Re: Brinks Home Security Gets Caught Stealing From Its Customers

[Frank Olson <use-the-email-links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

G. Morgan wrote:
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Each of the three appellants' households entered into a contract with Brink's for a home security system. By the terms of the contracts, Brink's continued to own the systems and the homeowners paid a lease fee. Each contract included specific language obligating the homeowner to reimburse Brink's the cost it incurred for the payment of property tax on the homeowner's security system:
>
> That is messed up!  The whole point of leasing equipment (from the customer's
> standpoint) is that they don't have to pay property tax.
>
>


"Old news".  The date of the opinion was in 2001.  That's eight years ago!