Commercial Alarm - help

Go back and read your 10/29 post: "Name another product that has a 99% + failure rate. It wouldn't be tolerated"

Actually, user error is to blame most of the

Now you are getting on the right track.

Yes, the result is the same and that is why a good working, managable ordinance is important. Put the responsibility where it belongs. If the person needs more training, so be it. It is up to them to make themselves available for further instructions. That is why there is free alarm dispatches in every ordinance I have read. If they continue to use the system without further instruction, knowing that they have screwed up to begin with and being warned about it, I would still put that into the user error category and they deserve the consequences.

No, you said product and/or system failure.

The cause is

No, it isn't. It is very relevent. If an ordinance says it will cut off habitual offenders, that is one thing and probably deservant. However, if you say "no response" is the way to go across the board, then you are hurting the other 96.5% of the users that have no problems. The PD will not respond to their needs if and when something happens. Take my case. I have not had an alarm in three of my locations in nearly 20 years. Do I deserve "no response"?

The $99 burglar alarm killed the idea

Believe it or not the mass marketers false alarm factor is right at the average of .035%. Maybe a little higher in some areas, but still not what you or others would like to believe. Everyone would like to say they are the problem, but actually they are not. It is the $99 or **Free** no likes about them, not their false alarm ratio.

Getting over the hurricane hang over but there is light at the end of the tunnel. I have been a little reluctant to get into the ASIS certifications due to some the regulars views about the people that have them. That is why I haven't posted mine but anyone can go to ASIS for info.

They are in a **dimension** all their own.

>

"Jackcsg" wrote in message news:apidnRqiiqfJi snipped-for-privacy@adelphia.com...

Show me how they accruately do this by not showing up for 1-2 hours, don't get out of their car, mail a false alarm citation to a customer that lives in a gated community and the guard has no record of an officer coming through, not going into a back yard if the gate is locked but yet there is total water access in the back of the house, writting up a false alarm when the window pane of glass was actually removed and sitting next to the pool heater, when a slider was busted out and the whole house was trashed, but yet reported as a false alarm, a police officer client from another city was called, as an emergency call out, to his home. He left work and beat the responding agency to find his house burglarized. How about the girl that had her face slashed from the eyebrow, down her cheek and neck and onto her breast. Quess how long it took for the PD to show up to her emergency button, even though it was after the fact. Not until her neighbor dialed 911 when she came out of the apartment. Want me to go on? I have a ton of them. The bottom line is the PD's have used the FA hype to put themselves to sleep. If their superiors had policy to respond, they would respond. It is not about FA's, it hasn't been that way for 130 years. It has only been since the bean counters that run the cities have started to do the leaner and meaner thing which has become a why of life in today's society. If departments can have accident investigation officers and community patrol cars, and funeral escort, they can have an alarm response division. If they had this, then and only then can they put a realistic budget out as to the real cost and not until than. Right now, all they have is made up BS numbers. I have listened, first hand, to it all. They, just like the two officers in Orlando that were gunned down because of their lacksidazical (sp) attitude about response, will get a rude awakening. Hopefully not.

Damn Bob, tell us how you really feel! There is no doubt that probably for every crime, 10,20,30 go untouched. I've been exposed to some of the same stories you've just told. The problem is....you have just identified the perception. You know as well as I do that both sides of the story benefit the side telling the story. The dumb ass taxpayer understands neither. It's the freakin' blame game. It's the American way, and Understanding Capitalism 101. The non-thinkers will always rule this Country, and run it according to the highest levels of greed obtainable. Reactive actions don't teach any one shit; it lays the first word in the "Lessons Learned" document that is later given to the pissers and moaners. The last proactive thing that was done in this Country was telling the British to go pound salt. Ask people today why that was done today, and most are clueless. History has a way of being written...

Damn, I KNEW that name sounded familiar!

My error!

That's why you record the training session and leave a copy with the customer.

Or better yet, sell the customer recurring training and make some RMR.

I agree that there are 2 sides to every story. However, in this thread the point was made that 99% of alarms are false alarms and this is bsed on the police reports. Bob has pointed out that on many occasions an alarm is reported as false when it is in fact not a false alarm. I have seen this myself.

Most recently, police arrived at a commercial building (Medical supply - no drugs though) in response to a an alarm. Saw no sign of forced entry and put it down as a false alarm. We show up to find out why the door contact falsed. Surface mounted contact on a steel door in the back of the building. Door was slightly warped but still seemed to have plenty of make/break - unless I pushed on the top of the door. But, I had to push pretty hard. Marks on the door indicate someone was trying to pry the door open and set off the alarm.

Not the cops fault in this case - there wasn't anything apparent - but not a false alarm either.

But it will go down >>

I don't know what the reason is, but J Sloud only has to say that the authorities "perceive" that the false alarm rate is 99% and that's what we have to deal with.

But for some reason he seems to actually believe that it's an accurate comparison to compare false alarms to number of burgalaries ........ only. And everytime someone comes up with an analogy that proves his opinion is wrong, he ignores it and says there's a 99% failure rate.

