Woodhaven Homes Dallas, Texas Doesn't Care About It's Customers!!

After over a year of trying to deal with Woodhaven Homes regarding warranty issues and neighborhood concerns, the homeowners asked me, the president of the homeowners' association, to write a demand letter requesting a meeting to discuss our problems.

Instead of agreeing to meet with us, they had their attorney, who specializes in personal injury, write back a one page response. The following are our issues and their responses.

WOODHAVEN HOMES - ASSOCIATION ISSUES

1) Street Cleaning - We have repeatedly requested that the streets be cleaned on a regular basis.

They claim that they do clean the streets on a regular basis. However, this is not true. There is standing water, dirt and debris in the streets. This is tracked on to our driveways and ultimately into our homes.

2) Contractors - We have requested that Woodhaven instruct their contractors and subcontractors to adhere to a City of Arlington ordinance restricting contractors' work between the hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Their response was to direct us to take this issue up with the City of Arlington. The builder should be responsible for the actions of their employees. Why should we have to take on this task?

3) We would also like the contractors to park in one of the three vacant parking lots so they will not block traffic. Last year we lost trash service for a week because they refused to move their vehicles which were lined up on both sides of the street.

4) Common Area - We feel that Woodhaven should be responsible for common area maintenance until ninety percent (90%) of the lots are complete. Contractors continually use those areas to drive across and for trash disposal. This is damaging to the grass and sprinkler systems.

Their response to this was to ask me to produce a document requiring them to do so. They are aware that I can produce no such document. The request was made because it is, once again, their employees who are damaging this area of our community. Perhaps if they were responsible for the area they would be able to control their employees and subcontractors.

5) The common area lot was driven over by a contractor's vehicle several months ago. This crushed the edging and damaged the shrubs. We requested repair by February 15, 2002.

Their response was that they will repair the area "within a reasonable time frame". It has been in it's current state for several months already.

6) There is a cable hanging approximately three to four feet off the ground over the pond. We have notified Woodhaven representatives and the developer of this situation on many occasions. This is extremely dangerous to the children in the neighborhood as well as the public at large.

WOODHAVEN HOMES - RESIDENT ISSUES

Note: In my inquiry to these issues, I was told that the HOA is not a customer of Woodhaven Homes and that they would only address these issues with individual homeowners. However, they have made no such attempt.

1) Warranty Work - The homeowners have always had problems with the warranty department and, as of this date, the problem persists. When the warranty department does come to the residents' homes they usually say that they are not responsible for the work because it was performed by a builder previously employed by Woodhaven. One resident was forced to hire an attorney to seek resolution to his warranty issues. This is a ridiculous and unnecessary expense for the homeowners.

2) Grading of lots - On November 19, 2001 we notified Woodhaven's Area Manager of the drainage problems between the homes in Brighton Village. Water is unable to drain from the lots which keeps the back and side yards muddy. He stated at the meeting that the problems would be rectified within six (6) months. He came to the property and inspected the lots for the drainage problem and acknowledged that there was a grading issue. A few weeks later, the work began. So far this work has been attempted on three occasions, but because it was not completed, the work has washed away.

As you can see, each of their responses have been confrontational. They are simply not in the business of customer satisfaction. Ironically, on their website under ABOUT US, it states: "Every time you need us, we'll be there." Another quote from that page reads: "The dynamic leadership of owners with three decades' experience has shaped a strong company with a desire for excellence and dedication to providing value for the homeowner and the ability to deliver superior service in every way." In our case, this is certainly false advertising.

DEVELOPER ISSUES (Adlai Pennington--MKP & Associates)

Note: We contacted Woodhaven regarding these developer issues because the developer is their customer. We were hopeful that they would addresses these issues with him on our behalf as they currently have other developments with him. However, we were informed, "Please direct all of your inquiries dealing with the developer to the developer or advise in writing if and why you will not." They were advised as to why, but I can only assume they did not thoroughly read or understand the correspondence sent to them.

1) The Brighton Village Homeowners' Association took possession of association "files" at a meeting on November 19, 2001. The records were incomplete and in disarray. As I attempted to audit the records, I repeatedly contacted Mr. Pennington for assistance. I did not receive any responses.

The issue here is Mr. Pennington's unwillingness to respond to our repeated requests for help.

2) Upon completing the audit of our bank account, I was disturbed to discover $2,229.20 in BVHOA dues were missing--$2,126.01 for 2001 and $52.60 for 2000. Mr. Pennington was made aware of the missing funds on December 31, 2001; January 15, 2002, in a meeting on January 18, 2002 and in a telephone conversation and follow-up e-mail on January 30, 2002. At the January 18th meeting he promised to replace the missing dues immediately. To date we have not received the missing funds.

