Cirillo v. Slomin’s Inc.

Facts

The defendant sold and installed an alarm system in the plaintiffs’ home. The alarm system had central station monitoring that would send a signal from the alarm system via telephone lines in the event of a break-in. The defendant’s sales agent, Howard Goldberg, represented to the plaintiffs, among other things, that the system had “fail safe” if the phone wires were cut and the police would be immediately notified. To complete the purchase, the plaintiffs entered into Contracts with the defendant, each Contract contained similar disclaimer clauses: “…there are no oral Agreements, understandings, or representations between the parties;” “[the] salesman has no authority to change any terms or make representations…; “Slomin’s has made no representations… and the customer has not relied upon any representations….;” and “Slomin’s has made no representations or warranties and [the] subscriber has not relied upon any representations…” On January 6, 2002, the plaintiffs’ home was burgled and the telephone wires were cut. The police were not notified by the alarm system and the plaintiffs’ sustained substantial loss as a result.