Rolfe East Reviews 

Reply from Rolfe East

Oct 31, 2026

We are sorry you were disappointed by the outcome of your application. We understand how frustrating it is to miss out on a property, but we do not agree that Rolfe East acted unprofessionally or unethically. It is important to clarify that your application was subject to a standard tenant referencing process, carried out by Goodlord, an established independent referencing provider.

The referencing checks identified discrepancies concerning your employment start date, and your referee could not be verified as an employee of the company. These issues required clarification before proceeding further.
Our team and Goodlord explained the outstanding requirements and stayed in contact to help resolve them. Delays largely stemmed from the time taken by your employer to supply the necessary documentation.

This was not a case of our team simply leaving an applicant in the dark or arbitrarily introducing new requirements at the last minute. The additional requests arose directly from discrepancies that needed to be resolved through the referencing process.

In your email to us on 14 October, you acknowledged that the property could be offered to another tenant if a new employment contract was not provided by 15 October. On 16 October you called to say you have now received the document. By that point, the necessary referencing requirements had not been satisfied within the available timeframe, and the property was no longer available you.

Throughout this period, our team maintained communication with you making genuine efforts to assist and resolve the outstanding matters to move your application forward.

The documentation discrepancies and employer’s response times were outside our control. When the application could not proceed, we agreed to refund your holding deposit.

We take our responsibilities to applicants and landlords seriously. We cannot approve an application with unresolved referencing issues, even where a deadline is approaching. We therefore believe that your review omits significant facts that are essential to understanding why your application did not proceed.

We stand by our team’s conduct and we respectfully ask you to reconsider your review and remove it.

We remain happy to discuss any outstanding concerns privately and hope we can reach a constructive resolution, but also reserve the right to consider appropriate further steps if materially misleading statements about our business remain published.

Reply from Rolfe East

Oct 31, 2026

Hi Ellie, thank you very much for your lovely review of Max & Ashley. We hope we can be of assistance to you again in the future.

Reply from Rolfe East

Aug 21, 2026

Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback. We’re sorry to hear that you felt disappointed by your experience, and we do understand how frustrating it must have been to incur costs during the conveyancing process.

We take concerns of this nature very seriously. Our research showed that the conversion was carried out with all of the relevant permissions needed at the time, and we provided information based on what was available to us and understood to be correct. We appreciate that further questions arose during the legal process, and we regret that this caused uncertainty for you.

While we do not agree with every aspect of your comments, we are sorry that you felt unsupported and that the matter concluded in this way. We always aim to communicate clearly and act in good faith, and we will take your feedback on board as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the service we provide.

Reply from Rolfe East

Updated Jul 18, 2026

Dear Daniel.
Thanks for your review. You called our office and asked that a sign be removed from your property. We do not have your property on the market with us. You called from an anonymous number. When asked by my colleague Emma, you would not leave your phone number with us. I wanted to call you back to establish where the board had been placed so that we could change or remove it. We had no way of contacting you. We do not feel this warrants a 1 star review. Please contact us to discuss this on 01935 814929. Thanks. Laurence Truett. Managing Director.

Edit:

All of our calls are recorded. I have reviewed the call and Emma did not laugh. You appear to have deliberately called us from an anonymous number so that we couldn't call you back and give a resolution to the problem. As an agency, we do not want anyone to be upset by our approach and marketing. We would have called you straight back if we had your number and sorted the problem. However, you were unwilling to give us this. We erect many signs every week. I wanted to establish which board was being referred to and what your problem was with the location it had been placed in. However, I had no way of doing this due to your anonymous number and unwillingness to give it to us. Laurence Truett - Managing Director.

2nd Edit: Thanks for your comments. I have offered to speak with you to gain clarity on this but still have no way of contacting you as your telephone number was anonymous and you refused to give my colleague Emma your number. We would love (as always) to achieve a peaceful resolution, however, in this instance it seems you do not wish this to be the case.

Reply from Rolfe East

Jun 16, 2026

Dear Marta,

Thank you for sharing your concerns. We are sorry to hear that your recent experience did not meet your expectations. We take complaints seriously and have reviewed the circumstances.

The property attracted a very high level of interest, with many enquiries coming in by both phone and email. This meant that unfortunately it took longer than usual to respond to everyone. You were booked in for a viewing and given the same opportunity as other applicants who attended during the allocated viewing period.

Regarding the viewing, we expect all staff to provide a professional and helpful service. We have reviewed the feedback received and note that another attendee praised the way the viewing was conducted. The agent’s request regarding parking was intended only to avoid inconvenience to local residents.

Most attendees made offers and although the property may have appeared as “let agreed” online, it remained available until a holding deposit was paid. By sending the application form, the agent was therefore giving you the opportunity to make an offer while the property was still available.

I hope this clarifies the position. If you would like to discuss the matter further, our Sales and Lettings Director would be happy to speak with you.

Reply from Rolfe East

Jun 16, 2026

We have reviewed your complaint and believe there has been a simple misunderstanding.

