

Oh update!! As you can see the responded asking me to contact them on that number. Hung on the phone for 20 minutes with no answer. Yep still think chocolate teapot is appropriate. Won’t be bothering again.

We complained to PRS about Barnsdales and their failings i.e.
= Negligent Misrepresentation in their contract claiming to be a member of the Property Ombudsman when they are not.
- Our building manager Louise Ballinger disappeared one month into the contract. Barnsdales wanted £50 to meet and explain how our building would then be managed.
- No response to a roof leak, despite numerous phone calls and emails. We had to resolve ourselves.
- Falsely claimed to have made contractually stipulated 2 site inspections.
- Provided false legal advice on a directorship claim.
- Mismanagement of documentation. Barnsdales claimed they did not have documentation that had been provided to them.
- Mismanagement of Account. Barnsdales took six months to provide bank statements.
- Failure to collect Service Charges or inform us that they had not been collected.
- Payment for unattended fire inspection that was kept secret for over 4 months.
- Overpayment of Electricity Bills amounting to over £300 that we had to resolve.
The PRS decided no sanctions were needed.

Don't waste your time with PRS as living out the pockets of estate agents, We first complained last year in March, After sending all evidence, they would not take the case on, Resubmitted on the 9th January 2023, We gave 14 days' notice to our agent in Leicester Hortons the reason for this was unprofessional conduct as acting for us as sellers and our buyer's gross conflict of interest, also no communication, we told them how much wanted
was never passed on to them, We went on to sell with a different agent but they still want payment, PRS did nothing to help us, even though one of their agent said they can not pursue us for payment, The agent Kiran said the best you can expect is an apology just proves how they side with the estate agents I am to now expecting the normal reply No help

Extremely disappointed with the service provided by PRS.

After submitting a complaint (PRSC110252) with plenty of evidence it was declined after being initially accepted. In the two phone conversations I had with the case assessor it was crystal clear that she had not read my complaint, which was ridiculous.

I strongly disagree with the reasons given for declining my complaint. I might be biased in this appreciation, but the case assessor didn't provide good arguments for doing that, and her explanations were very vague. In any case, what it's utterly unacceptable though is that the case assessor clearly ignored the existing legislation for tenancies, specifically the Tenant Fees Act 2019. I reproduce here a paragraph from her final statement:

"In relation to the fees put forward by the landlord to end the tenancy early, please note a landlord is not obliged to do this and can choose to hold a tenant to the terms of a fixed term tenancy. Where a landlord does agree to release a tenant early, the terms for this - any payment to be made - are for negotiation".

This is simply not true, it contradicts the law (which regulates the fees that can be charged, they can't be negotiated), and I'm really concerned that an organisation with this level of incompetence is regulating estate agencies.

PS: I wrote this same review in Google and PRS replied with their standard message saying that I could contact them on the phone to discuss. As I don't have any way to reply that message, and they don't have a complaints procedure, I just want to use this review to add that I won't contact them again. It's just unacceptable that this organisation is not aware of existing legislation regarding tenancies, and if they really cared about it they would address the problem directly (that's why I included the complaint number) instead of replying with a copy/paste message to the consumer.

Although the PRS allow themselves up to 10 days to respond to any enquiry, they only allow 4 days for a complainant to submit the required evidence, otherwise they dismiss the enquiry/complaint. I found this a unfair, as this is usually a new process for most customers to understand.

PRS have been dealing with my complaints towards a letting agent I employed. I have submitted 3 complaints. The agent has not complied so one of e complaints is due to non compliance. Surly if the ruling allows non compliance, what is its value. What is the point of PRS ? What, if any, power do they really have

No matter what proof you gave them, they are here to support their members—Letting agent. This company refused to take any action against one of their members who has cheated us and robed £15000. They are shambles in the name of redresses.

Complaint Reference: PRSC109940

Dreadful experience.
This Property Redress Scheme has been invented to just waste people’s time. Of course it is the Union of the agents that I am complaining about. Why would the government appoint the agents union to investigate complaints against one of their members. This entity has completely refused to investigate my complaint where one of its members has just robbed us of over £17,000.00

