Which system is better?

Qg08vIBD3XnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com...

Thats about right, slightly more with dialer delay

In many areas you have to use dialer delay regardless if you also use cancel codes

You spelled Monitronics correctly, history in the making

For most of my clients we called the authorities immediately on burglar, panic or medical alarms. Because fire departments in CT won't turn back once dispatched we always called the premises first on fire alarms. Clients were instructed to disarm (triggering a cancel code) and then to call us if it was an accidental alarm. Our agreement said that they could be charged for false alarms that were not properly and promptly canceled but we never actually had to charge anyone. Once in a rare while we'd get a client who was so irresponsible that we'd just drop them at the end of the first year. Other than that, things worked well for us.

As false alarms became more of a nation-wide problem over the years various communities instituted rules requiring a verification call before dispatch and we would of course honor those. But by and large, immediate dispatch worked well for us and for our clients. Most really like the fact that we could get the PD on the way faster than others who insisted on calling the premises first.

BTW, with one type of alarm we always called the fire department first -- carbon monoxide. We would notify the FD, then call the premises and warn them to go outside immediately and stay there until the firemen cleared the building. On several occasions this saved lives.

Yanno, I've always wondered where the "there is no four" came from.

Anyone remember?

It came from me

Would you be kind enough to elaborate?

I find myself mighty curious...

Yes. Definitely!

We don't use a dialler delay (if that's what you're meaning). I have yet to see a client disarm a system within 30 seconds of an alarm, so I always see the "alarm" and the "cancel code" on our activity reports. We primarily use API and if they're not "busy", they will follow up on alarms even if the cancel code's been sent (although they'll prioritize it "lower".

I've encountered that complaint on a few occasions. It's been pretty easy for us to address this. You get your client to perform a "test" on the system once a week (like the little sticky label on the keypad says). :-)

I suppose that a lot of the answers you'll get will depend on whether the equipment is being monitored locally or through an "800" line. We use a local ULC listed station.

In most (if not all) cases invovling a monitored alarm, the central will call the premises first (simple verification). Our procedures regarding a fire alarm differ slightly in that the trucks are dispatched first, then the premises are called. In a fire, seconds count! This is explained to the client when the system is installed. We have very few false alarms from monitored fire systems with the exception of the usual vandals that yank on pull stations. In buildings that become a problem with this kind of false alarm, we will install the STI covers which usually (99% of the time) puts an end to it. We also provide a "cheat sheet" (a one page operations guide) that lays out our procedures as well as crucial phone numbers and instructions on how to add or delete keyholders. The last line of the sheet states that the customer should test his system weekly!

We still differ in philosphy regarding contracts, Bob. Our clients sign a three year agreement and most are happy to do so. Our monitoring rates are $15.00 per month and haven't changed in over ten years. Yes, we have an "escalation clause" (it's a standard contract wording), but we've never exercised it, nor will we. The last thing I want is someone calling me that's paying $38.00 per month when we're writing new contracts for $15.00. This actually happened to me when I first got into the industry and was working for Chubb. I had a long time client call to inquire what our monitoring rates were. When I said $25.00 per month (on residential at the time), he asked why it was he was paying $48.00 per month. I let my manager deal with him. I understand the client got a two year credit on his account. Did they address this issue with their other clients who weren't "bright enough" to clue into what they were doing?? Of course not!!!

the client got

I have to say that I really don't understand your reasoning.

You say you haven't raised your monitoring fee for over ten years. Does that mean to say that your operating cost haven't increased over the past 10 years also?

I've got to give you a clue Frank. There's not one of your customers out there that appreciates the fact that you are losing money every year because you're "a nice guy". Also, there's not one ( well .... maybe one) customer out there who would begrudge you having raised your fee by 10 to 20% over that time period. I understand that the monitoring fees in your area may be lower than mine but in the past 10 years, I've increased my fee's (generally) from $18.00 per month to

22.50 per month and by now a number of them up to $24.50 per month (my next plateau) . (My fee's have always been a little higher than most others in my area) And ...... they are increasing daily as contracts come due. $.25 here ..... $.50 there and sometimes even a dollar a month. Companys pay more and expect to pay more than residential. There are some elderly or single mother accounts that I've held the line on but there's no way that I'm in business to be a sponge for my clients, against increased operating costs.

This isn't "greed" it's just a forgone conclusion that you can't run a business as successfully as possible without covering your operating costs so that you can make a profit. The end to every business is to profit so that it can continue to function, by maintaining and increasing services to your clients. Thereby KEEPING your clients by offering more than the competitors. In my opinion ..... by you maintaining your prices you are buying into the same mind set of those people who think they're getting a Free alarm system.

Now ..... of course if you haven't had a raise in ten years ..... if you haven't bought new vehicles in ten years ...... if you haven't subscribed to new services or had your insurance increase or paid more for labor and materials or had your rent increased ...... in ten years ...... well then maybe ...........

And if you're going to say that you've increased installation fees, that means that you aren't running your monitoring as a seperate profit center. Another no-no.

A N D ...... what about the value of your accounts should you want to sell out someday?

Things may be different in your area but I'm pretty sure this is a universal business philosophy.

That's a joke right? Most customers I've seen have no problem disarming within that amount of time, if they can't then they've forgotten the code or something.

I second the 2-way voice recommendation

RHC: Whaaaat....are you guys joking? This is what Alarmfarce push in their bullshit pitches.....Tom, this is NOT funny......:)))

:

So what? It doesn't matter who does it that feature is great for reducing false alarms

I don't recall that ever being an issue with us, we are the largest 2- way voice central station in the US

RHC: Then Mark, why not give us a realistic assessment of 2 way voice, both pro and con....

The main objection for centrals is that incoming alarm signal lines are being tied up with voice traffic. Under normal conditions an alarm signal comes in, reports, hangs up ..... next signal comes in, reports, hangs up. Voice traffic on these lines means more .... and probably many more, incoming lines are required.

"Right out of the blue" it does sound good ........ to the uninformed. You could tell the client that you will install a telephone line and a handset at every kepad so that when central called they could talk to the operator. They'd say no. BUT ..... you tell them that when the alarm goes off an operator will speak to them out of a little box ...... now THAT"S different.

In my opinion .... when you get right down to the nitty gritty ......It's just glitz and easy to sell to the uninformed.

Lookit how far Sonitrol has gone using this idea.

I should think that would be self explanatory? Some locals consider it alarm verification where just a burg signal alone isn't enough to justify a dispatch. I could give countless examples where we've confirmed a burglary in progress and it's useful for medical conditions. I could also give countless examples where it saved someone's life

I wouldn't install a system without it.

Sonitrol had the right idea but used crap equipment.