CPS Homes reviews in Cardiff

Thank you for your kind words Nick and for being with us for so many years. We’ll be sure to pass on your lovely feedback to the team :)

Hi Shree, We can understand why you were extremely disappointed that this let did not proceed, particularly given how close it was to your intended move-in date. There are, however, several points in your review that I think are important to clarify. The proposed tenancy was agreed with you and the landlord on 20th August, with a proposed move-in date of 28th August. As with all agreed lets at this stage, this was expressly subject to satisfactory referencing, the landlord's final approval and a contract being signed. Each of the four applicants signed an application confirming the referencing requirements that needed to be met. Unfortunately, when the completed referencing was received, it did not meet those agreed criteria. This was not simply a case of us discovering at the last minute that somebody worked part-time. We considered the referencing as a whole and, despite it not meeting the standard criteria, we pushed the landlord to allow the let to proceed, particularly because of the short time before your intended move-in date. Ultimately, the landlord was not comfortable proceeding. No occupation contract had been signed, so there was no contract for the landlord or CPS Homes to cancel. This was an agreed let that unfortunately fell through during the referencing and approval stage. Thankfully, fall-throughs like this are relatively rare, but this is precisely why our paperwork makes clear that a proposed let remains subject to contract until the necessary checks and approvals have been completed. In terms of the timescale, the property was agreed on 20th August and the landlord's decision was made before the proposed 28th August move-in, so the entire process took no more than a week. We appreciate that where somebody is relying on securing accommodation, even that period can feel significant, particularly when the outcome isn't the one they hoped for, but we don't consider this to be unduly long. Your security deposit and advance rent were refunded in full within five working days of the let falling through. The holding deposit was initially retained because of the difference between the referencing criteria agreed at application stage and the outcome of the completed references. We did offer to transfer this to another property if we were able to find something suitable for you. As you haven't subsequently secured another property through us, we have now also decided to return the holding deposit in full as a gesture of goodwill. You are correct that the landlord initially instructed us to re-advertise the property at a higher rent after this let fell through. That instruction was subsequently changed and the property is now being marketed at a lower rent than the amount originally agreed with you. Finally, we don't "take good reviews". We invite customers to provide feedback at different stages of their experience with us, as many businesses do. What somebody writes and the rating they choose to give us is entirely up to them. We're genuinely disappointed that we weren't able to get this let over the line for you, and we appreciate the difficulty that caused. However, we don't think it is fair to describe what happened as a scam or to suggest that an existing contract was cancelled. A proposed let was agreed subject to referencing, landlord approval and contract, the completed referencing did not meet the agreed criteria, and despite us trying to make a case for the let to proceed, the landlord ultimately declined it. We wish you all the best moving forward, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Sarah, Thank you for taking the time to leave your feedback. We’re sorry that the deposit process left you feeling this way, but we do want to clarify a few important points. Where CPS Homes manages a property, we document its condition at the beginning and end of the tenancy and provide this information to the landlord. Any proposed deductions from the deposit are ultimately the landlord’s claim, not money that CPS Homes keeps. Our role is to help communicate and mediate that claim, consider any evidence provided by the tenants and landlord, and try to reach an agreement between both parties. The fact that a claim is reduced during this process does not mean the original items were knowingly or deliberately unjustified. It is precisely why tenants are invited to provide photographs, inventory comments and other evidence. Where that evidence supports a tenant’s position, we will put this to the landlord and seek amendments to the claim, as happened here. If agreement cannot be reached, tenants also have the option of referring disputed deductions to the Deposit Protection Service, where an independent adjudicator considers the evidence from both sides. We would never seek to discourage a tenant from using that service. We do accept your point regarding the check-out report. Tenants should have access to the information they need in order to properly consider and respond to a proposed claim, and we’re sorry that you had to specifically request this on this occasion. We also apologise for the time taken to respond to some of your emails. The summer changeover period is exceptionally busy, but we appreciate that waiting more than two weeks for a response when money is outstanding is frustrating, and we are continually looking at ways to improve communication during this period. What we cannot accept is the suggestion that CPS Homes deliberately makes excessive claims in the hope that students will simply give up and pay them. Deposit deductions must be supported by evidence, tenants are able to challenge them, and where agreement cannot be reached there is an independent dispute process specifically designed to determine what, if anything, should be awarded. We absolutely agree with your final piece of advice, though: tenants should take comprehensive photographs when they move into a property and ensure any discrepancies are recorded on the inventory that we send. Good evidence at both the beginning and end of a tenancy is the best protection for everyone involved. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Charlotte, We’re sorry to read your review, but there are some important points we need to clarify because the proposed deductions are not charges that CPS Homes has decided to impose. At the end of a tenancy, our role is to document the condition of the property through the check-out process and provide that information to both the landlord and contract-holders. In this case, the landlord elected to arrange the post-tenancy works himself and has subsequently told us what costs he wishes to claim from the deposit. CPS Homes does not decide which deductions a landlord should make, nor do we profit from any money deducted from a deposit. We act as the intermediary between the parties, communicating the landlord’s proposed claim to the contract-holders, inviting their comments and evidence, and helping both sides try to reach a fair agreement. The landlord’s proposed claim in this case is also considerably broader than a charge for cleaning or “dust”. Our records show that a number of concerns relating to the condition of the property, damage and contractor call-outs arose during the tenancy, with several associated charges communicated to the household at the time. Further matters were then identified by the landlord at the end of the tenancy. In relation to cleaning, arranging a professional cleaner before moving out does not automatically mean that no further cleaning can reasonably be claimed. The relevant comparison is between the condition of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy, supported by the inventory, check-out report, photographs and any evidence provided by the contract-holders. Equally, the fact that a landlord proposes a cleaning deduction does not mean that the contract-holders have to accept it. You are fully entitled to challenge any part of the landlord’s proposed claim that you believe is unjustified, including providing evidence of the professional clean you arranged or evidence relating to any maintenance issue or contractor charge. We will consider that as part of the deposit discussions and continue to help both sides try to reach an agreed outcome. If agreement cannot be reached, either party can refer the dispute to the deposit protection scheme for free, independent adjudication. That independent process exists precisely for situations where a landlord and contract-holders disagree about responsibility or the amount being claimed. We appreciate that deposit discussions can be contentious, but describing CPS Homes as “scammers for students” does not fairly reflect our role here. We have not created the landlord’s claim or determined what should be deducted. Our role is to document the condition of the property, communicate the respective positions and help facilitate a fair resolution. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Thanks for the lovely review :)