I should have read these reviews first before bothering with this farce. I would have saved a lot of wasted time. My property has now suffered tens of thousands of pounds worth of loss caused by the Tenancy Application Fraud that was carried out by Jordan Fishwick Lettings to assist the rouge tenant with getting my property. Property Redress Scheme provided a defense for the letting agents and not a balanced decision since a balanced decision would not be in keeping with the funds they get. Despite the fact that I provided evidence that the agents Jordan Fishwick had created a landlord that did not exist including retrospectively changing the terms of its agreement (A fraudulent offence} the PRS defended this illegal and unethical practices by saying the agreement was not signed. So, there you have it. corruption and unethical practices abound. I reported the fact that the agents also accepted a NHS survey letter as a proof of address, which the agents justified as being because the applicant didn't have anything else. I also reported that the agents used the same NI and payroll number for the tenant as they did for the financial referee and the PRS found zero wrongdoing. All of these things were carried out by the agents without my knowledge or my consent. Charlotte of the PRS also cleverly hoodwinked me into believing i had a choice to go through the early resolution process and that my case would be decided by an independent investigator, but she did neither and it was nothing more than a deliberate rouse to get me to the finish line with their predetermined decision which contained plenty of bias after i complained about the first investigator who wrote and told me my claim might get compensation of 50.00 and that was before the PRS had even carried out an investigation. Below is my response letter to Charlotte. And I challenged anyone to claim that anything in this statement is fabricated and untrue.

Dear Charlotte
I have received your response to my complaint against Jordan Fishwick. Unfortunately, I have not been able to discern any balanced or rational evaluation worthy of crediting your response as a decision.

What you provided amounted to no more than a very transparent and candid defense of Jordan Fishwick and its failure to act in compliance with regulatory requirements, not only in the interest of myself as a landlord, but as a matter of the greater public interest at large and this is very concerning.

For this reason, I do not wish to waste any further time with the PRS. Your response also arises against the backdrop of the prejudice and bias that was candidly shown by the PRS right at the beginning of your receipt of my complaint which I highlighted with immediate effect.

As you are aware this backdrop refers to the compensation amount and preliminary bias that was offered without request, also in the absence of the PRS full receipt of all documentation of the complaint necessary to conduct a balanced investigation for the purpose of compensation.

Sadly, your decision reads more like a proposed and highly unsubstantiated defense of the professional negligence, breach of contract and application fraud carried out by Jordan Fishwick. This was also illuminated by your feeble attempt to negate the legal obligations of Jordan Fishwick by submitting a defense that the terms of agreement were not signed.

Given that I was advised that the PRS do not deal with breach of contract I found this defense to be a wholly irrational attempt to negate all obligations owed by Jordan Fishwick to the Landlord as completely devoid of any rational sound judgement on the issue of legality.

I will not waste any further time. The only efficiency I identified was in your ability to blindside yourself from the fraud, non compliance of regulatory procedures and practices, and deceptive practices of Jordan Fishwick that were clearly and succinctly brought to your attention.

1. As evidenced by your letter of 2nd November you have failed as promised, to assign an independent investigator.

2. You also misled me by offering a decision under the guise of a proposal on the issue of whether I wished to skip the initial stage.

Clearly, just as with Jordan Fishwick, the PRS can neither be trusted to do as they say, and this must be highlighted.

Again, all of these practices along with your candid defense of Jordan Fishwick are very concerning for a regulator who is supposed to be protecting the public at large.
For this reason, I have no interest in wasting any further time with your farcical process.

Absolute Sham.
Yet another corrupt ombudsman funded by the industry. They never work.
My case is worth a fortune as a £30,000 item is missing or stolen and Jane Wetherop Ltd can't even find the keys for the property it was stored in. Tenants have caused tens of thousands of pounds of damage to two properties, well in excess of the £25k PRS limit.
PRS = £750!!!!!!
PRS refuse to follow the DPA/GDPR. I've had to report that to the ICO.
Conveniently the PRS don't publish any complaints procedure.
HF Resolution Ltd are a set of clowns. Shame on the Department of Housing for awarding contracts to clowns who don't follow basic law.
Their companies house record is out of date!
Close them down.

Delighted with the helpful service from all staff at this Company. I was left severely out of pocket by Stobart & Hurrell Estate Agents when they failed to correctly advertise a property for sale, and did not include the major factor there was a restriction on the property. Having spent on survey and solicitors fees to get to this point, the Estate Agent felt they were in no way at all responsible for this failing, and offered me a "Goodwill Gesture" of approx one fifth of the money I had lost!
I contacted the PRS Scheme immediately, and after submitting all my evidence, they agreed I should be re-imbursed the full amount.
Once Stobart & Hurrell were informed of this decision, they paid in full.
I would have lost over £1,000 but for the service of this Company, for something that was not my fault, and I am very grateful to them for their intervention on my behalf.