An example of an ADT dealer and the lies

["Sonicduck" <jones1019@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Stephen P Scott, CPA [sscott@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

RE: ADT Security, St. Louis, MO - told not responsible to move system
to new address, despite this obligation by ADT being in writing from an
authorized dealer - told must fulfill rest of 3 year monitoring
contract despite no longer living at the monitoring address


I purchased an ADT Security system from a salesperson based on a
telemarketing call. I was to receive a free wireless security system as
long as I subscribed to a 3 year monitoring contract. I told the
salesperson that we were planning on moving in the next year or so. He
verbally responded that if we moved anytime during the 3 year contract,
the system would be moved for free with us. He later put this in
writing for my files. The security system and monitoring worked fine
for a year and a half until we addressed the move.

I called to schedule moving of the system in April, 2003. ADT responded
by saying they weren't responsible and would not move the system. We
found it was an authorized ADT dealership that had sold us the system
and sold the contract to ADT. Apparently, this is common practice. They
said the dealership was responsible for the move, not ADT. ADT would
not tell me who the dealership was. I looked up the paperwork and sure
enough another company name was on the installation contract too with
ADTs. No one pointed out at the time of sale that we weren't actually
working with ADT.

Catch 22:
To make a long story short, ADT said we had no choice but to keep
paying them because they had purchased the monitoring contract in good
faith from the dealership, but any promises made were not their
responsibility. We would have to get the dealership, who was no longer
in business, to move the system. That meant that I had to pay even if I
couldn't use the system.

What's really interesting is that ADT keeps saying that they only
provide monitoring, and that's what I'm paying them for. When I offered
to put in a new system myself so that it could be monitored, they
changed their story. No, sorry, the contract is tied to the address.
You can't quite escape from their logic.

So, is it worth paying out the 75% of the remaining contract to get rid
of this horrible company. Obviously, it's cheaper to do that than to
hire an attorney, and they know it. It's another case of the big
company against the little guy. ADT gets to blame the dealerships for
all their problems and broken promises. The funny thing is, they do
know what the dealerships are doing and don't stop the bad practices. I
guess the money is just too good.

BBB and Attorney General's Office
PS: The Better Business Bureau had no affect. ADT just blew them off.
The MO Attorney General's office has been put off from May until
November, 2003. ADT says they still need more time to investigate the
matter.

Waiting is good for ADT and expensive for me as they charge my credit
card 29.99/month. They even had the gall to bash the Attorney General's
office of Missouri. ADT claimed the Attorney General's office had
probably lied to me about investigating the matter as ADT had no notes
in their file.

Buyer beware of ADT. And the real kicker is after hours of research I
found there are many other reliable security vendors and self install
kits available today. Monitoring can be found for 1/3 to 1/2 the costs
too without long term contracts!