16th Sep 2026 (12 days ago)
Very friendly and professional service. Very happy in our new house.<br><br>UPDATE after having lived there 3 years:<br>? 1/5 — I would strongly advise tenants to stay far away from PM Estates.<br><br>Our experience throughout the tenancy was poor. We had repeated problems with the boiler, bath and plumbing which took far too long to deal with and, in some cases, repeatedly reoccurred rather than being properly resolved. At one point, we were left for over TWO WEEKS without adequate heating during cold weather, with a toddler in the property, and had to rely on space heaters.<br><br>I appreciate that delays obtaining parts can happen, but ultimately we were the family living in the property while these problems dragged on, and the original plumbers quote was declined as it was “too expensive” - yes, it was Christmastime, of course it was going to be expensive. That’s the risk you take being a landlord.<br><br>However, the check-out process was the final straw.<br><br>Before leaving, we paid for a professional clean, professional carpet cleaning AND £250 for a gardener.<br><br>Despite this, further cleaning and carpet steam-cleaning deductions were proposed. When cleaning issues were raised, I actually went back to the property myself, corrected the areas identified and sent photographs. I specifically told PM Estates that the carpets had already been professionally cleaned and offered to provide proof.<br><br>They also took issue with the garden and proposed a further contribution towards it. The garden was left in a perfectly reasonable condition, particularly after the extremely hot, dry summer and drought we had just experienced. We’d already spent £250 having a gardener tidy it before leaving. What exactly is expected from ordinary tenants — a professionally landscaped garden with perfectly green grass after a drought?<br><br>What frustrated me even more was how little consideration appeared to be given to the history of issues that had already been reported to PM Estates.<br><br>A perfect example was the water damage associated with the bath. The bath did not have an overflow, the resulting issue had already been communicated during our tenancy, and we had even asked for the affected area to be repainted, which was never done. PM Estates have clarified that the deduction they proposed related to the condition of internal walls rather than the ceiling itself, but our fundamental point remains: the cause and history of damage matters when deciding whether a tenant should be held responsible for its condition at the end of a tenancy.<br><br>If previous correspondence had been properly reviewed and taken into account, the history of these issues would already have been clear.<br><br>Instead, the whole process left us feeling as though every tiny issue that could possibly be found was being picked apart to make deductions from our deposit, while the explanations and history behind those issues seemed to carry considerably less weight.<br><br>And to be completely clear: where we WERE responsible, we accepted it. There was some painting and stair carpet damage, and items left behind that required removal. We accepted those charges without argument. We weren’t trying to avoid paying for damage we caused.<br><br>We were good tenants. We always paid what we owed, looked after the property and caused no major problems throughout our tenancy.<br><br>For me, the most telling part is that we left this tenancy feeling that it was easier to lose money we genuinely did not believe we fairly owed than to continue trying to reason with the company managing our home.<br><br>Luckily, we have bought a house, so are out of the rat race rental game, but we would never rent through PM Estates again. If you’re considering doing so, I would seriously think twice.... Read more