Re: Problem with ADT Security Company

["R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

True enough on the surface for sure. However, how many salespeople tell the
client about this little clause when they first sign the contract ?
Realistically, none. And how many people read each and every word of any
contract they sign before they sign it ? Again, almost none ! Hell, I can't
even get them to read my standard one page agreement !! Most people still
deal with companies and each other from a basis of trust, and unless
prompted otherwise, will go on that basis. And we of all people should be
trusted; after all, the client is trusting us with his security !

Business contracts should not be set up with automatic "traps" for people
signing them. If the company told the client up front about this, and the
client was stupid enough to sign off on it (by initialling the clause or
some such thing), then obviously it would be acceptable. But to sneak it in,
as some companies do for the express purpose of limiting the clients
options, is unacceptable.

But if the client is stupid enough to agree to this KNOWINGLY, then he will
be held to it (unless the law itself gives him some sort of relief on this
point)

RHC


"moe" <moe@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:IVr5f.1225$lt.568@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> that is written into the contract and if the prospective customer doesn't
> want that "auto renewal" then all they have to do is not sign the
> contract. Nobody forced anyone to sign a contract.  But if you sign then
> you should live up to what you agreed to do.
>
> "R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:LcqdnXQd2bAU2sveRVn-gA@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Mark, normally what seems to happen in most cases is the client after the
>> first contract has expired, goes on a month to month basis. Then the
>> client remains on month to month indefinately. Then as you say, the
>> client can terminate with a months notice. My only objection is some
>> companies (a minority thankfully) don't operate this way; instead, they
>> continue to duplicate the original term once again unless the client
>> takes positive action, needlessly locking the client in to another long
>> term.
>>
>> That's what I'm suggesting is not a legitimate way to operate
>>
>> RHC
>>
>> "Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:_P2dnczKlc4IXMjenZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> I would normally agree with you on parts of this RH but even with a 5
>>> year
>>> agreement the customer can also cancel if he gives a 1 month notice
>>> after
>>> the contract finishes
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>