ADT's Top Dealer "The Defenders" Sued 20+ Times

By Dan Gelinas, Published on May 07, 2019

ADT's largest authorized dealer, The Defenders, has been sued more than 20 times since 2012, IPVM has verified through analyzing legal records.

In February 2019, we examined how ADT And 'The Defenders' Silent About Massive Complaints and was tipped off to numerous lawsuits by ex-Defenders employees.

In this note, we examine:

  • 20 lawsuits reviewed (with a spreadsheet and links to complaints and answers from court records)
  • 3 key themes: Employee Grievances, Customer Grievances, Violations of the TCPA
  • How one plaintiff asked for a permanent injunction on ADT and Defenders to combat their "unconscionable contracts"
  • Most cases settled out of court
  • Response from the Defenders And ADT
  • ADT sued in half of these cases, as well

**********

***** *** ********* ** certainly *** **** ***** than ***, **** *** certainly * **** ********* of ***'* ******** ***** **** *** ****** report*********:

* *********** ******* ** our ******** ********* **** a ******* ****** ** such ***** *******, ********* an ********** ******* ******** that ****** *nine-year ******* ********* **** ** ** ******** **** *** ********* *** ************* **% ** *** our new accounts in 2017.

********, *** ********* ** tightly ******* *** *** relationship **** ***** ******* shows *** ******* **** in *** **** ***** a *******'* *** **** would ******** ** ******:

*** ********* ********* ******* of $***+ ******* *** 2018, ********* *** ***** **** ******.

20 ********** ****** **** ****

**** ********** ********** ********:

**** **** **** * main ******:

  • ******** ********** ******* ** unfair ***, *****, *** wrongful ***********: * **********
  • ******** ********** ******* ** fraud, ******, ********** (********* allegedly ******* *****), ****** of ********, ********** *** racism, *** "************** *** oppressive" *********: * **********
  • ******** ********** ******* ** violations ** ************ ******** ********** *** (TCPA): * **********
  • ************, *** ***** ********* was ***** ** ******** competitor*** ********.

*** ** ** ****** at *** *** ********** since ** **** ********* lawsuits **** ******* ******* database *****, ********* *** "Defenders" *** "******* **** Home" ** *** *********. We *** *** ****** in *** ***** ***** systems **** ***** ******, for *******. ****, ***** have **** ***** ******* Defenders ***** ******** ********* pseudonyms. ** *** ********* ***** ** *** Security *** ************ ***:

********* ******** ******** ******* does ******** ***** ******** assumed *****, ********* "******* Your ****," "*********," "******** Direct," "**** ********," "**** Blue ***** *********," "**** Energy ***** ***," "**** Home," "****.****," "**** **** Security," "********," "**** ********" and "**** *********."

** *** ** ** looked **, * **** still **** ** *** time ** ******* *** one ** ***** *** due ** ***** ** the *** ** ***. All ***** ***** **** settled *** ** *****.

How ** ****** ******* ****** ** *** ** ********

**** ******** **** ******** from ******* ** *** original********* ***** ****** ** our ******** ****. *** ****** ****** a ******* **** ***** us **** ******** ***** filed ******* *** *** the ********* *** ***** and **** *** **********, as **** ** *** screenshot *****:

Most ***** ******* *** ** ***** & ********* **** *********

** *** ********* ***** that **** ****** ****** settled *** ** *****, most **** *********** *********"**** *********," ***** ******* means **** * ********* settlement *** ********** *** ********* ** giving ** ***/*** ***** to *** *****. "******* prejudice" ***** *** ********* reserves *** ***** ** sue *****. **** *** case, * **** ********* complaint, *** *********** ********* without *********.

Customer ********** *******

**** *. *** *** et ** (***** ******)(***+):**************** ****'* ********* ** which *** *********** ******* pro ** **************** (*** ******* **** Home) *** *** *** guilty ** ******, *****, and ********** ***** ** "unconscionable" ******** ** ***** contracts. *** **** *** $1.2 ******* *** ** injunction ******* **** ***** business *** ************ *** objectionable ******** ********, ** seen ** *** ********* excerpt **** **** **:

