5 ms·

Except, as mentioned in the article in a few places (including the second paragraph), the contract allegedly contains a "Termination for Convenience" clause, wh

Except, as mentioned in the article in a few places (including the second paragraph), the contract allegedly contains a "Termination for Convenience" clause, which should have allowed the PD to cancel the contract and not have to pay the $4,000/year fee. But nobody knew that. So the real story here is that "...between turnover within the police department and a trusting approach to its relationship with the company, neither the IT department, which handles payments for recurring annual technology costs in the City of Fontana, nor the police department had actually consulted the specific terms of the agreement until contacted for this article." I've lost count of the number of times I've seen parties sit down and disagree about a business deal without having ever read the contract they've both signed. Any time I go to a meeting to discuss a relationship that's governed by contract I read the contract ahead of time, and often I'm the only one in the room who has. It can be a lot of fun to inform someone who's trying to renegotiate a better deal that they've been in violation of their own terms and conditions for years. "And you want us to give more up when you haven't even kept your end of the bargain?" I can see the Taboola ad now: "One mom's weird trick to prevail in negotiations..." It sounds like the PD isn't getting their money's worth with Axon, and the citizens of Fontana aren't getting their money's worth with the PD or city officials. If the title should change, it is "City officials careless with contracts; Axon also terrible to deal with."

strictnein 7y ago
Yeah, that's kind of my point as well. The title makes it sound like they tried to get out of a deal and Axon threatened them. The reality is they dropped the ball and when they contacted Axon a couple years later the rep they talked to probably gave them information based on their understanding of the deal, but was just incorrect. It's likely that rep was just used to more recent deals whose contracts did contain language like that.
- handedness 7y ago
  They tried to get out of a deal and Axon essentially threatened them. What a nice credit rating you have; it would be a shame if something happened to it. "The only cancellation term is Termination for Non-Appropriations or a lack of funding," was their reply, which was false, and they're making a positive statement about the nature of a contract apparently without having first reviewed said contract. I'm not an attorney and I know not to do that. If someone asks me a question as it relates to the terms of a contract, I would never respond without reviewing, or if I did, state that "I haven't had a chance to review it but if memory serves..." If someone says, "we want out of this contract," I would never say, "you haven't satisfied the conditions for cancelation" without reviewing the conditions for cancelation. If only because I may want to do business with that company or someone who works there in the future, and referencing the terms of a fair deal (which it looks like this was) is the best way to mitigate any unjustifiably bad feelings coming as the result of it. Terrible practice by Axon and they wound up in the news over it. The same could be said for the city and PD. Precisely nobody looks good in this scenario, and a quick search of the contract would have saved the city thousands and a lot of bad PR. Just because Axon isn't the only bad guy in this story doesn't mean they aren't the bad guy.
  - chrischen 7y ago
    Nobody threatens by literally stating "I threaten thou". They say things like "yea but if you do that this bad thing will happen" which is exactly what they said.
    - handedness 7y ago
      > "yea but if you do that this bad thing will happen" Which was a false statement on the part of Axon.
- deogeo 7y ago
  Lets go with the hypothetical that the representative made an honest mistake, and thought the contract was like the other contracts that Axon offered. Those contracts didn't come from thin air - Axon chose to write contracts so that they can threaten others with a hit to their credit rating.
shard972 7y ago
City officials careless with contracts is not news.

strictnein 7y ago

Yeah, that's kind of my point as well. The title makes it sound like they tried to get out of a deal and Axon threatened them. The reality is they dropped the ball and when they contacted Axon a couple years later the rep they talked to probably gave them information based on their understanding of the deal, but was just incorrect. It's likely that rep was just used to more recent deals whose contracts did contain language like that.

handedness 7y ago
They tried to get out of a deal and Axon essentially threatened them. What a nice credit rating you have; it would be a shame if something happened to it. "The only cancellation term is Termination for Non-Appropriations or a lack of funding," was their reply, which was false, and they're making a positive statement about the nature of a contract apparently without having first reviewed said contract. I'm not an attorney and I know not to do that. If someone asks me a question as it relates to the terms of a contract, I would never respond without reviewing, or if I did, state that "I haven't had a chance to review it but if memory serves..." If someone says, "we want out of this contract," I would never say, "you haven't satisfied the conditions for cancelation" without reviewing the conditions for cancelation. If only because I may want to do business with that company or someone who works there in the future, and referencing the terms of a fair deal (which it looks like this was) is the best way to mitigate any unjustifiably bad feelings coming as the result of it. Terrible practice by Axon and they wound up in the news over it. The same could be said for the city and PD. Precisely nobody looks good in this scenario, and a quick search of the contract would have saved the city thousands and a lot of bad PR. Just because Axon isn't the only bad guy in this story doesn't mean they aren't the bad guy.
- chrischen 7y ago
  Nobody threatens by literally stating "I threaten thou". They say things like "yea but if you do that this bad thing will happen" which is exactly what they said.
  - handedness 7y ago
    > "yea but if you do that this bad thing will happen" Which was a false statement on the part of Axon.
deogeo 7y ago
Lets go with the hypothetical that the representative made an honest mistake, and thought the contract was like the other contracts that Axon offered. Those contracts didn't come from thin air - Axon chose to write contracts so that they can threaten others with a hit to their credit rating.

shard972 7y ago

City officials careless with contracts is not news.