Can I sue a storage facility for false advertisement?

If the Storage Company expressly told you (or advertised) that your Unit was separately alarmed and surveilled, this would constitute misrepresentation. Intentional misrepresentation is established by three factors: (1) a false representation that is made with either knowledge or belief that it is false or without a sufficient foundation, (2) an intent to induce another's reliance, and (3) damages that result from this reliance. the falsity and knowledge of the falsity are relative straightforward elements. Even if the Seller did not intend to deceive you, the misrepresentation could constitute negligent misrepresentation. See Barmettler v. Reno Air, Inc.,114 Nev. 441, 956 P.2d 1382 (1998) (providing that one who, without exercising reasonable care or competence, “supplies false information for the guidance of others in their business transactions” is liable for “pecuniary loss caused to them by their justifiable reliance upon the information”). Both causes of action require a showing that damages resulted from the tortious misrepresentations. Nelson, 123 Nev. at 225, 163 P.3d at 426; Barmettler, 114 Nev. at 449, 956 P.2d at 1387. The question becomes one of "So What?" if your unit was not actually under individual alarm but alas you suffered no loss or damages. You may have a claim for refund of your monies and/or to terminate the contract. But absent some loss caused by the misrepresentation, you would not have substantial damages.