Pro Guard Inc

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/26) */
The claimant has indicated that her fiance was added to her account with no authorization from her. In fact, her fiance was listed as the primary contact on her account, he met our technicians at the initiation of service, represented himself as...

a shared account holder, and signed all of the legally binding contracts and documents on her behalf. The fiance has past due accounts and these were joined to the claimants accounts when a review determined that he was the authorized agent for the claimant and was apparently sharing a residence with her. We retain original copies of the contracts wherein her fiance acts as her agent. It is our standard practice to decline service visits on accounts carrying a past due balance.
As explained to the claimant repeatedly, our Service Manager was unavailable on the day of her initial request and would be informed of the situation at the earliest possible time.
We will be happy to terminate monitoring when the claimant submits the request in writing, specifying the addresses as per the terms listed in her monitoring agreements. There are multiple addresses in question here, so we require specific written directives to clarify and prevent errors. Assuming an effective date of August 31, 2015 for both locations, a credit of $106.71 for three months of pre-paid service will be due to the claimant while an outstanding balance of of $338.57 for the fiance's addresses will remain due.