C.S TEK. Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Not to sure about this one, Id check with //.National Installer.// before you seek any legal advice. I cant see the system becomming yours when you purchased the property if its still under contract. .Thats like buying a car on finance before you sell your house and leaving it in the garage for the new owner. Dont think the car would become the new house owners, Do you??? Trade Member As Mr Kingswood said "Dont forget the 6 P's when installing.....Proper Preperation Prevents P*** Poor Performance!!!" John Kingswood(alais Nobby), Paul Earl Ltd 1985-2006
morph Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 disagree Colin,As far as I am aware stolen equipment doesn't become your property just because you bought it in good faith. I agree the installing co would usually chase the contract signer for breach of contract rather than ailienate a potential new customer (and it's easier) but the installing co still legally own the equipment as it wasn't the contract signers to sell in the first place. I don't know if the law is applied differently up there in sunny scotia, I'd have to check to be sure. Regards Bellman 44402[/snapback] Chris, Speaking from dark and dreary London, The system belongs to the New property owner, //.National Installer.// only have recourse to recoup their loss against the original owner of the property( ie the finacial cost of the equipment and the Contract). //.National Installer.// will always say it is ours if you ask them, there have been several ,members on these forums in the same circumstance, they ask //.National Installer.// and guess what it is theirs, talk to the lawyers who handled the sale and a letter later //.National Installer.// are appologising and the matter is closed, NEW owner owns the system. Neither you or I are Lawyers Chris, but I do help a lot of people out of obscure agreements and in most cases they do own the equipment. I understand where you are comming from, but I would sugggest you ring a Lawyer who offers a 1 Hour consultation and you will see what we are saying is correct. //.National Installer.// will always imply, that it is their equipment and try to get a new contract out of the customer( after all thats Business. Another point is it a good idea to be implying that prospective customers are thieves!!
bellman Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 Chris, Speaking from dark and dreary London, The system belongs to the New property owner, //.National Installer.// only have recourse to recoup their loss against the original owner of the property( ie the finacial cost of the equipment and the Contract). What you doing in london Colin, thought you liked it up north where it's cold? Anyway, as I said earlier as far as I am aware, The system is still the installing co's property, title dosn't change, please check this if you wish, title only transfers on full payment for goods. //.National Installer.// will always say it is ours if you ask them, there have been several ,members on these forums in the same circumstance, they ask //.National Installer.// and guess what it is theirs, talk to the lawyers who handled the sale and a letter later //.National Installer.// are appologising and the matter is closed, NEW owner owns the system.Again I beg to differ, is the implication that large national co's routinely defraud their customers?what you are describing is a national backing down because they really don't care about a system that costs them a few hundred pounds, if they wanted to push the point to court, they would, but it's just not financially viable to do so. The installing co could just turn up with court order to remove it,. a simlar type of thing happened to an ex employer of mine under simlar circumstances and he ended up £23,000 out of pocket for the privilage. Neither you or I are Lawyers Chris, but I do help a lot of people out of obscure agreements and in most cases they do own the equipment. I understand where you are comming from, but I would sugggest you ring a Lawyer who offers a 1 Hour consultation and you will see what we are saying is correct. //.National Installer.// will always imply, that it is their equipment and try to get a new contract out of the customer( after all thats Business. This is true Colin, we are not Lawyers, and I also understand from your point of view, it must be difficult with customers that are entangled with lots of different contracts from different companies. and as u say, this is business, just like Alarmgard will always imply that the equipment is the customers and try to get a contract out of the customer Another point is it a good idea to be implying that prospective customers are thieves!! 44461[/snapback] I didn't imply the guy was a thief, I advised him to contact his installing co to check the ownership of the equipment.. later in another post I mentioned "As far as I am aware stolen equipment doesn't become your property just because you bought it in good faith." that has nothing to do with the original poster as I'd already addresed him earlier in the thread. Final point, is it a good idea to be implying that a large national co regularly commits fraud upon it's customers? Regards Bellman Service Engineer and all round nice bloke ) The views above are mine and NOT those of my employer.
Guest Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 after speaking to a manager today,if the system is under a rental agreement the equipment belongs to //.National Installer.// as its an asset,the maintenance contract is with the prev owner but unless it was an outright sale the equipment is //.National Installer.//,s tho the customer can buy it for the price of the assest value,and they will and do take legal action to recover the equipment..
morph Posted March 16, 2005 Posted March 16, 2005 What you doing in london Colin, thought you liked it up north where it's cold?I am in the south all the time, Chris. Anyway, as I said earlier as far as I am aware, The system is still the installing co's property, title dosn't change, please check this if you wish, title only transfers on full payment for goods. Again I beg to differ, is the implication that large national co's routinely defraud their customers? No simply its normal business practice to try and gain a customer, as most companies would. what you are describing is a national backing down because they really don't care about a system that costs them a few hundred pounds, if they wanted to push the point to court, they would, but it's just not financially viable to do so. Exactly The installing co could just turn up with court order to remove it,. a simlar type of thing happened to an ex employer of mine under simlar circumstances and he ended up £23,000 out of pocket for the privilage. Not for an alarm! This is true Colin, we are not Lawyers, and I also understand from your point of view, it must be difficult with customers that are entangled with lots of different contracts from different companies. and as u say, this is business, just like Alarmgard will always imply that the equipment is the customers and try to get a contract out of the customer Alarmgard will always find out who actually owns the equipment, this why we pay a Lawyer a fee for advice and yes we will always try to get a customer to agree to annual maintenance contract, but we also offer a one of service for customers in this type of circumstances. You may also note that I dont generally offer to take a system over when a customer is in this circumstances even if st albans is only an hour from our London office I didn't imply the guy was a thief, I advised him to contact his installing co to check the ownership of the equipment.. Okay fair enough But you did imply he was handling stolen goods but there again are they stolen as they still remain in the property that they were installed later in another post I mentioned "As far as I am aware stolen equipment doesn't become your property just because you bought it in good faith." that has nothing to do with the original poster as I'd already addresed him earlier in the thread. Final point, is it a good idea to be implying that a large national co regularly commits fraud upon it's customers? No fraud Implied, simply making information known on the facts that I have to hand and can easilly substantiate should the need arise. Regards Bellman 44468[/snapback]
norman Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Woo Woo. Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
C.S TEK. Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 //.National Installer.// and Secom should take a Tip of Initial and Stop renting. Think of the money these companys would save. chris Trade Member As Mr Kingswood said "Dont forget the 6 P's when installing.....Proper Preperation Prevents P*** Poor Performance!!!" John Kingswood(alais Nobby), Paul Earl Ltd 1985-2006
norman Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 They don't rent anymore. Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
Brian c Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 Why would they save money, why have they stopped rentals? Some customers would rather rent for tax purposes and so that they don't have to worry about repair/replacement costs. If you don't know......ask.
Guest Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 Nothing wrong with renting if it's done properly. I think the problem with //.National Installer.//'s implementation of renting was lack of communication as to how it worked and who owned\didn't own what.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.