RP PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT INC

Landlord profile

Rp Properties Management Inc

on the county rolls as RP PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT INC · mail to 3228 CR 4713 LA CO TX 78039No Texas filing under this name

$1,161,120Market value

10Properties

7,960Sq ft living area

≈7Units estimated from floor area

The unit figure is the only estimate in that row: floor area divided by 900 square feet, so it is the third figure restated

Portfolio totals

10parcels on the rolls

7 of them are inside the registry lookup scope

≈7units, estimated

Floor area divided by 900 sq ft, not a count

$1,161,120total market value

County roll value across all 10 parcels

$77,080median parcel value

The middle parcel, which a total hides

County spread: Medina 9, Bexar 1
ZIPs: 78039, 78066, 78210
Parcels whose tax bill leaves Texas: 0 of 10
Parcels flagged owner-occupied: 0 of 10
Most recent purchase date on the roll: 20096
Earliest purchase date on the roll: 18781

Source: 2 county appraisal rolls · roll year 2025 to 2026 · purchase dates are the roll's own recent-purchase field and are not reliable deed dates

Download this portfolio as CSV

The Texas business filing behind this name

Texas has no business filing under this name

The registry answered, and the answer was that nothing is filed in Texas under this name. That is a finding. Plenty of rentals are held by a person under their own name, by a trust, or by an out-of-state company that never registered here

This owner is in the no record state. The three states are different claims, and the method page gives the current count for each

Source: Texas Comptroller franchise tax registry · 7 registry rows carry this owner

Every property on the rolls under this owner

10 parcels held by this owner, with size, age, acquisition date, and market value
Parcel ID	Address	County	Market value ↓	Sq ft	Built	Acquired
000000034310	11280 CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$465,790	3,248	1912	19233
000000380870	1811 MCKINLEY AVE SAN ANTONIO 78210	bexar	$185,000	1,248	1930	20096
000000030225	11619 CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$160,730	1,200	1984	18984
000000018692	11609 CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$115,060	1,708	1910	18984
000000036061	CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$98,510	0	not on the roll	18781
000000515845	11631 CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$55,650	556	1950	not on the roll
000000512692	RIO MEDINA 78066	medina	$21,480	0	not on the roll	not on the roll
000000512695	RIO MEDINA 78066	medina	$20,280	0	not on the roll	not on the roll
000000512694	RIO MEDINA 78066	medina	$20,270	0	not on the roll	not on the roll
000000515784	11615 CASTRO AVE LA CO 78039	medina	$18,350	0	not on the roll	not on the roll
10 properties			$1,161,120	7,960

Values are the county market value on the roll, not a sale price · roll year 2025 to 2026

Companies linked to this one

There is no network to draw yet. Linking one company to another needs a franchise filing on both ends, and this owner has no matched filing. The links this tool will draw are a shared officer, a shared registered agent, and a shared mailing address, in that order of strength

How to read the end of a chain

A chain can end three ways, and the difference matters. Two of them are answers. One of them is a gap in what we know, and it is drawn as a gap so you never mistake it for an answer

Matched

The name on the roll lines up with a Texas business filing. We show both names side by side so you can reject a bad match yourself

25,455 owners of the 71,735 inside the coverage rules, 35.5% so far

No record

We searched and Texas has no business registration under this name. That is a finding, not a miss: plenty of rentals are held by a person or an out-of-state entity that never registered here. The line stops on a hard bar because the search finished

37,870 owners so far

No answer

No usable answer came back for this name. Almost all of these are lookups the registry rejected outright, which is our query failing, not Texas reporting that nothing is filed. That claim is the middle column, and this is not it. We do not know either way here, so the line trails off dashed and open

8,410 owners in scope: rejected lookup or never queried

One more case borrows that same dashed ending: a parcel outside the coverage rules. The registry was never asked about it, on purpose, so the chain is a gap here too, and the page names the rule that put it outside instead of implying an answer is on its way. 147,384 of the 2,117,593 parcels on the rolls are inside the rules

11.7%

of the 71,735 owners inside the coverage rules have no registry answer. The scrape has finished, so these are not owners waiting in a queue: almost all of them are lookups the registry rejected. Read them as unknown, never as unregistered