True.
That is not true. Gross negligence is tortious and in most states (Pennsylvania is a notable exception) gross negligence will over-ride contractual waivers of a right to seek damages. Alarm industry case law is full of decisions where alarm companies' contractual protections have been tossed out because of gross negligence. IIRC, Pennsylvania is one of the few states that do not recognize gross negligence.
Following is an excerpt from a NY State case:
"New York law generally enforces contractual provisions absolving a party from its own negligence." Colnaghi, U.S.A., Ltd. v. Jewelers Protection Services, Ltd., 81 N.Y.2d 821,823 (1993); Sommer v. Federal Signal Corp., 79 N.Y.2d
540,553 (1992). Public policy, however, prohibits a party from insulating itself through a contractual clause, for damages caused by grossly negligent conduct. Id.; Sommer at 553.""Gross negligence, when invoked to pierce an agreed-upon limitation of liability in a commercial contract, must "smack of intentional wrongdoing" (Kalish-Jarcho, Inc. v City of New York, 58 NY2d [377], at 385). It is conduct that evinces a reckless indifference to the rights of others (citations omitted)."
The key is in the definition of gross negligence. It is much worse conduct than the common negligent behavior of some alarm companies. For example, a relative of mine who has an ADT system (it was in the house when he bought it) says that they usually take about 10 minutes to call when the alarm goes off. That is certainly negligent behavior. It is not gross negligence, however.