New way of asking about Y2k Compliance?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Today I received a letter form the School District of Philadelphia regarding Y2k Compliance. (Our company is a vendor to them).
The letter contained the following words: "The purpose of this letter is to advise you that in order to continue to conduct business with the School District, your business operations, products, and/or services that you provide must not be adversely impacted by the Year 2000 problem, either in function or performance.
Unless the School District hears from you organization to the contrary by June 15, 1999, we will assume that you have exercised due diligence in addressing your own Year 2000 problems, and will bring issues of mutual concern to our attention. We will understand your silence to mean that you have resolved any Year 2000 problems that might affect your contract and/or relationship with us." (end of quote)
Are any other organizations taking the "silence is assurance of compliance" tack to trying to get Y2k compliance assurance?
-- Dan Hunt (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 29, 1999
This is a good one, Dan! What would happen if we all started sending similar versions to our oh-so-silent utilities, banks, telecoms, etc.?
-- Rachel Gibson (email@example.com), March 29, 1999.
Whoa. Assuming compliance is a recipe for disaster, IMO.
-- Dean -- from (almost) Duh Moines (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 29, 1999.
Hmmm. Seems to me that this "We will understand your silence to mean that you have resolved any Year 2000 problems" is a legal ploy, rather than being aimed at getting compliance assurance.
What they're saying is: If you don't tell us now that you're not compliant, then you will have no legal defense later if Y2K noncompliance causes you not to be able to deliver what you've contracted to us and we sue you because of that. We'll have you cold on breach of contract.
Cute trick. Caveat vendor!!!!!!
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), March 30, 1999.