Hi Jess, You recently posted a more detailed review on Trustpilot, which explained that your concerns related to the process of finding a property, the handling of maintenance reports and proposed cleaning deductions at the end of your occupation. We responded fully there, but feel it is important to provide some context here for anyone reading this review. We do not pressure anybody into renting a property. Every property we have available is advertised on our website, and prospective tenants are free to decide which properties they wish to view and whether they subsequently apply for one. Our Lettings Team will often suggest properties based on someone’s requirements, including suitable homes they may have overlooked online, but the decision always remains with the prospective tenant. We also do not accept the suggestion that maintenance reports routinely take at least three weeks to receive a response. The action required and time taken will depend on the nature of the issue, any investigation needed, contractor availability and, where applicable, the landlord’s authority. We do not benefit from delays and always want repairs resolved as promptly as reasonably possible. At the end of an occupation, we carry out a documented check-out inspection and provide the landlord and contract-holders with a report containing comments and photographs. We highlight what we consider to be fair wear and tear, as well as anything that may be substantially different from the property’s condition at the start. It is ultimately the landlord who decides whether to propose a deposit deduction. We do not profit from deposit deductions and would much prefer to return deposits in full, as this is quicker and easier for everyone. Where a deduction is proposed, contract-holders are invited to respond and provide evidence, and we seek to help both parties reach an agreement. Where that is not possible, the deposit protection scheme offers free, independent adjudication. The cleaning contractor referred to in your fuller review is one of several contractors we use. They are a long-established local business with the capacity to manage a significant number of cleans during the busy summer changeover period. Contractors are instructed based on their ability to complete the required work reliably and at a fair cost. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team

Hi Jamie, thanks for the lovely review, means a lot. We will pass your kind words on to Erin too :D