Granted there's a problem with the quantity of false alarms in the industry but it's exacerbated by the police and the polititians because they're looking at it with predjudice and as a revenue source. And there first position is to get rid of the expenditure. They'll push it how ever it takes to achieve their agenda. And no response is the police version of a cure. We can't go along with it becaues then it really WILL become a precident. We should fight it by educating them at every turn. It's taken the industry quite a while to respond but it's gradually getting better. There are still some areas that are considering no response but now that some of the more publicized areas have backed down and are trying alternative measures, it's easing off a little. In my opinion, it'll get better before it again becomes an issue. False alarms, even after all present measures are taken, are ALWAYS going to be a problem for this industry. It was a problem 35 years ago and it will be in the future, in spite of video or any other kind of verification. No response can't be allowed and eventually it'll be seen that that will only increase the incidence of breakins and intrusions.

I'd guess that fines and permits will be the best route to take since the false alarms are never going to be quelled. People will either pay the fines and have response, or they will lose the privilege just like any other permit privilege. It's a matter of convincing the authorities that if they manage the events, the response and permits, it a revenue stream that can be adjusted to pay for itself. Technology will help some, if we can just manage to push this industry into the 21st century in spite of all the heels first kicking and screaming.

Manufacturers hold an important key. They develope/provide the equipment and have a vested interest in educating the installation trade. Personally, I don't think they've done a very good job ...... at all.

My point is ..... that you keep bandying about this 99% figure as if it had any actual meaning. Except for the fact that it's the incorrect method to use to evaluate the value of alarms systems and it is used by politicians and police departments to justify their greed or indolence. It only has meaning because that what is being used as a measuring stick by the politicos. It's an incorrect measure. No denying that if you compare the number of alarms calls to the number of actual burglaries it's an accurate figure. But it's not the figures that should be used to evaluate the usefulness of alarms or their "failure" rate or their value in preventing crime.

An oil burner service company recieves constant calls from people who claim to have furnace problems. Less than 1% don't have problems. Upon reviewing their service records the service company comes to the conclusion that since 99% of the people who called saying they had oil burners problems, actually did have problems ..... Therefore, oil burners are no good, aren't useful and don't heat homes.

Jim,

Many times perception is reality. The fact that the only statistics available point to 90+% failure rates mean that these are the numbers in the public's view. Show me a study that says false alarm rates are

5% or 10% or even 70%. I'm well aware that system failures account for very few false alarm problems. Even when the system is blamed, it's rarely caused by device failure. Normally it's a bad application, incorrect installation, or some other problem causing the system to false. Remeber, I work for a company with 5 million residential customers and close to a million commercial accounts. We're very aware of the problems, causes, and potential solutions. We've got more reporting capability than you can imagine, and we track every conceivable number related to false alarms. Like you've said, a majority of systems never false. In fact, they never send any signals at all aside from logging data and timer tests. Remember, all of us sell things that we hope will never be needed. The majority of the falses come from relatively few systems. We identify these and dispatch a technician to identify and rectify the problem. Sometimes it's simple customer education. Occasionally, we discontinue service to customers who continue to be problematic. The interesting statistic is the number of legitimate alarm signals as it relates to total alarm signals received. Btw, we investigate (in person) and report every legitimate alarm signal. When you take the number of actual alarms as a percentage of total alarm signals, you ariive at the number I've been quoting. It's not uncommon for a small office to only one or two legitimate alarms in a month compared to several hundred user error alarms, nuisance alarms, bad equipment alarms, bad application alarms, etc.

See above. The 99% failure rate is accurate when comparing legitimate alarm signals to total alrm signals over a given time period. Obviously, the number would be much lower comparing number of alarms that false to toal alrms installed. I've never argued this.

The answer to your question as you have posed it would be 0% since 100% of the break-ins were detected and the police were dispatched on 100% of the break-ins.

Doug L

That analogy doesn't stand up. To make it true, you would have to say that 99% of people who have oil burners expeience no heat when the device is activated. Upon further examination by the service company, it is discovered that some oil burners are broken, some weren't installed correctly, some weren't designed for the application in which they are installed, and the vast majority are too complicated for the average consumer to operate. Regardless of the reason, 99% of the time, the device doesn't operate as intended. 99% of the time, the consumer is left freezing. How long would oil burners be around?

In my view the primary value of alarm systems is the monitoring service that initiates police response. The equipment is just a means to an end. The percentage of actual break-ins vs. unnecessary police dispatches is all that is relevant. If 99% of the time, the police are dispatched due to a false alarm, then the failure rate of detecting break-ins and providing police response is what?

The "system" includes everything installed in the house or business as well as the monitoring center and dispatch. All must function correctly to ensure a dispatch and police response to a break-in. If any one of these do not work correctly, the system is broken. The average consumer only cares about the ability to detect an intruder and to dispatch the police if an intrusion takes place.

NO, IT ISN'T ACCURATE! I don't expect you'll respond to this post, any more than you've responded to any of my previous ones. But I just can't let you keep spreading bullshit, because some other mathematically challenged individual might actually believe you.

If there are 10,000 false alarms and only 100 actual burglaries, what is your so-called "failure rate?" 99%.

