The GC knew that the information from the 3rd party would have been used by us in a dispute so there was they did not put up a fight.

I do not think they are disputing us keeping the deposit, but they do not want to pay anything above that.

If you substitute your buyer's duty with a broker's duty and then you behave as a broker, then you are a broker.The contract is only relevant when there is a dispute, then a judge will read the contract to determine what duties were agreed.

They are in the process of filing a dispute which I don't think will go through.

Any dispute or difference arising out of or in connection with this contract shall be determined by the appointment of a single arbitrator to be agreed between the parties, or failing agreement within fourteen days, after either party has given to the other a written request to concur in the appointment of an arbitrator, by an arbitrator to be appointed by the President or a Vice President of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators."

Fingers crossed that we can get a resolution, because at this point, the woman owes us ~$6,000 before any late fees / penalties.

They have had multiple disputes about what room "A" is to sleep in because of this. 

Guest agrees this policy supersedes VRBO / Homeaway policy.I'm not a lawyer so i'm not 100% sure this would hold up, but it seems like it should do the trick when sending to credit card companies as proof for disputes. 

I'm looking to evaluate the cost/ benefit of disputing the assessed value due to the square footage error.The property value metrics are as follows:Total Value + Assessed Value for 2018 Tax Year = $426,700Sales Price (Purchased October 2017) = $620,000FY2018 Residential Tax Rate = $12.13Current property tax bill = approximately $5,175.My scenario is as follows: I plan on renting the unit for the next several years at worst.

So to sum up the current state is: I have sent certified mail to them and ready to go to a court in case it does not help but still have no idea how to build my position.I think more or less clear is only for with stove drip pans: the law says a landlord cannot charge for normal wear and tear, hence they will have to prove that all 4 pans are in need of replacement and still it is going to be prorated depending on average pans life and cost, which is also can be disputable.