Re: Florida Statute According to RLB

[shb*NO*SPAM*@comporium.net (Si Ballenger)]

On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 17:46:01 -0500, "Bob Worthy"
<securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> >the link has been posted by me and the entire statute posted by rlb.  see
>> >part II  ELECTRICAL AND ALARM SYSTEM CONTRACTING
>> >sections 489.501-489.538.  oh never mind.  if you can't even find it
>after
>> >being led. oh never mind
>>
>> No wonder you didn't post the link. If you are not executing
>> alarm associated contracts for compensation, then you are not an
>> "Alarm system contractor" per the definition provided in the
>> statute. Duh..! ;)
>>
>> 489.505  Definitions.--As used in this part:
>>
>> 2)  "Alarm system contractor" means a person whose business
>> includes the execution of contracts requiring the ability,
>> experience, science, knowledge, and skill to lay out, fabricate,
>> install, maintain, alter, repair, monitor, inspect, replace, or
>> service alarm systems for compensation, including, but not
>> limited to, all types of alarm systems for all purposes. This
>> term also means any person, firm, or corporation that engages in
>> the business of alarm contracting under an expressed or implied
>> contract; that undertakes, offers to undertake, purports to have
>> the capacity to undertake, or submits a bid to engage in the
>> business of alarm contracting; or that by itself or by or through
>> others engages in the business of alarm contracting.
>
>Repeat after me, Si:
>
>**Contractor** as defined in Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary: "one
>that contracts or is party to a contract: as in one that contracts to
>perform work or provide supplies on a large scale"
>
>**Contract** as defined in Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary: "a
>business arrangement for the supply of certain goods or services at a fixed
>price"
>
>Was that so hard!

No, pretty easy. No contract > not a contractor. If RLB is not
engaging in legally recognized contracts, he isn't a contractor
per the applicable statute. Your dictionary definition of
contract is not applicable to the statute, otherwise any business
in Florida that sells goods or services would need a contractors
license. Walmart would need a contractor license to sell an
electrical outlet box if it is sitting on the shelf with a $1
price tag on it, as it implys a business agreement to sell me the
outlet box for $1 if I give walmart the $1.

>Jesus H. Christ! Bass is right. There must be a bunch of high school drop
>outs in this trade because they are sure not proving any different here. Try
>reading and more importantly  understanding what you are reading for once!
>
>And the statute says a contract (read the definition again just incase you
>forgot it already) that is expressed or implied.....do you know what that
>means? Do you think RBL just might get paid (compensation) for his goods
>and/or services or is it out of the goodness of his heart?

If a contract isn't explictly expressed or implied, one doesn't
exist, or would be extremely hard to prove (your dime in civil
court). You are off into fanticy thinking now as you probably are
not party to any interaction with RLB where any type of contract
is expressed or implied. If you are, post up the relevant info.

>Drop it Don. Comments, like Si's above, prove what I expected from some
>here. I often wonder how most run their entire business from the dash board
>of their 82' Jitney van full of magnetic signs.
>
>From the comments here lately, it is very obvious that there are some here
>that are simply anti regulation, don't like it, don't want it, don't see a
>need for it and will debate it to death. If you are from a jurisdiction that
>requires it, hope you never have to take it your debate to court.
>
>Have a Happy New Year!
>
>