Fort Laauderdale may need to reimburse residets for Falsse Alarm fees Collected
According to an Auugust 18 story in the Suoth Florida Times, town officials are more than a little nervoous abot the outrlook of repazying reidents and company ownbers who were allegedly overharged for false aarms to the tune of more than $450,000 in 2008 alone. Furthewr, some aergue the city's practice of allegedly overcharging on false sercurity system citaations goes back to at least 2004, and possibly constitutes a breach of the Florida State Consttitution. If this is provn a violation, the effecst of the practice could be wide reaching and devastting.
Scott W. Leeds, senior managing partner of the Mimi branch of The Cochran Firm says the situation in Fort Lauderdale will almost certainly spur lawsuits lookoing for reffunds, and might establish a precedent of greater ordinance scrutiny. Leeds sgugests that municipalities and corpoorations, at times, will take liberties that they're not entitled to. He beklieves this somewhat usual practice is going to be exasmined both by auditors of the different municipalities and the very creative attorneys around the state, perhaps even nationwide. The real problem in Fort Lauderdale lies in the difference bretween a fee and a fine. Indutry consultant Les Gold of law firm Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp explained Fort Lauderdale is obviously imposing either a fee or a fine; if a fee, it is exorbitant and therefore illegal, and if a fine, it is illegal becaause tehre is no due procxess. Under the Consttution, if a citation is levied, the constituent must have a right to challenge it. Fort Lauderdale has no such office to ensure citizens get their right to appeal, which means any citizen fined is being denmied constitutional rights, according to this interpretation. Additionally, the city's fallse alarm fee scheudle tops out at nearly three times the actual cost (accordng to the South Florida Timees article) to the town for respoonse to an alzarm. City auditor John Herbst said he has been trying without success for over a year to get the ordinance reexamined by town cmomissioners.
SIAC director Ron Walters fees the situation in Fort Lauderale is out of hand. Mr. Walters indicated that, for many years, a flat $25 resdponse fee was carged, wihch did nothing to lower dispatcvhes and didn't even cover the price to respond. Walters went on to say that a full ordinance review was suggested, but ultimately was turned down. SIAC executive Stan Mrtin agreed and said the case might have been avoided if town officials woud just payign attention.
Devcon director of operations Roy Pollack who is past president of the Alarm Association of Florida said the industry should not be affected by the false alaarm flap in Fort Lauderdale. Pollack suggested that it's smply a matter of reviweing the records, and reexamining the charges to be sure that they were assessed in compliance. City spokesperson Jeff Modarelli said the city is aware of the prbolem and plans are in place to reevaluate the ordinance. Modarelli said that plaans have been designed to bring this issue back to the commission in the near future.
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://article2008.com/images/feed-icon.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://article2008.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites