Power Home Technologies PHT Broken Verbal Agreement, Implied relationship with another contractor Myrtle Beach South Carolina

 Power Home Technologies engages in predatory marketing practices against senior citizens to induce them to agree to extended contracts. Power Home Technologies (PHT) made an unsolicited call for the purposes of selling a home security system and monitoring contract. The sales representative only identified as "Jay", indicated that PHT was affiliated with a current provider (Vector Security) and indicated that the current contract with Vector would not be a problem. I believe that Power Home Technologies is using their previous relationship with Vector Security and their customer list as a basis for making sales calls to "prospective" clients.

They are aware that these clients are under contract because of their previous relationship, but yet still ask the client via a phone call the status of their existing contract. At a minimum, PHT is engaged in predatory marketing practices by engaging in unsolicited telemarketing and playing on the fears of senior citizens and applying undue pressure to engage in a contract. In this particular case, William Schmitt's recollection is that the sales agent, "Jay" stipulated or at least left the impression with the customer that Power Home Technologies and Vector Security were affiliated and that the termination of the agreement would therefore not be an issue.

Power Home Technologies claims to have a recording of the conversation between the sales agent and William L. Schmitt but has not provided a recording or transcript to demonstrate it acted in good faith or at least to verify their claim. I have called their customer service department on multiple occasions. One customer service representative, "Ashleigh" took notes on the issue and promised a call back from a supervisor, "Ms. Diana" within a half hour. Unfortunately, the return call was never made. I placed another call and eventually spoke with "Rachael" who took on the issue and eventually addressed it with someone she described as an owner, "Kevin". I was required to send a fax to PHT indicating the remaining obligation on the contract with Vector Security. I did so on 7/9 and requested an amount of $629.79 be credited to the account in order to make good on the salesperson's promises. Rachael did confirm that the fax was received and that the issue would be addressed by the owner, "Kevin".

On July 12th, after no correspondence was received from PHT, I called back and confirmed with Rachael that she had contacted "Kevin" regarding this issue. She confirmed that she had in fact done so. I informed Rachael that I would provide the owner an additional 48 hours to contact me regarding this issue before seeking additional, external remedies (BBB, social media, state licensing, etc). As of 8/6/2013, no additional contact attempt has been made by PHT. In addition to the above issues, the installation of the PHT system was done on top of the existing Vector Security Systems configuration and utilized electric wires and installation. The removal of the Vector equipment has violated the equipment warranty and the service agreement with Vector Security Systems. As a provider in the industry, the installers should not have disconnected an existing system without consulting the existing monitoring company. Had they done so, they would have identified that a contract existed and should have ceased the installation immediately.