*** ********** **** ************* 6.5 ******* ********* ** the ****** ****** *** Canada. * ***** ****** or ******* ***** ** behalf ** **** ** these *.* ******* ********* of *** *** ******* Your **** ** ***********, inefficient *** ***** ****** burden *** ******** ******. Upon ***** ******* ** this *******, *** ********* requests *** ***** ***** enter ** ***** *** apermanent ********** *********** *** ********* *** ********** **** ******** ** *** *********, ********** *** ********** ******** ********* ********* ** **** ********* *** **** ******** **** ***** ********* ** ***** ******** ******** **** *** ************** *** ********** ***** *** **********. (emphasis added)

************* ** ***** ************** *** ***********, ** seen ** *** ********* from **** *:

********** *** ***, */*/* ADT ******** ******** (“***”); and *********, ***. (*/*/* Defender ******** *******), */*/* Protect **** **** (“*********”), by *** ******* *********** counsel, ************ **** **** and ***** ********** ** Plaintiff’s (****** *******) ********* (“Complaint”).

***********, **** **** **** their ******** **** ***** and **** ******** ** the ******** *** ********* signed:

********** ******** **** *** applicable **** *** ********* in ********** *** **** owed ** *********, ***** duties *** *** ***** and ********** *********** ** written *********.

****'* ******* **** *** closed ********* **, ****, and *** **** *********** **** ** *** Circuit ***** ** *** County, ******* ** ** ***** ongoing.

**** **** **** **** ADT *** *** ********* are ********** ***** **** every ******** **** ******* with * *** ********:

**** *** ********** *****. They **** *** ******** you **** ** **** to *** *** ** agree *** **** ** their *********, **** **** all **** **** .... They *** ********** ******** because ** *** ***** how ** **** ***** contracts. *** **** ****** I **** ** ** that *’* * ******.

********, **** **** *** ADT ******** *** ****** hard ** ******:

***** **** ********* **** wrong **** **** *** their ******** *** **** win. *** ******** ** unconscionable *** * ***** that ***** **** ** fraud. ****’** * ******** defendant *** *’** **** fighting **** *** * years, *** * ***’* find ****** ** **** me, ******* *** ** such * **** ************ to *****.

***** *. *** ***, and *********, ***., */*/* Protect **** ****:

*** ******** ************** ******* ********* ********** installed ***** *********** *** *********'* ******** where ** *** *** detect ***** **** * malfunctioning ***-************ **** ******** that ****** ****, ********** killing * ****** *** severely ******** *** ********:

*** **** *****/***** ******** installed ** *** ******** wall ** *** ***** residence *** *********** ********* by ********** *** *** and *********, ***. */*/* PROTECT **** ****, ** and ******* ***** ******, servants ***/** *********.

***********, *** ********* ****** that *** ********, *********, and ***** *********** ** the ****** “******** ****** by ******” ** *** Defendant’s “************, ************, *** negligence”:

*** ********* ********** *** resulting ******* ******** ** the ****** ********** *.*. and *.*., *** ********* decedent ******* *. ***** occurred ****** ** ****** of *** ************, ************ and ********** ** *** defendants, *** *** *** DEFENDERS, ***. */*/* ******* YOUR ****, ***** ******, servants ***/** *********

*** ************ ***** ********** *** ****** *** allegations, *** *******, *** they ***'* **** ****** information ** ****** ******* or *** *** *********** are ****:

*** ******* *****. ********* Defendans **** ****** ********* or *********** ********** ** form * ****** ** to *** ***** ** the *********** ********* ** the ********* ********* "***" of *********'* *********.

*** ******* ******. ********* Defendans **** ****** ********* or *********** ********** ** form * ****** ** to *** ***** ** the *********** ********* ** the ********* ********* "***" of *********'* *********.

*** ***** ********* *** filed ******** *, ****, and ** ** ***** 29th, **** ** ***** open.

Employee ********** *******

****** *. *********, ***. et **:

*** *********, ** ******* technician **** ** ****** at *********,****** **** ** ******** a ****** ******* ********* **** *** **** symptoms **** ***** **** made *********** ********* ** work *********. ** ********* time ***, ****** ** by * ******'* ****. His ********** ****** *** request *** ******** *** tech ****** ** **** immediately, ****** *** **** when *** **** ***** to ****** ******'* ****** as **** ** **** excerpt **** **** **:

**. ******* ****** **** knowledge ** *********’* ******* medical ********* *** ********** documentation, *** ******* ******** on *********’* ******** *********** Form **** ********* ***** called ** ******** ********** of *** *********, ****** and ******** ********** ********** against ********* ** *********** his ********** **** ******** for ********** *** *********** protected ****** ***** *** Family *** ******* ***** Act.

