I am writing to formally dispute the charges that have been added to my account. The carpet was already in that condition when I moved into the property, and I do not believe it is fair or appropriate to charge me for pre-existing damage. I also want to clarify that I never spilled anything on the carpet, nor did I wear shoes in the room. I took care of the property during my time there, and the condition of the carpet was not caused by me. Additionally, depending on the angle or lighting, the carpet appears to be a different color, which may make certain areas look more noticeable in photographs than they actually are.

To whom it may concern,This is Debra Eddy, Brianna Eddy‘s mother. I’m very confused, and upset about the charges that my daughter is being asked to pay for her previous apartment. My daughter has submitted emails, and I have spoken to Miguel in the office requesting further information, however, no one was able to answer any of my questions. All we received was a picture of the carpet and the wall and a comment stating that the carpet needs to be replaced. After speaking to Miguel yesterday, he informed me that he is not sure why the carpet had to be replaced and that it could be for several reasons, one of which could be that if the carpet is just old and they needed to replace it.My daughter has had several issues while staying at that apartment, the biggest one being when the whole apartment flooded, including water coming out of her vent in her bathroom, and the whole kitchen area being flooded out, which damaged quite a few things of hers, which she ended up having to throw out! There were people coming in and out of their apartment for weeks to dry out and repair everything, causing a major disruption in their living, eating and taking care of her cat that she has permission for. The cat litter box, and food, that was in the bathroom, had to be moved into the bedroom due to the flooding that occurred.We were not reimbursed for any thing that took place or the major inconvenience, and we ended up having to spend quite a bit more money on her, having to eat out because she was unable to use the kitchen area due to the huge hole in the ceiling, fallen drywall, and soaking wet area that was clearly unsafe to use anything electrical during that time frame. Therefore, she was unable to meal prep for those several weeks, and had to replace several items that were ruined.I kindly request that you please look further into this matter, and reconsider the charges, due to circumstances that were out of our control. I appreciate your help and expedience with this matter.If you should have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 561-506-5835.Sincerely,Debra Eddy

I have been charged for my carpets but I do not beleive I left any stains or dirtiness on it, I specifically rented a carpet cleaner and used it so i definitely triple check it was 10000% clean.

All those things were in my apartment before I moved in. I have photos with these things before I even moved in. This is absolutely ridiculous, I honestly thought these were things that came with the apartment since they were there in JANUARY when I moved. This makes it evident that you guys didn’t clean the apartment before I took over the sublease.THESE PHOTOS ARE FROM OCTOBER. So since these were in the apartment when I moved in I thought it was from station 42. I don’t have a photo of the shower thing but it is not mine either. If you need more information from me feel free to call.

I dispute the cleaning and damage charges assessed against my account. I lived in the apartment for approximately two years and left the apartment in a clean and orderly condition. I vacuumed the carpets weekly during my stay as well as before vacating and did not intentionally damage any of the fixtures, flooring, or other property.It is also important to note that, during my two-year tenancy, there was no assessment, inspection, or cleaning performed by the complex specifically for my room between my first and second year of occupancy. Therefore, the conditions noted at the eventual move-out inspection reflect approximately two years of normal residential use rather than the condition of a recently cleaned or newly occupied unit. I believe this is relevant when distinguishing normal wear and buildup accumulated over the course of a two-year tenancy from actual tenant-caused damage.Bathroom sink:I dispute the cleaning charge for the bathroom sink. The discoloration shown appears consistent with bacterial/mineral buildup that can occur in damp bathroom fixtures, rather than damage caused by misuse or neglect. In particular, the reddish/pink discoloration appears consistent with Serratia marcescens or similar surface buildup. This type of buildup is a cleaning issue and does not constitute physical damage to the sink. Throughout my stay, this 'stain' presented itself multiple times, which I could easily wipe clean with a rag and basic cleaning solution. I respectfully request that this charge be removed unless there is documentation demonstrating that the sink was damaged by my tenancy.Bathtub:I also dispute the charges associated with the bathtub. The discoloration and deposits appear consistent with mineral/iron buildup associated with the property's water supply rather than tenant-caused damage. The bathtub fixture also did not consistently shut off completely and would continue to drip, which may have contributed to the accumulation of mineral deposits over time. The dark discoloration on the bottom of the tub also remained despite ordinary cleaning and did not appear to be removable surface dirt. The presence of the reddish/pink discoloration also appeared during my stay in the bathtub and can be easily removed as stated above.I recognize that I am responsible for leaving the apartment reasonably clean, but I do not believe that mineral deposits or discoloration resulting from the property's water conditions and plumbing should be classified as tenant-caused damage or billed as damage remediation.Carpet:I dispute the carpet cleaning/damage charge as well. I lived in the apartment for approximately two years and vacuumed the carpet before leaving as well as regularly during my stay. The dark areas appear consistent with ordinary traffic and wear from normal residential use over the course of a two-year tenancy. I did not intentionally stain, tear, burn, or otherwise damage the carpet. I therefore do not believe ordinary wear and aging should be treated as tenant-caused damage requiring a substantial charge.Timing of inspection:I also ask that the timing of the inspection be taken into consideration. I vacated the apartment approximately one month before the end of my lease (returning my keys to the leasing office on July 3rd), and the inspection did not occur immediately after I surrendered possession of the apartment. Because there was a significant period between my vacating the unit and the inspection, I respectfully request documentation establishing that the conditions being charged to me were present at the time I vacated, rather than developing or changing during the period before the inspection.Given the above, I respectfully request that these charges be reconsidered and removed. If the charges are being upheld, please provide an itemized explanation of each charge, documentation of the work performed and invoices or other documentation supporting the amounts charged.I am requesting that only costs attributable to actual tenant-caused damage beyond ordinary wear and tear be assessed to me.

