ADT Alarm Service Agreement: Bullet-Proof Exculpatory, Fraud-In-The-Inducement, and Warranty Waiver Provisions
Florida Arbitration Law . com:
What is in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Every rose has its thorn.
Pick your cliché. The case of John and Elaine Rose and State Farm Mutual Insurance Company v. ADT Security Services, Inc. may become quotable in Florida precedent.
ADT hit a home run securing the enforceability of its home security system service agreement – at least in the First District – and the court was kind enough to provide the actual exculpatory provisions and fraud/warranty waivers for the rest of us to peruse.
The Rose family bought a security system which included a fire alarm. After being struck by lightening, the house “burned to the ground.” The Roses sued claiming that, inter alia, the ADT salesman promised that, with the system, they would “never lose their house to a fire” and that it “would save the lives of the Roses’ dog and family…” (State Farm was involved as the subrogation plaintiff and it appears the Roses survived to make the insurance claim; no word on the dog.).
ADT won summary judgment. Appellate court agreed. The ADT service agreement language carried the day.
The trial and appellate courts flat out assumed the Rose’s allegations that the ADT salesperson promised them everything. But, for fraud in the inducement, the court held that “a party cannot establish justifiable reliance and may not recover in fraud for an alleged false statement when proper disclosure of the truth is subsequently revealed in a written agreement between the parties.” We’ll quote that contract language below.
The ADT contract also knocked out claims of implied warranty of merchantability and implied warranty of of fitness. To overcome the first warranty, the contract must be in writing, conspicuous, and use the magic word, “merchantability.” Fitness warranties…