Narrative: 1.The homeowner, broker and property manager conspired to charge a “pet” deposit for a service dog. The assistant property manager had been given proof the dog was a service dog and was to relay that information to the property manager. 2.The property manager then in fact did charge the deposit in violation of the law. 3.By charging this “pet” excessive deposit ($1,000 dollars versus the usual $250 dollars) they then exceed the lawful deposit of two times the monthly rent in TOTAL. 4.The broker also failed to return $385.73 of the deposit upon move out after a water leak in the main supply line to the house; which I believe to be in violation of multiple CA laws. 5.They also rented the house in violation of multiple Building Code & Safety laws and regulations.