Hello NARPM Denver Chapter!

Web Admin - Sunday, February 07, 2016

Hello NARPM Denver Chapter! by Susan Melton, 2016  NARPM Denver Chapter President

We are off to a great start to 2016!  Our January 26th meeting was one of the largest, best attended meetings we have ever held. 

I want to remind all of our wonderful NARPM Denver Chapter members that this organization can only exist with the hard work of people willing to volunteer their talent and many hours of their time. 

Special thanks are due to volunteers Johanna Wells and Abigail Jacobs.  Johanna has faithfully served our chapter as our Affiliate Chair for many years doing an excellent job of coordinating sponsors for our luncheon events and annual Property Management Conference.  She has done such a good job that a second person was needed to help carry the load!  In 2016 Johanna will be handling the Property Management Conference sponsorships and Abigail will handle the luncheon meeting sponsorships.   Please join me in thanking them for their part in making NARPM Denver Chapter the recognized leader in residential property management!

Networking is one of our NARPM core values, and our monthly luncheon meetings and educational classes provide an excellent opportunity to network with colleagues and affiliate members.  Please help us continue to provide a quality luncheon meeting experience by making your luncheon and sponsorship reservations via the website  Now, in addition to being able to pay with a credit card, you can use Paypal to pay with an e-check.  We are no longer able to accommodate or accept reservation payment via check at the door. 

Please help our volunteers provide successful professional events.  Your help will help us all realize and appreciate the value of being a member of NARPM Denver Chapter.

What We Have Learned About Collecting Rental Debt

Web Admin - Friday, January 22, 2016

WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED ABOUT COLLECTING RENTAL DEBT by Mark Tschetter, Senior Managing Partner of Tschetter Hamrick Sulzer, P.C.

We are involved in collecting rental debt for all types of clients. From national managers and owners to single owners. For a long time we weren’t involved. After a not so great association with a collection agency client, back in the 1990s, we made a conscious decision to get out of debt collection. However, based on client need and demand, we started providing debt recovery services about five years ago. As a landlord law firm, even when we weren’t actively involved in debt recovery, we constantly dealt with collection-related issues and collection agencies. Going full circle over the years, we have heard a lot about collections from clients, and like to think we have learned a thing or two as well. This month we share our experience.

Before discussing our experience, a brief recap of the collection industry is necessary. Collection of rental debt is handled almost exclusively by collection agencies (agency or agencies). Collection agency efforts to recover debt are almost always limited to calls, letters, and credit reporting, and do not include bringing lawsuits. Because they don’t take the next step that could be taken to collect, when a debtor won’t pay, most agencies are known as “front-end agencies”. If the debtor is resistant and refuses to pay or cuts off telephone communication by exercising their rights, front-end agencies abandon any further efforts, but may place the debt on a tenant’s credit report. Agencies report rent debt to credit agencies hoping that the tenant will actually care about their credit enough someday to pay the debt.

Almost, without exception, all rental debt is collected on contingency. You pay nothing if no money is collected. If an agency is successful in collecting money, the agency’s fee is a percentage of the amount collected.  Industry contingency percentages range from 20% to 60%. Probably the biggest fallacy about collecting rental debt is that the collection rate or contingency percentage is the most import factor in negotiating a collection contract. Invariably, the collection rate is almost the first issue people want to discuss. Low rates sound good, but when we ask clients how the agency at twenty percent is doing (meaning the client gets 80% of what is collected), the answer always is “not good”. Eighty percent of not much is still not much. The most important factor in collections is the liquidation rate. The liquidation rate is a percentage determined by dividing the total amount collected by the total amount placed for collection. If you place a $100,000 for collection, and $15,000 is collected, then the liquidation rate is fifteen percent. In collections, the most important question is not what your rate is, but what you are receiving (netting back)? Your ultimate net back is directly tied to the liquidation rate.

