Re: Brinks Home Security Fraud

["Doug" <not@xxxxxxxx>]

"tourman" <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1826b2c5-a7a7-481f-9bf4-1fe41b15fa8a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Jun 22, 12:29 pm, "Doug" <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> "tourman" <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>
>> news:a61c78c1-4841-46be-9508-571fcc7dda25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jun 22, 7:48 am, "alarman" <nos...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> tourman wrote:

>>
>> > You're damn right I didn't charge her ! If you would have, that would
>> > make you part of the "problem" not part of the "solution"....
>>
>> Charging a fee for providing a service call doesn't necessarily make one
>> part of the problem, the problem was the keypad beeping, the solution was
>> stopping it beeping, the method of payment is another issue
>> altogether.You
>> elect not to charge a separate fee for a service call, instead charging
>> an
>> all inclusive fee and that's fine, it suits your business plan and it
>> works
>> for you and your customers, but it doesn't mean that those that charge
>> for
>> individual service calls are wrong.
>
> RHC: Quite right ! Nor have I ever said or even implied so ! (at least
> not deliberately....)


The part that threw me was when you stated
 **You're damn right I didn't charge her ! If you would have, that would
make you part of the "problem" not part of the "solution"**
somehow I misinterpreted that as a somewhat less than positive comment.

Doug