Hi Toby, We’re sorry to see your review, but we think some context is important here. CPS Homes does not simply set a charge of £432 for removing a couple of Blu Tack marks. Where remedial work is required and we are asked to arrange it, this is carried out by trusted independent contractors whose pricing is competitive due to the volume of work we place with them. In other cases, landlords may carry out work themselves or appoint their own contractor. Unfortunately, your review does not give us enough information to identify the property or the particular job, so we cannot comment on exactly what the £432 related to. However, if Blu Tack has damaged the decoration to the extent that a whole room needs repainting, a cost of that level is not necessarily unreasonable. Repainting a room can also involve considerably more than simply painting over a few visible marks. Depending on the circumstances, the contractor may need to identify and purchase matching paint, move and protect furniture, prepare and prime damaged areas, apply multiple coats to achieve an even finish, and then return the room and furniture to its original condition. There is labour, materials and often more than one visit involved. What may appear to be a very small area of damage can therefore result in a much larger remedial job, particularly where a localised touch-up would leave an obvious difference in colour or finish. There is also an important distinction between fair wear and tear and damage. A landlord cannot reasonably charge a contract-holder for ordinary wear and tear, but marks or damage caused by Blu Tack and other adhesive products can fall outside of this. This is why we specifically advise contract-holders when they move in not to use Blu Tack, and provide further guidance before moving out on avoiding potential deposit deductions. Of course, any proposed deduction should still reflect the actual loss or reasonable cost of putting the damage right. If you contact us directly with the property address and details of the charge, we’ll happily look into the circumstances and explain exactly what was claimed and why. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Deepak, We’re sorry that the condition of the property on arrival did not meet your expectations. Everybody moving into a new home should reasonably expect it to be clean and ready for them, and that is the standard we aim to provide. We would, however, like to clarify a couple of points within your review. There was no pressure applied to pay your deposit and first month’s rent nearly a month before the occupation contract began. The payment requirements and timescales were clearly explained before you and your housemate chose to proceed with the property and paid the holding deposit. They form part of our standard signing process and were not introduced or imposed upon you after you had committed to the property. We believe many, if not all, agents operate in the same way. In relation to the cleanliness, our records show that both a deep clean and professional carpet clean were carried out by one of our longstanding cleaning contractors between the previous occupation ending on 4th August and yours beginning on 7th August. That said, arranging a professional clean does not mean we will dismiss concerns if an incoming contract-holder feels particular areas require further attention. Occasionally, aspects of a contractor’s work may need to be revisited and, when that happens, our focus is on getting them put right. That is exactly what we have done here. When you raised concerns about the standard of cleanliness, our team acted promptly, contacted the cleaning contractor and arranged for them to return to address the areas you highlighted. We therefore don’t feel it is fair to characterise our response to these concerns as slow. Your occupation began only on 7th August and, within the very short period since then, we have been actively working to address the issues you reported. We remain committed to ensuring you are comfortable in your new home and to resolving any outstanding concerns as quickly as possible. We hope our swift action in arranging for the contractor to return demonstrates that commitment and provides some reassurance about the service you can expect from us going forward. Many thanks, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Yasmine, We’re sorry to read that you and your housemates feel this way. We’ve been unable to identify your tenancy from the name and information provided, so we cannot verify the events described or give a property-specific response publicly. We’ll therefore respond to the points raised more broadly, but invite you to email feedback@cpshomes.co.uk with the property address and the dates you lived there, so that we may look into the specifics. An inventory is completed at the beginning of a tenancy to create a dated photographic record of the property’s condition when the tenants take possession. It’s not prepared simply to attribute responsibility to tenants at the end. It’s equally important in protecting tenants from being held responsible for damage or defects that were already present when they moved in. Where members of a group move in on different dates, it’s neither practical nor appropriate to delay documenting the property until everybody has arrived. The completed record is made available to tenants digitally and tenants have the opportunity to report anything they believe is missing or inaccurate. We accept that faults can arise during any tenancy. What matters is that they’re reported and handled appropriately. When a repair is reported, our team will initially ask questions and, where relevant, provide simple troubleshooting advice. This helps us understand the problem, give the landlord and contractor accurate information, and sometimes enable a tenant to resolve a minor issue immediately. Tenants also have responsibilities to look after their home in a reasonable, tenant-like manner. However, these initial checks are never used to avoid arranging a repair for which the landlord is responsible. The qualifying questions aren’t onerous or time consuming: they should be engaged, as it ultimately benefits everyone and aids smooth resolution. We do not recognise the account that you were left without heating in your bedroom for nearly four months because we were threatening to hold you responsible for the radiator. Providing adequate heating is a landlord’s responsibility, and our role would be to report the issue to the landlord and pursue the necessary action. We may initially ask a tenant to complete a simple check, such as bleeding a radiator, as part of establishing the cause of the problem, but that is not the same as refusing to deal with a fault or seeking to make the tenant liable for it. Without the property details, we cannot review the maintenance history, but the circumstances described do not reflect the process we would expect our team to follow. We’d also like to understand what is meant by your housemate being “without a window”. A problem with a window’s handle or opening mechanism may require a specialist visit and, potentially, replacement parts with a lead time. That is very different from somebody being left with an entirely open window aperture for weeks. The suggestion that action was only taken because mould appeared, and therefore “at the expense of a student”, is also unclear. A mould report would increase the urgency of investigating a heating, ventilation or building-related issue. It would not, in itself, make the tenant financially responsible for the work. We manage a large number of student homes, but we do not regard students as people to be taken advantage of. Our staff work daily to support tenants, resolve problems, explain their rights and responsibilities and encourage landlords to maintain and improve their properties. We do not claim that every tenancy or repair will always proceed perfectly, but the suggestion that we deliberately avoid addressing problems until tenants suffer does not reflect how we operate. We wish you all the best moving forward. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Nadene, We are very sorry that the property was not presented in the clean condition the tenants were entitled to expect when they moved in. The landlord had confirmed to us that they would arrange the cleaning directly, and we have written correspondence confirming this was the case, but it is clear that this was either not carried out or was not completed to a reasonable standard. We fully understand why those arriving at the property were upset, and we are extremely disappointed that the commitment made to us was not fulfilled. As managing agent, we conducted a full check-out inspection after the previous tenants left, documenting the condition in which they had returned the property. The landlord then confirmed that they would arrange the necessary cleaning directly. Regrettably, it is clear that this was either not carried out or was not completed to a reasonable standard. We are extremely disappointed that the commitment made to us was not fulfilled and will be addressing this directly with the landlord. When the tenants reported the problem earlier today, we attempted to contact the landlord but could not reach them. Rather than allow the situation to continue, we took the decision to instruct our own cleaners, with the clean taking place on the same day the concerns were reported to us. Once CPS Homes became aware that the promised cleaning had not been completed, we could not reasonably have acted any quicker. It is also important to clarify that a substantial programme of work was arranged by CPS Homes between the previous tenants leaving and the new tenants moving in, after we sought and obtained the landlord’s authority. This included replacing blinds, repairs, redecoration across several bedrooms, bathroom works, kitchen ceiling treatment and a replacement mattress. Replacement glass for several blown windows has also been ordered and will be installed when it arrives. It would therefore be inaccurate to suggest that no action had been taken to prepare or improve the property, although we absolutely accept that the standard of cleaning fell below what it should have been. Regarding the reference to £800 per month for bills, utilities are not included within the rent and no utility payments are made to CPS Homes or the landlord. The tenants choose and pay their utility providers directly. Any concern about the amount billed will therefore need to be raised with the relevant provider, particularly as the charges may have been calculated using estimated rather than actual meter readings. We provide tenants with detailed moving-in information, including guidance on setting up accounts and checking utility readings, and our team will be happy to help them understand the process. We take the concerns raised seriously and remain in direct contact with the tenants to ensure the reported matters are properly followed through. We are meeting them at the property tomorrow to assess things further. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Jessica, We’re sorry to read that this was your experience, though there are several points within your review that we feel require clarification. We do not pressure anybody into renting a property. Every property we have available is advertised on our website, so prospective tenants can clearly see the options available to them at any given time. Our Lettings Team will often ask people about their requirements and suggest properties that may suit them, but it is entirely their choice which properties they view and whether they subsequently apply for one. We regularly receive positive feedback from tenants who have found an ideal home through our team’s recommendations, having initially overlooked it online. We take pride in helping people find suitable accommodation, but the final decision will always remain theirs. We are also concerned by the suggestion that every maintenance issue takes at least three weeks to receive a response. This is a very sweeping statement and does not reflect how maintenance reports are handled. The response required and the time taken to complete a repair will depend on its seriousness, the investigations needed, contractor availability and, in many cases, the landlord’s authority. As managing agent, we assess reports, carry out initial checks, seek any required approval and chase matters through, but we do not benefit from delays and always want repairs completed as promptly as possible. Regarding the end-of-tenancy cleaning, tenants are expected to return a property in no worse condition than it was provided to them, allowing for fair wear and tear. Therefore, where a property was clean at the start of the occupation contract but requires cleaning at the end, a landlord may be entitled to propose a claim. This can include dust or other cleaning that remains necessary when the check-out inspection takes place. Our check-out process is transparent. We document the property’s condition through comments and photographs, distinguish between fair wear and tear and matters that may go beyond it, and provide the full report to the landlord and contract-holders. As the occupation contract is between the landlord and contract-holders, it is ultimately the landlord who decides whether to propose a deposit deduction. We do not profit from deposit deductions and would much prefer to return every deposit in full, as this is considerably quicker and easier for everyone involved. Where deductions are proposed, contract-holders are invited to provide their comments and evidence, and we attempt to help both sides reach an agreed outcome. The vast majority of deposits we handle are resolved by mutual agreement. Where agreement cannot be reached, either party can refer the matter to the deposit protection scheme for free, independent adjudication. The cleaning contractor referred to is one of several companies we use. They are a long-established local business with the capacity to handle the large number of cleans required during the summer changeover period, and they have worked with us for many years. Contractors are selected based on their ability to complete the required work reliably and at a fair cost. Ultimately, it is the landlord’s decision whether work is authorised and who is instructed to undertake it. We appreciate that deposit discussions can be contentious, as tenants understandably wish to receive as much of their deposit back as possible, while landlords may seek compensation for deterioration they believe goes beyond fair wear and tear. That is precisely why we operate a documented, two-way process and why independent adjudication remains available whenever the parties cannot agree. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi, We’re sorry that you’ve had a less than positive experience with us. We cannot currently locate you on our database, so in order to verify and learn more about your experience, we’d appreciate it if you could provide us with more information via feedback@cpshomes.co.uk. We look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards, The CPS Homes Team.