My bathroom tub was completely redone before moving in. After a few months/winter break, I noticed the paint bubbling up and paint chipping due to natural moisture in bathroom from showering. When I tried to clean it made the paint chip even more so therefore did not want to create more damage. If it was a brand new bathroom, this should not have occurred...

I submitted a FMO Dispute Form on July 7, 2026; however, I have not heard anything back yet. The reason I am resubmitted is for a $325 carpet charger. I only lived in the apartment for approximately two months, and during that time I did not engage in any activity that would have damaged or stained the carpet. I regularly kept my room clean and vacuumed the carpet before moving out. The carpet was left clean and free of any damage, stains, burns, excessive wear, or other condition that would reasonably require replacement or a $325 charge.I have both my original move-in photographs and my move-out photographs documenting the condition of the room and carpet. The photographs show that the carpet looks substantially the same in both sets of pictures. The carpet is naturally a brown color, and the appearance in the photographs is not evidence of staining or damage. In my move-out photographs, you can clearly see the vacuum streaks throughout the carpet, demonstrating that I cleaned and vacuumed the room before leaving. When comparing the move-in and move-out photographs, there is no noticeable deterioration or damage to the carpet that would justify a replacement charge.I also documented the condition of the apartment when I moved in. The only issue I reported at move-in was a broken door that had been left by the previous roommate, and I submitted a maintenance request regarding that issue. I left the carpet in the same condition in which I received it.Additionally, the photographs I have are time-stamped, so they can be compared directly to establish the condition of the carpet at both move-in and move-out. I am happy to provide the original photographs and their timestamps as documentation supporting this dispute.Because I was only in possession of the apartment for approximately two months, did not smoke, cleaned and vacuumed my room before moving out, and have photographic documentation showing that the carpet remained in substantially the same condition as it was at move-in, I am requesting that the $325 carpet charge be removed from my Financial Move-Out Statement.I respectfully request that this charge be reviewed against my move-in and move-out documentation and removed from my account if, as my photographs demonstrate, there was no tenant-caused damage to the carpet.

I was a resident this past year in building 4104, apartment 202, bedroom A. My resident portal is showing a fee of $325 to replace flooring.I reported in the condition report when I moved in that the carpet in the bedroom was "extremely dirty and dusty”. It was so bad that even after vacuuming it multiple times I purchased a large area rug, which covered the carpet while I was living there. I did not have any pets there, my family does not have pets and I have severe allergies. I also never wore shoes in my room. The condition of the room was dirty from the beginning. My mom thoroughly cleaned all the vents, baseboards and blinds regularly to help with my allergies. Despite all of this my allergies continued to get worse to the point that had to seek care from an ENT specialist and I had to purchase an air purifier for my room.It was evident from the start of my lease that the carpet was not in good condition and I did not contribute to that. Attached is a picture of the area rug in my room. Based on all of this I do not feel as though I should be financially responsible for this replacement.Thank you for your time.

I left my apartment spotless. I was charged a cleaning fee for my rug, which was vacuumed before I left, and my roommate’s sponge she left in the kitchen (it is documented that she left after me).

The "damage" stated on the lease 15430697 in 304-B was caused by a leaking toilet flow valve. Purely returned to his apartment on 8/25/2025 at 6:30 pm to find his room and bathroom flooded. He put in maintenance request #5882255 immediately. Maintenance repaired and replaced the toilet fill valve but did nothing about the soaked carpet. Purely did the best he could to soak up the water. The staining mentioned is due to this incident and not as a result of Purely's negligence or poor housekeeping and, therefore, he should not be charged. Please look into this and get back to me. Thank you. Sabra Raney