mitchell / kasdin
Initially when I had contacted Stan I asked him to fill two vacancies for both of my properties; one in Lancaster and the other in Palmdale, upon my approval. He mentioned that he had a worker that was moving out of a house due to the death of the mother-in-law and new the family very well and was confident that he would make a good tenant. Days later when I met in Stan's office to accept Paul Smith's tenancy i asked Stan if he had checked his credit and if he had any evictions in the past. The answer was no evictions and his credit was clean. I asked repeatedly to see his credit report and Stan said that he had pulled his credit and everything was fine, not to worry; that's why i was hiring him. Needless to say, that was far from the truth, since his credit was marred, he had an unlawful detainer (eviction) which he denied when I brought up the subject it was after I met with the owner of ReMaxAll Pro, that Stan later said that he did now of his eviction from the past, but checked on the court judgement which was satisfied? Regardless, it should have been disclosed at the time I was deciding on who to put into the house. It was deceitful and unethical for him not to disclose that information. Furthermore, Cheryl mandahay who is Stan's assistance said that it was " the good ol' boys network' when i asked why she never called Paul to demand payment. In fact Cheryl M. was told not to call Paul and upset him over the delinquent rent money.
Stalled me from filing an unlawful detainer, telling me that he Paul had paid when in fact he didn't. Stan also made promised that he was going to pay and the money was tied up on several jobs and they Stan and Paul worked in collusion to defraud me. The following week he stated that he was informed by Cheryl that the tenant (his friend) had not paid, but two weeks earlier he had made a partial payment.
If this was common knowledge that Paul was evicted why didn't Mandy know? Obviously she did since she was close to Paul and she never mentioned the fact when I talked with Pam regarding Paul Smith's delinquent rent in early February.
A prior eviction was filed at the Lancaster courthouse, stan and paul smith had been friends for over 10 years. Suffice to sway that he was unaware of the unlawful detainer is hard to believe. When he said that Paul and Joyce smith were good prospective tenants he failed to disclose that he had a prior eviction, which would have impacted my decision to rent to Paul smith. Stan was just concerned about the income on the house in Lancaster and picking up the property management commissions, around 8% on the Palmdale house.
The first month he doubled billed me on the commissions, it wasn't until I brought up the issue did they admit to making a mistake. Honestly, was it a mistake or just an attempt to deceive me and take more money. Incidentally if you do business with stan Greco property management you will find that his monthly summary reports are very dIfficult to follow. They have the previous months rental income, running balances and other oddities to make if difficult for you to follow and ask questions on questionable charges, this is intentional in my opinion.
Apparently, Stan Greco admits to not having pulled Pauls credit since 2006, so clearly his intent was to deceive me and to look out for Paul Smith and Marcia Smith's best intensions. Stan Greco had a fiduciary duty to look out for my best interest. It's my contention that he had pulled Paul Smith's credit report and now denies ever having pulled his credit to save his reputation and not to implicate him further.