If there are only 5,000 false alarms and 100 actual burglaries, what is your "failure rate?" 98% False alarms were reduced by 5,000, but your "failure rate" only improved by 1%.

If there are only 2500 false alarms and 100 actual burglaries, your "failure rate" is 96%.

If there are only 1000 false alarms and 100 actual burglaries, that figure is 91%. A 90% reduction in false alarms translates to an 8% reduction in the "failure rate."

Oh, but wait -- suppose the number of false alarms remains at 1000, but the number of actual burglaries doubles. Nothing the alarm companies can do about that, right? Your so-called "failure rate" just went down to 83%. Boy, those alarm companies sure are making progress in the battle against false alarms, right?

And suppose the number of false alarms stays at 1000, but the number of burglaries drops to 50. Nothing the alarm companies can do about that either, right? Your "failure rate" just shot up to 95%. Look at these two examples together: the number of false alarms remains the same, but the "failure rate" could be anywhere from 83% to 95%, depending solely on the number of burglaries.

Actually, the "failure rate" could be any percentage you like, even though the number of false alarms remains at 1000. If there are 10 burglaries, the percentage is 99%. If there are 100 burglaries, the percentage is 91%. If there are 1000 burglaries, the percentage is 50%. That must mean the alarm companies are doing a hell of a job on false alarms, huh? The more burglaries, the lower your "failure rate" is.

Beginning to see what bullshit this "failure rate" of yours is?

- badenov

They are the responding authority which collects this data, and forwards it to the USDOJ. The alarm industry reports no data to the USDOJ which supports anything different. Where do you suppose the Alarm Industry receives crime statistics. Pointing it out is mearly presenting where this information comes from.

That is true information, and I have seen the same first hand. Perception in the numbers of responses and their results, can have a reverse/adverse effect.

That's why video verification is needed.

This will continue to happen unit the perception of what might be the cause of an alarm becomes the majority of reasons. Humans are a nieve species.

Where did you receive this information that makes you think differently? Not your opinion, but documented factual information that supports your theory.

And why do they report these statistics to the USDOJ? Are they doing this out of the goodness of their hearts? They are required to do this for crime statistics in their area. Do you think that they are reporting the truth. Salt Lake City was already caught reporting the crimes differently than what the crime actually was to tilt the numbers away from burglaries, ie: a broke window reported as property damage rather than a break in, loss of propery as a robbery or larceny rather than a burglary etc. They don't want certain statistics reported to hurt their cities reputation for economical developement, real estate growth and funding. Don't fall into the fallacy that just because they said it, it must be Gospel. Broward County Sheriffs office is in deep deep dodo right now because of their reporting of crimes methods to close cases. It is well documented. It has be going on for years, heads are rolling and many people are going to get a "get out of jail for free card".

lacksidazical

Gahhhhhh!

YOU"RE not looking at all the OTHER people who have alarms that work .......why should I have to look at all the other people who have working oil burners.?????????

You're not looking at all of that information about alarm systems when you say that alarms have no value because the police only see the false alarms. You're not looking at the systems that verify code words. The systems that have a false alarm and then get service. The calls that the police call false because they didn't investigate. The chronic false alarms from the same

individuals. You're just saying that because the police only see lots of false alarms compared to a few burglaries that all of the rest has no meaning.

But 99% of oil burners AND alarms DO work. YOU'RE the one that says that because the police see only false alarms from the bad ones that alarms have no values.

That's a conclusion that you can draw from assuming that since the oil service company is too blind to see that just because they're only considering the systems that don't work .....and not the ones that DO work, that all oil burners are bad. Which really proves, that in order to acertain how well alarms or oil burners work, you have to include those that work in the calculations.

If we could get people who are blind to the facts to understand how to use inductive logic, they'll be around as long as alarms systems.

Exactly what the politicos want you/the public to see, instead of using accurate figures and method of calculation, in spite of the fact that it's wrong.

The only thing that's broken is the logic used to come to the conclusion that since the police only see false alarms, and that's being compared to the number of burglaries to come to the conclusion that all alarms are useless.

And that's exactly what happens. If police don't respond to all alarms, THAT"S when alarm systems will become useless. You tell me, what do you think a crooks point of view would be? Would he feel more or less inclined to break into a premise if he knew the police were going to respond? Once you answer that, you've answered the question about the value of alarms and response to them. By the way, my stand isn't to do nothing about the QUANTITY of false alarms ..... only to help people realize that there are never going to be NO false alarms, that the false alarm rate is ALWAYS going to be 99% and that actually both alarms systems and response by the police is the actual deterrent that reduces crime. The police in my area seem to understand that. So I guess you'd say they're wrong too ..... Eh?

Of course I guess we could call someone in an let them show the politicians and police how to use inaccurate methods to come to erroneous conclusions

This isn't my theory, and this isn't a matter of opinion. It's simple arithmetic.

If you don't believe my numbers are correct, then get out your calculator and plug in your own numbers. You'll prove it to yourself in short order. Forgive me for quoting Bass, but "this isn't rocket science."

- badenov