*** ********* **** ******* that *** ********** *** paid ***** **** *** his **** *** **** his *** **** ****** out ** ***** $**.**/****. The ********* ****** ** regularly ****** ~** *****/**** and **** ***** *** Fair ***** ******** *** he ** **** **** overtime.

********* ** ***** ******** simply **** *** ***********:

********* ********* ********* **, Defendant ****** *** *********’* allegations.

TCPA ********* ********** *******

*** **** ** * law ****** ** **** that ***** ** ******* unsolicited, ********* ***** *****. The *** ****** **** calls ******* ******** ******** consent *** ********* ******* unsolicited ***** **** ****** strict *****, *** ***** the******** ** *** **** Registry. *** **** **** allows *********** ** *** a ******* **** **** not ****** *** **** guidelines.

******* *. ***, *** et **:

*** ********* ***** * TCPA ********* ********* ******* ADT *** ******** ********** ***** *** ****** the ************** *********** ********* ******* ****** (ATDS)**** * *********** ***/** artificial ***** ** **** multiple *********** ***** ***** to *** ********* ******* her ***** *******:

**. **** ** ***** call *** ** ** with *** *** *** content ** **** *** every *** ** **********’ calls ** ************* *** same: “**** ** ** important ******* **** ******* Your ****, **** ********** ADT ******."

*** ********* **** ******* how *** ********* ******* the **********' *********** ******:

**. ************, ********* ********* her ******** ********* ******* provider ** *** **** the ***** ** *******.

***********, *** ********* ******* that **** ****** *** Defendants' *********** ****** *** blocked, **** ***** ***** a ********* *********** ******:

**. ***, **** ****** the **-*** ****** *** elapsed, **********, ** ** apparent ****** ** ******* Plaintiff’s ******* ** ***** the *****, ******* ***** tactic *** ***** ******* calls ** ********* ***** a ********* *********** ****** than *** *** ********* had ********* ** *******.

*** ********** ** ***** answer ** ********* ** of *** ********* ***** to ****** *****, *** deny *** *********** ** the *********:

********* ****** **** **** telephone ***** **** ******** by ** ********** ***** others **** *********** ** voicemail. ****** ** ********* admitted ******, ********* ****** the *********** ** **** paragraph.

** ******** ** ********* 35, *** ********** *** they "**** ********** *********" to ****** ******* *** allegations ** **** ** not *** ** "****** them":

********* ***** ********** ********* or *********** ** **** a ****** ** ** the ***** ** *** allegations ** **** ********* and, ***********, ****** **** allegations.

*** ********** ****** **** the **** ********* ***** using * ********* *********** number:

********* ****** **** *********.

Response **** *** *********

********* **** *** ***** not ******* ** *** suits:

** *** ***** ** DEFENDERS *** *** **** work *** **** ******** every *** ** **** families ****** *** ******* safe.

** ************ ******* ** DEFENDERS **** *** ******* publicly ** ******* ** pending ********** ** ******.

Response **** ***

*** **** *** ****** to ***, ******* **** we ***** **** ** "work **** ********* ** this."

ADT **** ** **** ** ***** *****

*** ** ***** ** a **-********* ** ** of *** ** ******** we ****** **.

Comments (2)

*** * *** ** ADT, *** ** *** several ******* **** **** set ** **** ** our ****. ** ********** goes **** ** *** as ****. *** **** has *******.

****, *** ********* **** President ** **********, *** Young, *** ******** ********* President ** *** ******** Alarm *********** ***** ** TMA-The ********** *********** (******** CSAA). ******* ******* *** a ****** ******** ** ADT **** * ***** of ** **** .. “….we **** **** ***** Associations ** ** *** dirty ****…”. **** *** we ****** *** ** his/their *** **** ****?

