Re: cleaner wiring solution needed (resend)

[Crash Gordon® <NONE@xxxxxxxx>]

"paid for" being a key phrase here.=20

If you haven't paid your phone bill the phone company has the right to =
impede your use of your phone (which you own), so does an alarm company =
if you haven't paid your monitoring bill in long time, this can apply to =
many different business models. Of course you have a right not to =
*enforce* any terms of a contract you enter into.

Locking a panel out of spite or punitive reasons other than terms of =
contract not being adhere to, is of course not ethical.



"Robert L. Bass" <robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message =
news:n56dnWbMCYpSjaPfRVn-vg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > I can't argue with that.  Unlawful conversion
> > is "larceny"...
>=20
> You learned that because I posted it earlier.
>=20
> > We're not talking about that though...
>=20
> Yes, we are.  You have no knowledge of US law.
>=20
> > We're talking about the obligations outlined in a contract for =
monitoring=20
> > which the client signs
> > and agrees to...
>=20
> Wrong again.  Once you sell someone an alarm system and it has been =
paid=20
> for, you have no legal right to impede the buyer's use of that system. =
 That=20
> includes his right to full access to all of its features and =
functions.  You=20
> cannot take away his access (unlawful conversion) to his own property =
simply=20
> because it's convenient to your business model.
>=20
> You can argue this until you're blue in the face and you'll still be=20
> completely wrong.
>=20
> > Even Bob Campbell (whom you've indicated
> > you truly respect) restricts access to installer
> > level programming on his monitored accounts.
>=20
> Not once the monitoring contract is over, he doesn't.  I have no =
problem=20
> with companies contractually agreeing with monitored clients to limit=20
> clients' access while the system is being monitored.  That is not what =
we=20
> are discussing.
>=20
> Continued use of lockout codes *after* the monitoring contract is =
completed=20
> for the purpose of making it difficult or more costly for the client =
to=20
> change service providers (or to DIY if he so chooses) is illegal =
immoral=20
> and, unfortunately, a very common practice in the industry.
>=20
> > Are you calling him a "thief" as well?
>=20
> Nope.  You're up to your usual tactics, trying to twist the discussion =
away=20
> from the facts.
>=20
>=20
>