April 21, 2011
******************
****************
Ken,
Every now and then you should put your attorney hat down and put the practical hat on. Yes, I am sure legally the things you say are correct but judges get testy when cases are brought before them that ethics of running a business rather than law should keep you out of a court room.
What really inspired me to write this letter is to require a subscriber to continue with their contract if their property burned down.
Certainly, this is a business decision on how I decided to run my business but if the subscriber dies, gets a job transfer out of state, house burns down (you get the idea) I do not require balance of contract. Have you been reprimanded by judges for suing for balance of contracts that you were legally correct but ethically wrong. Let me and the general alarm readers know your softer side.
STEVE GOLDBERG
ALERT SECURITY SYSTEMS INC.
NEW HAVEN, CT
************
I just recently checked our competitors contracts –Monitronics – and guess what, their limitation of liability is $1000.00
I know that before they had $250.00 and that seemed to be industry standard. Why would they change it?
I am assuming that their dealerÂ’s insurances went up accordingly.
Any thoughts about this?
HSS
**********
Ken,
Regarding SeanÂ’s comments; I recently reviewed a proposed contract agreement that according to the property manager, one of the top 3 in our industry had agreed to sign as the only agreement between parties. Although much of our standard industry monitoring agreement language had been inserted, there was no limit of liability! I was shocked, because I had always confidently told hesitant subscribers (and coached our sales staff) that every reputable alarm monitoring company requires subscribers to sign agreements with similar terms. Also surprising, the agreement was not assignable, and furthermore, the alarm company agreed to indemnify the property manager!
Rob
Indiana
**************
With regards to the continuance of monitoring........Do you still have to pay for a car if totaled in an accident? What about equipment service contracts. Shouldn't the clients insurance carrier pick up the remaining contractual obligation for resolution of the claim.
Respectfully,
John W. Yusza, Jr., President
Monitor Controls, Inc.
Wallingford, CT
***********
"Is a commercial subscriber still responsible for their monitoring contract if their building is destroyed?" Are you kidding me? At times I am dumbfounded by the lack of common sense and decency in this industry.
This "person" just lost everything and you want to collect on something that no longer exists or is needed. If you go after the $20 or $30 dollars a month you get from this account you will be telling them you don't give a crap about their safety or welfare, you just want their money. They, in turn, will tell this to everyone they know. The bad word of mouth advertising will be sever, widespread, and permanent.
When the insurance company pays the claim and new construction begins, do you think you will have a snowballs chance of installing the new fire or burglar alarm system? Will they ask you to do the monitoring or turn to one of your competitors?
It's no wonder I frequently have my competitors customers call me and ask me to take over their system. I have no sales staff or advertising campaign yet I have more work than I can keep up with. I like to think what sets me above my competitors is outstanding craftsmanship and service but more likely it's because I treat my customers like people instead of account numbers.
Tony Barlow, Pres/CEO
North Coast Signal Inc.
Fort Bragg, CA
************
Hi Love reading your info and what is happening in the industry, we have on our contract we are NOT an insurance company and if they require insurance coverage they need to contact their insurance company. Short sweet and applies common sense. We are not gambling, spend $250.00 and cash in on millions later if you can twist it to sue the contractor.
Eric Spangler