3) No dues were to be collected in 2000. However, while questioning the homeowners, I discovered that one resident paid $52.60 in dues for 2000. I have requested refund of this money, but no refund has been made.

4) At the HOA meeting on November 29, 2001, Mr. Pennington stated that no funds had been taken out of our account and that MKP & Associates had incurred all expenses up to that point. However, I discovered that $1,524.74 had been used to pay for utilities and common area maintenance. In the meeting on January 18, 2002, he acknowledge that he made the statement, but said that he misspoke and is not obligated to replace the funds.

5) Our utilities were consistently paid late which caused us to incur unnecessary late fees on a regular basis.

6) Mr. Pennington did not apply for a Franchise Tax Exemption pursuant to Section 171.082. of the Tax Code Title 2.

7) I attempted to contact him on three occasions regarding the abnormally high water bills BVHOA received from October 2001 to January 2002. These bills exceed $6,000 and we are unable to make payment. Only when contacted by a Woodhaven representative did he contact me on January 30, 2002 to say that he would fix the leak and deal with the water department. I have not received any notice of an adjustment on our bill nor proof that the leak has been repaired.

8) From October '01 - January 22, 2002, I have made repeated requests for a copy of BVHOA's Bylaws.

9) As Woodhaven was having difficulty selling lots in Brighton Village, a Woodhaven Homes employee turned to Mr. Pennington for assistance. Mr. Pennington decided to enhance the common area by creating a picnic area with a pavilion and grill. However, by his own admission, he lost interest and decided not to complete the project. This is an eyesore for our community.

We would like Woodhaven Homes to complete the area by the summer of 2002 because it was started at their urging. We require a cover for the pavilion, concrete under and around the grill area to retard fire, at least two picnic tables and a concrete slab under the pavilion. Mr. Pennington suggested the HOA purchase four (4) cross vine plants which would grow upward and serve as cover. However, this would only serve to attract insects to our eating area. We do not find this option suitable.

10) Grading of lots - There is water standing in the street in several locations. Mr. Pennington acknowledges that there is a grading issue, but is only willing to address one area. Repeated requests have been made to rectify this situation.

11) Fence - Where the brink wall meets the wooden fence on the southwest corner of the property, there is a gap. The fence is currently held in place by a tree branch. Mr. Pennington was notified of this on November 19, 2001, January 3, 2002, January 18, 2002, January 21, 2002 and January 30, 2002. It is still not fixed.

12) Missing resident files - When I was given the HOA files several homeowner files were missing. I was instructed by Mr. Pennington to contact the title company for copies of all missing homeowner paperwork. I called on January 21, 2002 and left her a message on February 6, 2002 to request copies of the missing files. To date, I have not received the requested documentation.

13) Pond - At the meeting on January 18, 2002, I inquired as to the maintenance involved with the pond. Mr. Pennington stated that it is not lined and requires no maintenance. He said that he has no idea how the water is staying in the pond. This was not reassuring and poses many potential problems in the future because it was not handled correctly in the beginning.

14) Walking trail - A Woodhaven Sales Rep enticed each prospective homeowner with the promise of a lavish "walking trail" as an incentive to purchase homes within Brighton Village. However, we were informed on November 19, 2001 by Mr. Pennington that his intentions had changed and he decided to only cut the grass and clean the area one time. This is not what we were promised and it is unacceptable and certainly falls into the area of DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES. The area is full of trash and debris not to mention overrun by rodents.

15) The light near the entrance of the property is burned out. I contacted Mr. Pennington on January 10, 2002, January 14, 2002 and January 30, 2002 regarding who has been responsible for changing the bulbs. He has not responded.

Once I realized that we were getting no where with this company, I decided to write the media, City Council, Mayor, Consumer Protection Agency, Home Builders Association and national consumer advocates.

A City Councilperson decided to follow up with Woodhaven Homes and MKP & Associates regarding our problems. They both became outraged. Woodhaven's Vice President, Mark Johns, called and left a message saying he was suing me for lying. The developer, MKP & Associates sent me a demand letter insisting that I retract my statements or suit will be filed for libel. I did not comply to the demand and anticipate being sued by both parties next week. I am not afraid because I can prove each and every one of my statements. However, let this serve as notice to anyone looking to purchase a home from Woodhaven Homes--BUYER BE WARE!!!