Why the liquidation rate is more important than the collection rate is easily illustrated. Assume $100,000 is placed for collection. If your rate is 20%, but an agency only collects 5%, then you receive $4000 (80% of $5,000). If your fee is 50% or 2.5x higher than that low-low rate, but 15% is collected, you receive $7500 (50% of $15,000). Collections are like anything else in life. You get what you pay for. If an agency has two piles of debt, one that they get paid 20% on, and one that they get paid 40% or 50%, which pile of debt do you think will get the most effort? Liquidation rates are driven by work efforts, treatments, and collection strategies. You’ll never receive, from front-end collection efforts alone, as much as you can by deploying front-end agency efforts, multiple treatments, and legal efforts. However, hardly any agencies deploy legal efforts, and the ones that do deploy legal efforts don’t do it on a significant basis. Nobody is going to go the legal route on your debt if you’re paying them twenty or thirty percent. Multiple treatments of debt means using multiple collection agencies and incorporating a legal strategy. Thus, by definition, a single collection agency can’t provide multiple treatments.

Right behind the collection rate fallacy, is the liquidity myth. Occasionally, we are told that a collection agency is collecting twenty-five percent to forty percent of a client’s debt. However, at the same time, almost everyone else tells us that they are either dissatisfied with their agency’s recovery rate, have no idea of how their agency is doing, or both. Because we have never seen any published recovery rates for rental debt, these contradictory positions are difficult to reconcile. However, based on information available to us, our best estimate is that the recovery rate for front-end collection agencies probably ranges from five to twelve percent, with bad agencies ranging at a below five percent and good agencies ranging closer to the high end. Back in 2008, the ACA International, the leading trade association representing credit and collections professionals, reported that just 18% of all money referred to collection agencies is eventually recovered. We have reviewed numerous collection agency reports that show liquidity rates between three and five percent. We have also seen millions of dollars of rental debt sold for four cents on the dollar supporting a four percent liquidation rate.

Two common scenarios can lead to mistaken beliefs about liquidation rates. The first scenario is the big check scenario. The community receives big checks monthly or at least what they consider to be significant or satisfactory checks. The second scenario is comparing a single year’s collections to a single year’s write-offs. Under both scenarios, the community may think that an agency is doing fine. However, analyzing your agency’s performance based on your monthly check, or comparing isolated write offs to isolated collections doesn’t accurately calculate recovery or liquidation rates because it doesn’t factor in the total amount of debt placed. Again, the liquidation rate is the total amount collected divided by the total amount placed, not the amount written off last year. If you have given an agency $100K a year for five years, and they collected $25K for you last year, the recovery rate isn’t 25% ($25K collected last year / $100K written off last year), but rather 5% ($25K/$500K). Big checks don’t necessarily mean an agency is doing a good job either. If you give any agency enough volume (place enough debt), you’re going to get a satisfactory check. The real question isn’t the size of your check, but what is the volume placed with the agency to get that check?

Calculating true liquidation rates is complicated by a variety of other factors. Portfolio liquidation rates can vary significantly depending on the economic demographics of individual communities. Liquidity is also a moving target because the numbers are forever in flux. Every month you may be receiving money, but you are also placing debt with the agency. While you can take liquidity snapshots, true liquidity can only be measured on a single batch of debt. For example, if you placed $30K of debt with an agency, in May two years ago, what percentage of this $30K has been collected? Because it takes the average debtor two years to get on his feet, determining liquidity on a two-year-old batch of debt is probably the most accurate and fairest way to determine liquidation rates, and thus the true performance of any agency. One thing is certain about liquidation rates. You’ll never know your true liquidation rate if you’re not getting enough information from your agency to accurately determine liquidation rates, and if you don’t take the time to really drill into the information.

Another collection myth is that credit reporting is the end-all be-all of collecting money. However, credit reporting doesn’t magically result in the collection of rental debt, or significantly impact liquidation rates. If it did collection agencies reporting 100% the debt referred to them would be liquidating at phenomenal rates. While impact on recovery is uncertain, credit reporting does benefit collection agencies. Unfortunately, the possibility of an agency using credit reporting as a substitute for concerted work efforts is significant. After all, if a former tenant won’t pay, after calls and letters from an agency, what else can an agency do but ding the tenant’s credit? Credit reporting allows agencies to place millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars of credit reporting hooks into the water, with little or no effort to man those hooks. The sheer volume of the credit reporting hooks cast into the water substantially benefits the agency. However, since not many of those hooks are yours your benefit is substantially less.