Thanks Maddy!

Thanks Freddie!

Hi Stephanie, thanks so much for the lovely review, we really appreciate it!

Hi Sassie, We’re sorry to see this review. We don’t appear to have any record of you being a current or recent tenant of ours, so would appreciate it if you could contact us via feedback@cpshomes.co.uk with further information so we can look into it properly and verify your experience. Speaking more generally before we receive that information, we always give tenants at least 24 hours’ notice by email, SMS, phone call and/or letter before any planned visit to a property, which is in line with the terms of the occupation contract entered into. We’re also very flexible if a proposed date or time isn’t convenient, so if a tenant ever contacts us to let us know that's the case, we’ll happily rearrange. We take comments like this seriously, so please do get in touch with more details and we’ll investigate. Many thanks, The CPS Homes Team.

Hi Luke, We are sorry to read your review, but we do need to correct a number of points, as it does not accurately reflect either the tenancy history or the outcome of the independent deposit adjudication. The DPS did not agree that there was “no claim”. In reality, the adjudicator awarded the full deposit of £1,025 to CPS Homes in respect of rent arrears. The condition-related claims were not awarded because of the evidential requirements around the original check-in documentation, not because the adjudicator accepted the wider allegations made in your review. The DPS decision also recorded the total claim for damages as £1,053 plus the rent arrears, so not the £5,000+ figure you claim. We also do not recognise the suggestion that repairs were ignored for years or that tenants were simply “left without” essential facilities for significant periods. Maintenance issues can and do arise in properties, especially in older properties, particularly where there has been continuous occupation for nearly a decade, but reported issues were dealt with and progressed. As managing agents, we also have to liaise with the landlord, who owns the property and authorises expenditure. We fully believe we did this thoroughly and transparently, updating you and your housemates on our progress at every turn. Routine inspections were carried out in line with our management obligations. The allegation regarding an unlawful inspection has previously been dealt with, and our records show that more than 24 hours’ notice was issued. For clarity, the rent was £875 in 2016 and £1,100 by the final fixed term in 2024/25, inclusive of water rates. That is a 26% increase over nine years, and the final rent was below market norm for a three-bedroom property in Cardiff Bay. Rent levels were set by the landlord following market advice, and where negotiation was requested from your side, this was put back to the landlord. On at least one occasion, the landlord agreed to a lower increase following that negotiation. At no point did the rent go up by £150 from one year to the next, and there were many years where the rent didn’t go up at all from one year to the next. Finally, the decision to seek possession was the landlord’s, not CPS Homes’. We do not own the property and we do not make those decisions independently of the landlord. We understand you were disappointed that the tenancy came to an end, but it is not accurate to suggest CPS Homes were trying to force you out for our own reasons. A six-month possession notice was given as required by the law, and you were aware that this would be served several months earlier. You chose to leave before the possession notice expired, as is your right. We wish you all the best in the future, The CPS Homes Team.