We have to take issue with the review left by the above landlord. At no time did we ever say a section (with an n) 21 notice needs 3 months service. It is true a period of time must be allowed for good service of a notice. Our instructions from the landlord were to issue the notice on the day the rent period expired, which would have been too late for it to take effect when the landlord wanted it to. The carpets at the house were at best worn at the start of the tenancy, despite the landlords own inventory describing them as 'immaculate'. Not the kind of language associated with a professional inventory, which she refused to pay for despite our advice. None of the various faults and very poor decor were noted on this inventory.
At the end of the tenancy the landlord tried to claim the whole of the deposit for various alleged dilapidations, which the tenant rightly objected to and the case went to the dispute service of the DPS. They awarded £209 from a claimed amount of £1285, finding in favour of the tenant on nearly all items claimed for. There was no mention of a damaged sink on the landlords claim, and the light switch that came loose from the ceiling was reported on one of our inspection reports and the landlord failed to repair it. The DPS found it was down to her maintenance to repair, not the tenant.
It took this landlord three months to fix the gas hob, leaving the tenant with only one working ring all over xmas and her family from abroad staying with her. After sending round a non-Gas Safe qualified person to look at the hob she finally instructed our gas engineers to change it. The quote for this was given to her immediately after the tenant reported the fault, but it took 3 months to get it done.
This is the first negative review Martin & Co Loughton have ever had on a website in 16 years of managing properties, which I think says more about this landlord than it does about Martin & Co. It is a pity there is not a website dedicated to landlord reviews for tenants to avoid.