Many tenants did not have excellent credit at the time they rented from you. What tenants had at the time of rental was acceptable credit. A person with a high credit score cares about their credit and pays their obligations on time. Many tenants who owe money simply don’t care about their credit. The small fraction of tenants that do care, make arrangements upon move-out. Credit reporting can and has resulted in major lawsuits, some involving awards in the tens of millions of dollars. The reality is that credit reporting is just one tool to collect money; it should be done carefully, and at the right time to avoid significant potential liability, and only after other significant efforts to collect have been made. Credit reporting should never be used as a substitute for continuous work efforts. Hard and consistent work efforts, focused by constant analysis of debt to deploy multiple treatments of debt, including legal treatment, always outperforms front-end credit reporting collection models.

When collecting money for smaller or individual owners or managers, we frequently encounter two issues. The first issue is SODA inflation. SODA stands for statement of deposit account, and is otherwise known as a security deposit accounting or a security deposit disposition report. The SODA and good ledger are critical to establish balances in tenant collection cases. Two examples illustrate SODA inflation. One, the tenant leaves the place a mess, and you have to spend thirty hours getting the unit into rental condition. Yes, you may have spent the thirty hours (probably more) getting the place cleaned up, however, no judge is going to award you cleaning charges at $75, or even $50 an hour for cleaning or repairs. Two, the tenant lives in your unit for five years, but you charge the tenant $750 on their SODA to repaint the unit. Almost all judges will hold that repainting costs after five years of occupancy are “normal wear and tear”. If the rent was $1,000 a month, and the tenant owes you two months of rent, a $2400 SODA (2 months of rent, plus reasonable cleaning charges), becomes nearly a $5,000 SODA ($2000 for rent, plus $2000 for cleaning, plus $750 for painting).

The second issue, we often see, is unrealistic expectations about collecting the money. Expectations are unrealistic for two reasons. First, as pointed out, even if you won in court (on the example above), most judges are going to award closer to $2,400 rather than the nearly $5,000. Second, just because you’re owed $2,400 on a single-family lease, doesn’t mean the account is worth $2,400. This could also be true for a multifamily unit defaulted lease account. However, volume makes multi-family collections different from single owner or small portfolio collections. A multi-family apartment community has sufficient write-offs (volume), over time, to establish a realistic liquidation expectation. In other words, if an apartment writes off X over time, then they should receive Y from collections. However, a small owner or portfolio manager doesn’t have the volume to establish an average liquidation rate. If you only have a handful of accounts, you pretty much take your debtors as you find them. The account could be a home run, or a strike out. If the debtor is only marginally collectible, you’re better off accepting this fact and taking what you can get, even though you can’t make it up on other accounts, and you might have to bear the loss directly. Unrealistically holding onto the dream of being made a hundred percent whole with a bad debtor usually results in the zero recovery nightmare.


Managing Asbestos Within Rental Properties

Web Admin - Friday, January 22, 2016

Managing Asbestos Within Rental Properties submitted by Johanna Wells with Property Doctors, 2016 Denver NARPM PM Conference Vendor Chair

Deterioration from water, fire, smoke and mold damage increase the friability of asbestos within building materials, which can be found in vinyl floor tiles, glue that attaches floor tile to concrete or wood, some linoleum, plaster, joint compound, popcorn ceilings and some forms of paint, posing a danger when it becomes disturbed.

The management of asbestos is primarily governed by three regulators in Colorado and increase responsibility for owners and property managers to manage the risks involved with exposure to asbestos for residential rental housing, their employees, tenants and contractors:

  •  Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) Code regulations.
  •  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
  •  Colorado Department of Health and Environment (CDPHE).

Deterioration of building material that has been affected by water, fire, smoke or mold damage increases the friability of asbestos containing material (ACM).  ACM becomes a danger when disturbed through sawing, scraping, sanding or drilling during demolition or renovation.   

Regulations:  There are five broad categories that the EPA regulates (inspection, notification, removal, training and disposal).

