The first time I received a ‘new generation’ complaint from a tenant, I was taken aback.
It wasn’t necessarily the substance of the complaint that surprised me.
It was the way it had been communicated.
It was long. Very formal. It cited legislation. It outlined the landlord’s alleged obligations, demanded specific action within a particular timeframe and threatened escalation to the Property Redress Scheme or Environmental Health if the matter wasn’t resolved.
And this was the tenant’s first communication about the issue.
I was used to something very different.
“Hi, I’ve noticed X issue. Would it be possible to get someone to have a look please?”
This felt like a completely different world.
Then it happened again, and I honestly asked myself:
“Is this how the younger generation are communicating now?”
By the third such complaint, however, I began to understand what I was actually looking at.
These complaints were being written by AI.
And that changed the way I responded.
Behind the formal language is still a person
The more I saw these complaints, the more I began to recognise the human being behind the carefully constructed language.
A tenant might be worried, frustrated or anxious about an issue.
They may struggle to articulate themselves.
They may want to make sure their concerns are taken seriously.
They may also be trying to build a case for the outcome they believe they are entitled to.
So they ask AI to help them write a formal complaint…
And AI does exactly what it has been asked to do.
The result can sound remarkably authoritative.
It can contain legislation, deadlines, demands and escalation routes — even where some of the tenant’s interpretation of the legislation may not be correct.
But the formality of the language doesn’t necessarily mean the tenant is looking for a confrontation.
In fact, in one of the complaints we received, it was clear that the tenant had simply asked their AI assistant to help them communicate what felt important to them.
They just hadn’t asked it to preserve the relationship while doing so!
That distinction matters.
We shouldn’t confuse formal communication with hostility.
But a formal complaint does require a formal response
Understanding the person behind the complaint doesn’t mean ignoring the complaint itself.
If a tenant has formally raised an issue, particularly where they have cited legislation and indicated that they intend to escalate it, it needs to be treated seriously and professionally.
That means we don’t simply react to the tone.
And we don’t simply accept the tenant’s interpretation of events.
Instead, we investigate.
We review the history of the matter.
We check the relevant legislation.
We consider the tenancy and property history.
We review previous correspondence.
We inspect the property where appropriate.
We document our findings.
And we respond to the substantive issues raised.
Sometimes the tenant will be right.
Sometimes they won’t.
Sometimes there will be action we need to take.
Sometimes the appropriate response will be to explain why a particular demand isn’t actually required.
The important thing is that the response is based on facts, evidence, legislation and professional judgement, rather than emotion.
Interestingly, we’re using AI too
There’s another side to this story.
As tenants have increasingly started using AI to formulate formal complaints, we’ve also found AI incredibly useful in helping us formulate our responses.
But there’s an important distinction.
We’re not asking AI:
“Write a response to this tenant.”
We provide the expertise first.
We give it the background to the matter, the tenancy history, the relevant legislation, our inspection findings, previous correspondence, the tenant’s concerns and our own professional judgement.
We have a lengthy conversation about the situation.
We challenge assumptions.
We test different interpretations.
We identify gaps.
And then we use AI to help us communicate our professional response in a way that is appropriately formal, clear and thorough.
The expertise and judgement remain ours.
AI simply becomes another tool in the professional toolkit.
The fourth complaint felt very different
By the time we received our fourth AI-generated complaint, something had changed.
Not in the way the tenant communicated.
In the way we received it.
We weren’t taken aback by the formality.
We didn’t become defensive.
We recognised immediately what we were looking at and knew how to handle it.
We took the matter through our formal complaints process.
We carried out the appropriate investigations.
We documented what we found.
We responded carefully to the issues raised.
And then we followed up with the tenant afterwards to make sure they felt the matter had been adequately addressed.
The outcome was interesting.
The tenant actually apologised for the formality of their original complaint.
And they expressed their appreciation for the thoroughness with which we’d handled the situation.
It was a useful reminder that the tone of the first communication isn’t necessarily the tone of the relationship that follows.
The bigger lesson for landlords and agents
I suspect AI-generated tenant complaints are only going to become more common.
And I don’t think the answer is for landlords and agents to become defensive about them.
Nor is the answer to assume that everything written by AI is correct.
The answer is to become better at what we do.
To be able to distinguish between the person and the words.
To understand when a complaint needs to be treated formally.
To investigate rather than react.
To know the legislation.
To keep good records.
To gather evidence.
To communicate clearly.
And to use technology intelligently to support — rather than replace — professional judgement.
AI may be changing the way tenants communicate with landlords.
It can also change the way landlords and agents respond.
But neither side can outsource responsibility for making good decisions.
Because behind every formal complaint is still a human being.
And good property management still requires us to treat them like one.