CT Files $5M Stipulation Judgment Against Middletown Company

MIDDLETOWN, CT — The state has filed a $5 million stipulation judgement against a Middletown-based home security company to resolve claims for contempt of a previous court order, according to officials.

The stipulation judgment was filed Tuesday against Safe Home Security and its president David Roman after the Middletown-based company “repeatedly failed over many years to comply with court-ordered consumer protection measures,” Connecticut Attorney General William Tong and Consumer Protection Commissioner Michelle H. Seagull announced in a news release.

“Families turned to Safe Home Security to safeguard their homes, and the company failed them,” Tong said in a statement. “We have heard from hundreds of angry consumers who were locked into bad contracts and left with broken and poorly installed equipment. Safe Home Security promised to do the right thing in 2014, but their bad business practices never improved. We returned to court to secure this $5 million penalty to force Safe Home Security to do the right thing, to follow the law, and to provide their customers with the functioning security systems and reliable customer service they deserve. We will be watching closely and are not afraid to take further legal action should Safe Home Security fail again to comply with these court-ordered measures.”

The Attorney General’s Office initiated a lawsuit against Safe Home Security Inc. in 2007 after numerous complaints about the security company.

Consumers complained that the alarm and monitoring systems were often “defective or negligently installed, that technicians were not regularly available and missed appointments, and that long-term contracts did not comply with Connecticut law and were renewed automatically without giving consumers an opportunity to cancel the contract,” the news release states.

The state reached a settlement with the company in 2014 requiring $30,000 in customer restitution, a $70,000 civil penalty to the state, and injunctive provisions relating to Safe Home’s compliance with auto-renewal statutes, debt collection statutes and statutes relating specifically to companies engaged in the residential alarm business.

Despite that settlement, the state continued to “receive hundreds of complaints regarding the company’s business practices,” according to the release.

The Attorney General’s Office filed a motion for contempt in 2019 claiming that the company “continued to block consumers from terminating long-term contracts, misrepresented the terms of contracts to consumers, charged consumers for services when the consumers’ alarm systems weren’t working, and other conduct.”

Tong at the time warned consumers to be wary of doing business with Safe Home Security.

The new judgment stipulation filed on Tuesday represents a settlement between the State and Safe Home to resolve claims brought by the State in its motion for contempt.

“When it is entered by the Court, the judgment will require Safe Home Security to pay $1 million within 10 months, with the remaining $4 million suspending pending their compliance with the judgment,” officials wrote in the news release. “The judgment includes additional injunctive relief to that which was ordered in 2014 and requires Safe Home Security to hire an independent monitor to review their compliance for a period of five years. The judgment further requires Safe Home to establish a dedicated email address to receive and track complaints, and to make a good faith effort to resolve all unresolved complaints filed with the Office of the Attorney General.”

Seagull said, “We are glad to see this company is being held accountable for a long history of poor customer service and harmful business practices in Connecticut. It is time for Safe Home Security to do the right thing, come into compliance with these court-mandated requirements, and provide consumers with the level of service and professionalism we expect from Connecticut businesses.”