  1. Inspection - It is the responsibility of the owner/property manager to have a property inspected/tested by an accredited building inspector to determine if ACM is present prior to any demolition or renovation of a rental property where 32 square feet, 50 linear feet or a 55 gallon drum of any friable ACM material will be removed.  A decontamination shower is required for certified asbestos removal personnel when 10 square feet of ACM will be demolished or removed.

  1. Notification Requirements - At least 10 working days prior to any demolition or renovation, it is the responsibility of the owner/property manager/certified contractor to provide written notice to the State of Colorado and the tenants when ACM is found in building materials that will be removed.

  1. Removal of ACM - Only disturbed ACM requires removal, owners, property managers and certified ACM contractors must reference the NESCHAP regulations and consult with the EPA and CDPHE officials prior to conducting renovation or demolition.

  1. Handling - EPA requires an accredited person trained in the regulations (applicability of regulations, notification requirement, material identification procedure, control procedures, waste disposal, reporting & record keeping and asbestos hazards and worker protection) to be on site when ACM is stripped, removed or disturbed during renovation or demolition.

  1. Waste Disposal - During any demolition or renovation activities, no visible emissions are allowed to the outside air during the collection, processing or transporting of any ACM.  It is the legal responsibility of the owner/property manager or certified contractor to properly package, transport and dispose of the wastes without posing any unnecessary risk to the public.

In some cases, violations, penalties, written warning or Notices of Violation are issued to owners who violate notification requirements.  EPA may impose up to $25,000 per day per violation for other offenses.

Final notes, regulations require that managing asbestos be an integral and ongoing part of managing rental property.  To avoid liability issues and fines use accredited asbestos building inspectors for testing and certified asbestos removal companies to protect your employees and tenants from risk of asbestos exposure. The information provided is not legal advice and should be used for informational use in making an informed decision when dealing with asbestos. 

Somebody has to pay - or do they?

Web Admin - Friday, January 08, 2016

Somebody has to pay – or do they? by Mark Tschetter, Senior Managing Partner of Tschetter Hamrick Sulzer, P.C.

Making the tenant pay for damage can be problematic. For example, a tenant’s own washing machine doesn’t stop filling and floods several units resulting in $15,000 of damage. The washer flooded because of a defective valve that failed to turn the water off. The tenant had no prior knowledge that the washing machine was defective or in need of repair, nor was the tenant’s use of the washer improper. The tenant carries renter’s insurance. However, the insurance company denies the tenant’s claim because the tenant was not at fault. OK, the insurance company won’t pay, but the tenant still has to pay the community right? Surprisingly, probably not.

For a tenant to be legally liable in damages to a landlord, the landlord must have a legal basis to hold the tenant liable. In any tenant lawsuit, a landlord must prove two things. The landlord must first establish that there is a legal basis to hold the tenant liable for what happened. If a tenant is legally liable, the landlord must also prove damages. In our scenario, the landlord clearly will be able to establish damages. The problem is proving liability. Specifically, the landlord will have difficulty proving that the tenant is legally liable for the washing machine flood.

While the law imposes legal liability based on many theories, the most common legal liability theories by far are contractual and tort. Contractually liability is straightforward. The tenant agreed to be liable so the tenant is liable. Tort (negligence) liability is based on duties imposed by society. For example, society imposes a duty to exercise caution while driving a car. Thus, if you are texting while driving a car and run over a pedestrian, you have breached the duty to exercise care while driving. Since you breached your duty of care while driving, you were negligent and are now legally liable for all damages that proximately flow from your negligent operation of a motor vehicle.

Whether a tenant owes a legal duty, in a particular circumstance, is a question of law. When an issue is a question of law, the judge decides the issue. In our washing machine flood scenario, this means a judge would decide if the tenant owed you a duty with respect to operating the washing machine. Clearly, the tenant has duties to use the washing machine properly, and to not use the washing machine if the tenant knows that the machine is defective or in need of repair. But does the tenant have a duty to monitor the washing machine? After all, if the tenant was watching his wash, he could have turned the water off.

