Q: About how PMs handle tenant dmgs and owner repairs

[Sean Honeycutt]

So I've been using this property management firm for a few years now and we had our first real "tenant damage" between tenants (I guess this timeframe is considered turning, not flipping, but if you have a better term for the time when repairs are being done between tenants let me know.) 

We had minor stuff before - patches that needed painting, handles that needed tightening, things just not really being clean enough - you know the typical "stuff" you expect.  This was more.  Screens were ripped, there were softball size holes in walls, stuff like that.  Still I wouldn't consider it bad, but you know more than normal?

Anyway, I'm an extremely handy guy.  I'll not claim to be a carpenter or plumber, but I was a licensed electrician in the IBEW, so I am used to getting my hands dirty.  Replacing screens, patching walls, and other repairs are not outside my bailiwick by any means.  Yet for some reason, suddenly my Property Management company is all defensive because I refused to let them do the repairs, I did them myself.  Told them to just bill what they would have paid their guys to do the work and get out of my way (they needed 10 days to start work, I was done in 3 days.)  I figured if they found fault in the repair, they could just redo it and bill for them instead of paying me for it.

Is there some logical reason, as the owner, I shouldn't be allowed to do repairs for tenant related damages?  I never got push back on doing things like changing locks, reprogramming garage door openers, or the other typical stuff - it's just now with the tenant damages the property management company is having issues.  (I did it anyway, it's my house dang it.  I'm not paying $65/hour for someone to patch and paint a wall, not when I have teenagers I can teach how to patch and paint a wall and make it look good when they're done.) 

I want to note, I sent them copies of the receipts as well, and while I am sure they have volume discounts, I am pretty sure they use the same hardware stores that offer me a veteran discount so the price can't be off by more than a couple percent - which would be owed back from the tenant in either regard, wouldn't it?

Just curious.  More concerned they were pushing back for some sort of legal reason - not necessarily a law, but maybe to make court easier if they had to go to court?