Mike, We have spoken at some length on the issues that you have raised. I have explained that I do not agree with a number of the issues that you have highlighted and I do not believe that the review is balanced or fair. I have the following feedback in respect of the points that you make: - Our tenancy fees are explained at the point of application, are available for review online and are displayed prominently in our offices. These fees are significantly below the average across Plymouth and can be verified as such. At the start of the application process, a tenants' terms of business was submitted requesting a move-in date of 30 Jul 15. This requested date was also the date on which you moved into the property and your tenancy started. As such, no delays in tenancy were caused through the application and referencing process. - An issue with damp was highlighted to your property manager during the first winter season of your tenancy. As a consequence, a contractor visited the property and undertook work on the roof with the lead flashing. The landlord was advised that the chimney would also benefit from re-pointing and capping. The landlord was unwilling to pay for these works. Given this position, we provided dehumidifiers to extract any excess damp from the air. Since these dehumidifiers were fitted, there were no further complaints. Your decision to extend the tenancy on two separate occasions subsequently might suggest that the issue of damp was isolated in both duration and significance. - We hold tenant deposits within our government-approved custodial scheme on behalf of our landlords and take instructions from our landlord clients at the end of the tenancy as to whether any deductions should be applied. The recommendations that we make are always evidence-based. In the vast majority of cases landlords accept the advice that we offer. In some instances landlords wish to pursue a deposit regardless. This is very much an individual choice and we will take our landlords' direction accordingly. In this instance, your deposit went for independent arbitration, where it was found that there was insufficient evidence for the landlord to retain the deposit for cleaning. As such, it was directed that the monies should be returned to you in full. Whilst there is no perfect system for the management of deposit returns at the end of tenancy, we are proud to fully support the government-approved scheme of which we are a member. I accept that this deposit return process has been frustrating for you, but the outcome has been the one that you believe to be correct. We have no complaint with this as the case has been independently arbitrated based on the evidence provided. I hope that you accept that our role as managing agent is to ensure that our landlords’ wishes are followed in line with due legal process. You will also understand that we have no vested interest or financial motivation in making unfair or unsupported claims from security deposits. Kind Regards, Chris Whitaker Martin & Co - Executive Lets