Re: Brinks Home Security Gets Caught Stealing From Its Customers

[G. Morgan <no_em@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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.


--

"Newspaper claims car thief transformed into a goat"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090124/ap_on_fe_st/odd_goat_thief_5