I haven't thought through all the ramifications of this, but it seems to me
the vendor, for its own protection in case of a default on payment, would
want to be aware of what types of information may exist within the client's
records stored so the vendor can be aware of their own potential risks if
the client defaults. It seems ultimate responsibility would rest with the
client, but I'd also think vendors would want to protect themselves as the
default in payment could be indicative of what the vendor could expect to
collect in any settlement if they brought an action against the client.
Client's who can't pay their storage costs are likely at a very bad place.
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of John Montana
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 9:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Records storage auction
I might add that the record storage vendor is not the bad guy here. The
customer decided to be irresponsible and not pay their bills and in the
process abandoned a large volume of records that may contain personal
information about people. When this happens, the vendor does not have a lot
of good options. They can hardly be expected to continue to maintain the
records indefinitely at their own cost, nor would it be reasonable to expect
them to cull through the records looking for the names of individuals that
could be contacted concerning their personal information. Further, if as was
undoubtedly the case, the nonpaying client was already substantially behind
on their account, the storage company is already out a significant sum of
money. At a certain point, they have to try and collect whatever they can,
and cut their losses going forward. That's what any business would do with a
deadbeat customer that owed a lot of money and didn't want to pay.
In my view, these auctions are not a good idea from a public relations
standpoint (as this discussion illustrates), but the real blameworthy
behavior here is on the part of the customer that didn't pay their bill and
abandoned a volume of records which for the purpose of this argument we are
assuming contained personal information. They are the ones who breached
their duty to their customers to protect the information, and they are the
ones who created the situation by failing to pay money properly due the
vendor for services rendered under the contract.
Best regards,
John
John Montaņa
Montaņa & Associates
29 Parsons Road
Landenberg Pennsylvania 19350
610-255-1588
484-653-8422 mobile
[log in to unmask]
www.montana-associates.com
twitter: @johncmontana
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present,
place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
|