You viewed the property on 25th November 2025. We did advise that offers had been made, but none had yet been accepted. Lettings properties remain as available until a holding deposit is paid; in this case, the landlord had not accepted any offer at the time of your viewing.

On 26th November, the agent tried to call you for feedback and to ask whether you wished to make an offer, but you did not answer or return the call. Later that day, the landlord accepted one of the existing offers.

At the time of your viewing, the property was fully available and you had the opportunity to make an offer for the landlord’s consideration.

We therefore respectfully ask that you remove your review.

Reply from Rolfe East

Mar 13, 2025

Dear Jim,
We were very surprised to see your review of Rolfe East. As you are aware Rolfe East did not manage this property. Our property management team, however, did help from time to time out of courtesy to you and the landlord which was above and beyond our instructed level of service. You will find most agents would have directed you to the landlord when you had an issue and wash their hands of the situation, but we like to make sure that everyone we deal with is properly looked after.
We have investigated this case, by reviewing emails and all other communications with you and the landlord. We also gained information from contractors and the inventory clerk, and we have found your review has inconsistencies and missing information which paints a completely different picture of the events.

Firstly, when you reported the leak to us, we reported this to the landlord who instructed contractors to come to the house and investigate and resolve the problem. We cannot comment on what was done initially but the issue came back a few months later and the landlord asked us to get involved. We sent two separate contractors round to investigate. Once the best method to fix the problem which would cause the lease disruption to you and your family was agreed, the contractor who could do the work at the earliest possible date was instructed. We can confirm the repair was carried out before you vacated the property, so your claim the landlord refused to repair the roof in your review does not match.

In terms of your second claim referring to your security deposit, the majority landlords will get an inventory check in report carried out by an accredited inventory clerk when a tenant moves into a property. This is done so the true reflection of the condition of the property is agreed and signed by both the landlords and the tenant(s). When the tenancy comes to an end, an inventory report will be compiled once again for the check out. The checkout report notes changes which are not general wear and tear and is the responsibility of the tenant to repair. Both reports were completed in the case of your tenancy, and you were given a copy of both at the time they were compiled.

Your check out report shows over 4 pages of things which are your responsibility to pay for. However, the landlord decided to only charge for the holes found in almost every wall in the house which you claim were from hanging pictures, but most of them were fairly large as evidenced in the checkout report when compared with the check in report. Please also note that the tenancy agreement which was signed by you, states that holes should not be punctured in the walls of the house without the landlord’s permission, and this was not sought by you or given to you by the landlord.

The landlord instructed contractors to give them quotes to repair all the holes and cost was more than the deposit the landlord held. He therefore decided to keep your deposit as it would partly pay towards the cost of the repair. Again, we will stress that based upon the checkout report the landlord, was well within their right to ask for more to cover the other issues, but they did not.

Your assumption that Rolfe East advised the landlord on the “correct manner on how to proceed" is false. The landlord took advice from the inventory report, again which is carried out by an accredited and independent inventory clerk. Rolfe East never advise landlords what they should do in the case of withholding deposits, it is the landlord’s property and their decision. Most landlords will make their decisions based upon the checkout report.

We understand you might be frustrated with the situation, but the deposit dispute resolution has its place and is there for a reason. Therefore, we kindly suggest you remove your review and libellous claim again Rolfe East.

Reply from Rolfe East

Mar 13, 2025

At Rolfe East we take a bad review very seriously as we pride ourselves on our people first attitude and our teams are trained to make sure they provide the highest level of service to our customers. We have therefore fully investigated this matter and have found the following:

On Thursday 13th February 2025 you had a telephone conversation with Ash to discuss viewings he wanted to book in for your property, one of which was a potential viewing for the evening of same day, which we knew would have been very short notice. However, none of the viewing discussed were agreed by you as during the conversation you asked Ash to confirm the details of any appointments he would like book by email. This also mirrors an email you sent to Ash on 4th February which stated that moving forward you would like all appointments confirmed via email. Due to the fact that you had requested an email, and there would have been a limited time period for you to reply to Ash agreeing to the viewing and then for him to confirm the appointment with the applicant, he spoke to applicant and changed the appointment to Saturday 15th February. He then sent you the requested email showing 3 viewings for 15th February which included the person who had initially wanted to see it on Thursday 13th. This email did not state that there would be an appointment on the 13th February, so therefore he did not expect you to attend the property viewing.

You complained about the situation mentioned above to James the branch manager on 14th February and specifically asked for Ash to be removed from doing any viewings at your property, so James promised to deal with viewings and enquires for you personally. I am sure you are aware that as branch manager this was not his usual remit, but due to the misunderstanding with Ash, he agreed to do this, which ensured you as the client was kept happy. However, James could not attend the viewings arranged for the next day on the 15th February as he was already committed to other booked appointments. He mentioned this to you in emails sent at 10:07am, and 2:54pm on 14th February, in order to give you the opportunity to re-schedule if you wanted him to be there, but you did not. This was all communicated by email so you were made fully aware James would not be attending.