Courts consider a number of factors in determining whether a person owes a legal duty to another. Factors include risk, the foreseeability and likelihood of injury, the magnitude of the burden of guarding against injury or harm, and the consequences of placing the burden upon an individual. No one factor is controlling. The question of whether a duty should be imposed in a particular case is essentially one of fairness under contemporary standards. Would reasonable persons recognize a duty and agree that it exists? Reasonable persons would not recognize a duty to watch a washing machine. We have all left washing machines unattended when doing our laundry. Based on Colorado legal precedent, tenants have no duty to monitor or watch washing machines when doing laundry. Without a legally imposed duty, a tenant can’t be held legally liable for negligent laundering.

What about the lease? Surely, the tenant has to be liable for the washing machine flood under the lease. Again, the answer is probably not. Contractual liability is based upon agreement. For example, in every lease, the tenant agrees to pay the rent. Thus, if a tenant doesn’t pay the rent, the tenant breaches the agreement and is legally liable in contract for the rent. To hold the tenant legally liable in our scenario, your lease must have a clause where the tenant agreed to be liable for events that cause damage even if the tenant was not negligent. Based upon our experience, most leases do not hold tenants strictly liable for events regardless of negligence or fault.

Rather, most leases make tenants liable for intentional or negligent acts, including both THS’s lease product and the National Apartment Association’s Blue Moon lease. For example, a tenant shall always be liable to an owner for any damage caused, whether intentionally or through negligence, by tenant any occupant, family member, guest, invitee, licensee of tenant, or any other person on the premises or the community due to tenant. Negligence includes acts of commission (breaching a duty by overt act) and acts of omission (breaching a duty by failing to do something the tenant should have done, e.g. leave the heat turned on during the middle of winter when the tenant is absent from the unit for an extended period of time).

OK, we get it. The tenant isn’t going to be held liable based on a negligence theory and our current lease probably doesn’t protect us. So the solution is to fix our lease, right? Yes, we definitely recommend fixing washer and dryer language in your lease as a step in the right direction. You should add language similar to the following: Regardless of Tenant’s knowledge or fault, Tenant assumes all risks and agrees to assume strict liability for all damages to the Premises, to other units, and to personal property in the Premises and other units caused by the Tenant’s equipment, including but not limited to leaks and flooding. Owner’s insurance will not cover such damages. Tenant agrees to indemnify Owner and Agent and their agents for any and all damages of any kind arising from Tenant’s equipment.

We know what you’re thinking. If a strict liability clause is great for washers, we should extend strict liability to all circumstances. Specifically, by agreement, let’s make the tenant liable for every event regardless of fault, and regardless if the tenant has any connection to the damage. Such a clause is known as a blanket indemnity clause. Blanket indemnity clauses shift all risk of damages from one party to another regardless of fault or the circumstances. Courts have routinely held that blanket indemnity clauses in residential leases are unenforceable. A well- written lease should impose liability on tenants for damages negligently or intentionally caused by the tenant. When your lease’s general damage clause goes from being based on fault to a blanket indemnity clause, you risk having a court ruling that your damage clause is unenforceable even in fault cases.

In no-fault cases, specific strict liability clauses will give you a chance, but unfortunately a specific strict liability clause won’t guarantee that you will be reimbursed for flooding washing machine damages for several reasons. First, and foremost, even with a strict liability clause (the tenant is liable for washing machine related damages regardless of fault), you may not prevail in court. Absent knowledge (tenant knew that the machine was in need of repair or was defective) or fault (tenant overloaded machine or used improperly), many, if not most, judges may be reluctant to stick a tenant with a $15,000 repair bill for doing what every American does, starting the washing machine and leave.

Assuming no knowledge or fault upon the part of the tenant and even if you have a strict liability clause, a judge could easily find that the tenant is not liable for a washing machine flood based on the adhesion contract or unconscionability doctrines. An adhesion contract is a contract drafted unilaterally by a business enterprise and forced upon an unwilling and often unknowing public. An adhesion contract is generally not bargained for, but is offered on a “take it or leave it” basis. Similarly, a finding of unconscionability can result based upon overreaching on the part of one of the parties that results from an inequality of bargaining power. Based on Colorado law, these doctrines should not defeat a limited strict liability contract clause. However, courts can and do use both the adhesion contract or unconscionability doctrines to justify not holding tenants liable.

