Ideafarmer
New Member
Question: If an out-of-state sign company calls a local company and asks them to remove and destroy a closed local business's sign, would most do it without checking to see who actually owns the sign?
Here's a real life scenario that's got a local sign company in hot water.
The local franchisee of a medium sized franchise chain (few hundred locations) closes his two stores and is in a legal dispute with the franchisor company. Franchisees are supposed to debrand closed stores within 30 days. In the past, the franchisor sent someone out to cover up any remaining signs.
This time the franchisor calls the sign company that handles their installations nationally and says they want the exterior signs removed and destroyed. That sign company calls a local sign company and has them go remove the exterior signage of the closed stores and destroy them (without the franchisee's knowledge or permission).
Here's the deal: the franchisee spent $40,000 installing the signs and has proof of ownership. The bank that provided the SBA loan to build the businesses has liens on the signage.
I don't think the local sign company had any awareness of the dispute or considered ownership issues - they just thought they got a nice, simple job from a reputable out-of-state sign company and a national franchise company, and now they've got a local business owner filing police reports for theft and destruction of property and ripping them on Facebook and a local bank no doubt considering a lawsuit.
Was this an innocent, understandable mistake that any sign company might have made, or did the local sign company make a huge, rookie blunder?
Don't sign companies check to see whether they've got the legal right to do what they're being hired to do... and that their customer actually owns the sign they are paying them to destroy?
Thanks for your opinions...
Here's a real life scenario that's got a local sign company in hot water.
The local franchisee of a medium sized franchise chain (few hundred locations) closes his two stores and is in a legal dispute with the franchisor company. Franchisees are supposed to debrand closed stores within 30 days. In the past, the franchisor sent someone out to cover up any remaining signs.
This time the franchisor calls the sign company that handles their installations nationally and says they want the exterior signs removed and destroyed. That sign company calls a local sign company and has them go remove the exterior signage of the closed stores and destroy them (without the franchisee's knowledge or permission).
Here's the deal: the franchisee spent $40,000 installing the signs and has proof of ownership. The bank that provided the SBA loan to build the businesses has liens on the signage.
I don't think the local sign company had any awareness of the dispute or considered ownership issues - they just thought they got a nice, simple job from a reputable out-of-state sign company and a national franchise company, and now they've got a local business owner filing police reports for theft and destruction of property and ripping them on Facebook and a local bank no doubt considering a lawsuit.
Was this an innocent, understandable mistake that any sign company might have made, or did the local sign company make a huge, rookie blunder?
Don't sign companies check to see whether they've got the legal right to do what they're being hired to do... and that their customer actually owns the sign they are paying them to destroy?
Thanks for your opinions...