You have also mentioned that one of the three viewers did not turn up. James had confirmed with all of the attendees via telephone in the morning before the viewings were due to take place, and you were emailed to let you know they all said at the time they would be there on time. One of the viewers, had appointments to see other properties with Ash before viewing yours. Unfortunately, they turned up late to their first appointment. Ash took them around the other properties quickly, and offered to drive them to yours, so they could make it in time. But, they decided they wanted to rebook the appointment as they was limited for time. James called you twice as soon as he received this information from Ash, but you did not pick his calls, and you also did not call James or the office to find out what was happening with the viewing. Emma from the Acton team sent you an email out of office hours to let you know what had happened to which you did not respond to kindly. We am sure you can understand, we cannot control whether people turn up to viewings or not. What we can do, is confirm they will be attending on the day of the viewing and communicate issues they may have attending to our clients. Both of these points happened on this occasion.

It’s a shame you feel the way you do about the service you received. However, Ash and James clearly followed your instructions and communicate where necessary and we have seen this in writing, so we are perplexed as to why you have subjected them to this unpleasant review. We would urge you to review your communications with them with a view to removing this unwarranted review.

Reply from Rolfe East

Jan 26, 2024

Dear Marco.
Rolfe East pride ourselves on our professionalism and handling of all transactions which is why over our 40 years in the industry we have built up a strong reputation of being a people focused agency who see customer service and care as an important part of our service. Therefore, we take any negative reviews or feedback very seriously and investigate any issue brought to our attention.

We have looked into your claims and the situation surrounding the offer you made on a property through our agency as per the contents of your review and reply as follows.:

Ash was keen to secure the property for you and saw you as a priority purchaser, he even conducted your third viewing outside of normal working hours. Ash also made sure you knew that there was another party that had offered through another agency, so you were fully aware that there were other buyers interested in the property.

Due to our hard work with the seller we managed to get your offer accepted. However, the next day we were informed by the seller that they had accepted a higher offer which was put forward by the other another agent. The seller saw the higher offer as a more viable option for them. We did give you an opportunity to increase your offer, but instead of discussing this with us, you list this review.

We understand you must be frustrated especially if this was your dream home, but we gain nothing from you losing out on the property.
All we have done is work hard to secure this home for you. Unfortunately, the legal system does not have provisions which lock buyers or sellers into contracts when accepting an offer, so both parties can withdraw or change their minds at any time. Agents do not have the power or control to stop this as we simply follow the instructions of the client who owns the property.

As always, we are still happy to help you with your home search, so please contact us to discuss this if you wish.

Reply from Rolfe East

Updated Aug 7, 2023

At Rolfe East we take all feedback very seriously. Customer service is a high priority to us and any negative feedback is investigated and action taken as a matter of urgency.

We have looked into your case and our finding are as follows:

We can confirm that your offer was indeed accepted by the landlord. However, both the landlord and the proposed tenant reserve the right to withdraw at anytime up until the moment the tenancy agreement is signed and the consideration fulfilled which is normally the first months rent paid. This is regardless of whether a holding deposit has been lodged or not. Unfortunately in this case the landlord received an offer which they preferred and decided to move forward with that offer instead. As agents we do not have control over which tenants offer is accepted, this is solely the landlord decision and as agents we have to follow landlords instructions. The reason a deposit was not taken even though the landlord was initially interested in your offer, was because Dexter was waiting for the landlord to confirm their instructions. As a company policy we do not take money from potential tenants without the landlords confirmation to begin the referencing process. There are situations like this where a landlord can and unfortunately sometimes do change their minds. We will also stress that the landlords decision had nothing to do with you not paying a holding deposit as you stated, it was simply the landlords preference. This decision would have been the same whether a deposit is paid or not. Having gone though the calls and emails thoroughly we are convinced that Dexter did his best to handle the situation with care. Once it became apparent that the landlord wanted to go with another offer, Dexter called you straight away, but got your voicemail. Rather than just leaving a message to tell you what had happened he asked you to call back, so he could explain directly which in our opinion shows care. When your partner called back he told her what happened. As he knew you wanted to move quickly he told her about a similar alternative property which was available immediately. This shows a pro-active approach from an agent showing care. He was obviously trying to help find a solution for you, rather than showing a lack of care. You then called in and were very abusive, and swore at Dexter on the call. We must stress that we understand this must be very frustrating for you, but we will not accept abusive behaviour towards our staff members. We would be pleased to assist in helping you find another property if you would be open to working with us.

Reply from Rolfe East

Nov 17, 2021

Hi there. This doesn’t sound like us, but if the ‘reviewer’ would like to give us more detail we would be delighted to look into it.

Reply from Rolfe East

Nov 2, 2021

We are neither lawyers or snakes, we would love to help you find a property in West London, but we feel you may already have accommodation.

Reply from Rolfe East

Nov 2, 2021

We have taken on your views, please feel free to contact us as I would like some more specifics.