Strict liability clauses also do not solve the renter’s insurance problem. Even if you have a strict liability clause and the court enters judgment against the tenant for the damage, the tenant’s renter’s insurance, in all likelihood, still won’t pay the claim. Again, renter’s liability insurance only covers negligent acts on the part of the tenant. Renter’s liability insurance does not cover damages based upon the intentional acts of a tenant or damages that result without tenant fault. Your sole remedy at that point is to collect from the tenant. Because most tenants can’t pay a $15,000 judgment, you’re left with a $15,000 judgment against the tenant that you can’t collect.

Absent fault, tenants are not always liable for all damage events. If a tenant is not at fault, you should carefully evaluate the tenant’s legal liability. The only thing worse than a tenant or an insurance company not paying is wasting your time, effort, and more money pursuing a futile claim. Scenarios involving malfunctioning appliances such as washers are among the most common damage scenarios where a tenant may not be at fault. If your community or your portfolio keeps incurring losses, you should evaluate changing your lease to impose strict liability on the tenant regardless of fault for specific damage scenarios. However, strict liability should only be imposed in limited circumstances. Otherwise, you may risk your ability to recover damages from the tenant in cases where the tenant is clearly at fault.

Denver NARPM January 26th luncheon

Web Admin - Wednesday, January 06, 2016

Join the Denver Chapter of NARPM for our monthly luncheon/meeting.

January's Topic: Marcia Waters, Director of the Colorado Division or Real Estate will be sharing valuable information regarding significant licensing changes impacting all Colorado property managers, and answering our questions. You don't want to miss this very important information coming directly from the division head of our industry's regulatory agency!

Date: 1-26-2016 | 11:15 am - 1:00 pm
Location:  Denver Police Protective Association

Click here to sign up now!

Happy 2016, Denver NARPM Chapter!

Web Admin - Monday, December 14, 2015

Happy 2016, Denver NARPM Chapter! by Susan Melton, 2016 Denver NARPM Chapter President

Last year was one of the busiest years ever for anyone in the residential property management business.  The improved sales market encouraged reluctant landlords to sell rental properties leaving many of us with smaller property management portfolios.  We were all extremely busy handling sales and turnovers while raising monthly rents and dealing with the hot rental market. 

Many thanks go to Cookie Hooper for serving as our 2015 NARPM Denver Chapter President while dealing with the crazy busy year 2015 turned out to be.  The leadership team managed to launch our new website and change the structure of our chapter leadership to improve communication and productivity.  Thank you Cookie for your hard work and dedication!  And thank you for continuing to serve as our 2016 Past President.

A few of our valued, dedicated members are leaving the leadership team this year.  We are very grateful to Lyle Haas, 2015 Treasurer; Kathy Worley, 2015 Secretary; and Paula Haas, 2015 Treasurer helper and Good Neighbor Committee Chair, for everything they have done for and their dedication to our chapter.  They may be lost without chapter duties to take care of so please check in on them at the next meeting!

Congratulations to Bill Martin for earning his RMP designation!  Bill has served as our 2015 Membership Chair and is looking forward to serving our chapter as the 2016 President Elect. 

This year’s additions to the Leadership Team are Kate Roth 2016 Secretary, Ben Parham 2016 Treasurer, and Greg Bacheller 2016 Membership Chair.  Thank you to everyone who serves on the leadership team.  These folks are the cream of the crop, every one of them dedicated to the excellence of NARPM Denver Chapter!

NARPM Denver Chapter leadership met earlier this month for our annual planning session.  The result of this jamb packed day is a yearlong schedule of exciting and educational events.  The first class of the year is the CE Required Annual Update class to be held January 26th, click here to sign up.

Happy New Year!  I look forward to serving as your 2016 NARPM Denver Chapter President.  Susan Melton

Thanksgiving Holiday Donation

Web Admin - Friday, December 04, 2015

Denver Chapter of NARPM holiday donation

Just prior to Thanksgiving, an article appeared in the Denver Post regarding the lack of funds needed to continue the program that “Daddy Bruce” supported in providing meals to thousands in the community at Thanksgiving. Daddy Bruce began donating his time and money to serve Thanksgiving meals to the needy from his Bar-B-Q restaurant located at 34th & Gilpin from 1963 until his death in 1994. Along the way, many organizations including members of the Denver Broncos and the Denver Police Department donated to his cause. After his death, the charitable event was eventually sponsored by the Epworth United Methodist Church, and the Epworth Foundation. After reading in the Denver Post about this worthy cause. the Denver Chapter of the National Association of Residential Property Managers (NARPM) contributed $500 to the Epworth Foundation. 

(Denver NARPM Chapter President, Cookie Hooper, presenting a $500.00 check to L J, the coordinator for the Daddy Bruce Foundation)

The Denver NARPM Chapter, a professional organization whose members manage single family homes, has set a goal to make an annual contribution to support “Daddy Bruce” through the Epworth Foundation as our organization strongly believes in giving back to the community we serve.

Thank You Holiday Donors!

Web Admin - Thursday, December 03, 2015

Thank You, Holiday Donors!

The Denver NARPM Chapter would like to say thank you to our donors that participated in our "Holiday Spirit Packages" benefiting Meals on Wheels, a fantastic program that serves 600,000 meals every year through Volunteers of America.


Gloria Guhl
MB Liberty Associates

ORNAMENT - The following donor(s) gave $20.00, providing 10 hot meals:

RED BOW - The following donor(s) gave $10.00, providing 5 hot meals:


Thank you to all of our "Holiday Spirit Packages" donors; your charity goes a long way to benefit those in need, and we are proud you are all an active part of the Meals on Wheels program!

Holiday Donations

Web Admin - Monday, November 16, 2015

Holiday Spirit Packages!

This year the Denver NARPM Chapter is asking for donations to Meals on Wheels, a fantastic program that serves 600,000 meals every year through Volunteers of America, and they need our help to reach this goal!

Available Packages: 

RED BOW- $10.00 (Provides 5 hot meals)

- A red bow with your name will be added to our donation tree.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

ORNAMENT - $20.00 (Provides 10 hot meals)

- An ornament with your name will be placed on a table at the event.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

GIFT PACKAGE - $80.00 (Provides 40 hot meals)

- A wrapped gift box with your name on all four sides, includes a surprise inside, used as center piece on a table.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

- Name or Company acknowledgement at the event.

- Name or Company acknowledgement on the Denver Chapter NARPM Website.

GIFT BASKET - $120.00 (Provides 60 hot meals)

- A basket with your name on it will be placed on a table at the event.

- Name will appear on Sponsor Board at the event.

- Name or Company acknowledgement at the event.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

- Name or Company acknowledgement on the Denver Chapter NARPM Website.

HOLIDAY SPIRIT - $250.00 (Provides hot meals and visits for 5 elders for an entire month)

- A large poinsettia with your name on it will be placed on a table at the event.

- Name will appear on Sponsor Board at the event.

- Name or Company acknowledgement at the event.

- Name listed on the Sponsorship Banner at event.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

- Name or Company acknowledgement on the Denver Chapter NARPM Website.

SANTA’S BAG - $500.00 (Provides hot meals and visits for 10 elders for an entire month)

- Santa will arrive at the event and thank your company for sponsoring.

- Name will appear on Sponsor Board at the event.

- Name or Company acknowledgement at the event.

- Name listed on the Sponsorship Banner at event.

- Name or Company will be listed in the January issue of the NARPM Newsletter.

- Name or Company acknowledgement on the Denver Chapter NARPM Website.

November 2015 CE Class

Web Admin - Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Join the Denver Chapter of NARPM for a 3 hour CE class.

CE Class Topic:  Security Deposit Processes and Procedures

This 3 hour CE class, taught by Robert Lynde, MPM©, RMP© will review the Real Estate Commissions requirements regarding the full cycle of handling a tenant(s) deposit, and delve into how five highly respected property management companies handle security deposit disposition and discuss disputes that went to court. 

Event Date: 11-11-2015 1:00 pm
Event End Date: 11-11-2015 4:00 pm
Member/Support Staff Cost: $30
Non-Member Cost: $45
Location: DMAR West Office

National Association of Residential Property Managers

Copyright © 2019 Denver NARPM. All Rights Reserved.
Website built by PMW | Tenant Screening | Sitemap | Areas Served | Join NARPM