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,587 reports, 888 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now

Related Reports

Axis / Avigilon Patent Litigation Ends With 3 Invalidated Patents on Sep 09, 2020
The multi-year, multi-district patent litigation between Canon and Axis...
JCI Sues Genetec For Patent Infringement on Jul 13, 2020
Surprisingly, security giant JCI has sued their partner, security software...
70+ Security Industry Companies Take $50 Million PPP Funding on Jul 15, 2020
70+ security industry companies have taken more than $40 million in PPP...
Worst Over But Integrators Still Dealing With Coronavirus Problems (June Statistics) on Jun 30, 2020
While numbers of integrators very impacted by Coronavirus continue to drop,...
Genetec CEO Declares "We Don't Negotiate Payment With Patent Trolls" on Aug 11, 2020
Are patent trolls like terrorists? Genetec's CEO is coming out strongly...
17 Alarm Company Lawsuits Against Competitors Faking Them on Oct 06, 2020
Alarm companies suing rivals for faking them are commonplace, an IPVM...
The US Fight Over Facial Recognition Explained on Jul 08, 2020
The controversy around facial recognition has grown significantly in 2020,...
NDAA Blacklist Delay Amendment Fails on Jul 24, 2020
The Blacklist Clause, which bans Hikvision/Dahua/Huawei users from doing...
Dahua Taunts Australian Government, Continues To Sell Illegal Fever Cameras on Aug 10, 2020
Dahua is effectively taunting the Australian government by continuing to sell...
Exposing Fever Tablet Suppliers and 40+ Relabelers on Aug 05, 2020
IPVM has found 40+ USA and EU companies relabeling fever tablets designed,...
Integrator Acquisitions 'A Good Market' During COVID-19, Says Greybeards on Jul 28, 2020
Industry broker Ron Davis of the "Greybeards" says that the integrator and...
SIA Coaches Sellers on NDAA 889B Blacklist Workarounds on Aug 05, 2020
Last month SIA demanded that NDAA 899B "must be delayed". Now that they have...
Temperature Tablet Shootout - Dahua, Hikvision, ZKTeco, TVT + 5 More on Sep 30, 2020
Temperature tablets, aka terminal or stations, have emerged as a 'low-cost...
Panasonic i-PRO Hid Huawei, Does Damage Control on Aug 21, 2020
Panasonic i-PRO hid their usage of Huawei from the public, continues to...
UK Court Rules Police Facial Recognition Needs Reform on Sep 01, 2020
A UK court has ruled that the South Wales Police use of facial recognition is...

Recent Reports

Deceptive Meridian Temperature Tablets Endanger Public Safety on Oct 21, 2020
IPVM's testing of and investigation into Meridian Kiosk's temperature...
Honeywell 30 Series and Vivotek NVR Test on Oct 21, 2020
The NDAA ban has driven many users to look for low-cost NVRs not made by...
Ubiquiti Access Control Tested on Oct 21, 2020
Ubiquiti has become one of the most widely used wireless and switch providers...
Mexico Video Surveillance Market Overview 2020 on Oct 20, 2020
Despite being neighbors, there are key differences between the U.S. and...
Dahua Revenue Grows But Profits Down, Cause Unclear on Oct 20, 2020
While Dahua's overall revenue was up more than 12% in Q3 2020, a significant...
Illegal Hikvision Fever Screening Touted In Australia, Government Investigating, Temperature References Deleted on Oct 20, 2020
The Australian government told IPVM that they are investigating a Hikvision...
Panasonic Presents i-PRO Cameras and Video Analytics on Oct 19, 2020
Panasonic i-PRO presented its X-Series cameras and AI video analytics at the...
Augmented Reality (AR) Cameras From Hikvision and Dahua Examined on Oct 19, 2020
Hikvision, Dahua, and other China companies are marketing augmented reality...
18 TB Video Surveillance Drives (WD and Seagate) on Oct 19, 2020
Both Seagate and Western Digital recently announced 18TB hard drives...
Watrix Gait Recognition Profile on Oct 16, 2020
Watrix is the world's only gait recognition surveillance provider IPVM has...
Intel Presents Edge-to-Cloud Ecosystem for Video Analytics on Oct 16, 2020
Intel presented its processors and software toolkit for computer vision at...
Best Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 16, 2020
5 manufacturers stood out as providing the best technical support to ~200...
Microsoft Azure Presents Live Video Analytics on Oct 15, 2020
Microsoft Azure presented its Live Video Analytics offering at the September...
Worst Manufacturer Technical Support 2020 on Oct 15, 2020
4 manufacturers stood out as providing the worst technical support to ~200...