I agree. I was merely pointing out the unknown possibilities. Glad you got it sorted out.
"Casual Observer" wrote in message news:ZT7nh.5046$IT2.1658@trnddc06... |I didn't breach the purchase or monitoring contract - the system was already | installed in the house when I bought the house - the alarm came with the | house - I own the house and the alarm system. The monitoring contract I | signed was a month to month deal - I cancelled it with a month's notice, so | they didn't get screwed there. | | Here's the rest of the story - I made a couple of calls to their service | number after unsuccesfully trying to get an installer code and get into | programming mode - the gal that answered the phone kept talking about their | proprietary work and the secret code - I finally talked with a supervisor | who said, no, they just went with the defaults and didn't use any secret | code - so I went back and tried a few of the defaults and bingo! I'll do | the rest of the research and figure out how to get it set to local mode. | | I think if the homeowner owns the alarm system, he\\she should be able to do | whatever he\\she wants to do with it. I think as a part of the contract | agreement, if the homeowner legally terminates the monitoring contract, then | the monitoring company should be required to put the system back to where it | was before the contract was initiated. If they hold the homeowner ransom by | using a secret code or something like that, then it's time for a registered | letter to the company, and perhaps a suit in small claims court. | | Wanted to thank all of you guys for the help. I have a new level of respect | for the capabilities and complexities of the alarm systems - and people that | understand them. | | | "Crash Gordon" wrote in message | news:459c9c9f$0$502$ snipped-for-privacy@news.qwest.net... | > How do you know he didn't breach the purchase or monitoring contract? Or | > owe | > the alarmco money? | > I'm not saying he does, but what if he did? Why should they unlock a panel | > for a deadbeat? Would your utility company turn your power back on if you | > didn't pay the bill, just because you own the house? | >
| >
| >
| > "tourman" wrote in message | > news: snipped-for-privacy@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... | > | | > | alarman wrote: | > | > tourman" wrote in message | > | > news: snipped-for-privacy@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com... | > | > > You are absolutely right on the money. | > | >
| > | > No, he's not. | > | | > | RHC: Yes he is ! Dead on the money ! | > | >
| > | > >Here is the case that happens SO | > | > > often and which I constantly get shit over on the newsgroup because | > I | > | > > complain about it. This is no way for any professional company to | > act, | > | > > and many people in the industry seem to not only turn a blind eye to | > | > > it, but insist these things don't happen very often. Or they'll come | > | > > back implying you are not being straight about this. This is the | > sort | > | > > of self serving industry crap that the buying public so often have | > to | > | > > put up with. No damn wonder so many people take a jaundiced view of | > | > > those selling monitoring services !! | > | >
| > | > | > | | > | RHC: Well, I'm sorry that you find that so bothersome, but start | > | looking at things more from the customers point of view for a change. | > | You know damn well this sort of thing goes on all the time. And instead | > | of starting on about how the poor company is being cheated out of | > | revenue etc etc etc...ask yourself how the hell you would feel if you | > | were getting screwed over like this. Seems to depend upon who's foot | > | the shoe is on.... | > | >
| > | > This is a service, expected by the new homeowner to be performed by | > the | > | > alarmco, which is not owed to the new homeowner. The homeowner's | > attitude is | > | > that the alarmco owes this to him because he now owns the system. If | > the | > | > homeowner wants the alarmco to reset the code, which was changed by | > the | > | > alarmco for all the good reasons published here before, the alarmco | > has | > a | > | > right to charge for that service if they so desire. The fact that the | > new | > | > homeowner wants to use the system locally, and can't because he didn't | > get | > | > the system defaulted by the seller, does not obligate the alarmco to | > perform | > | > service for free of charge. BTW, I certainly would not connect to, and | > | > reprogram someones alarm panel unless they were under contract with me | > and I | > | > had some protection from liability. Also, I do not accept your premise | > that | > | > this makes me a shady dealer, or somehow unscrupulous. These new | > homeowners | > | > need to understand that if they move into a home with an existing | > alarm | > | > system, that it is NOT the responsibility of the alarmco to hold their | > hand | > | > for free. | > | | > | RHC: Jesus H Christ, who the hell said anything about doing it for | > | free. On the other hand, I don't think they should stick it to him | > | either ! Don't you guys ever read and think, rather than jumping all | > | over the first point that may not be thoroughly brought out ! Nothing | > | you say above changes the fact that it is HIS f****ng property ! And | > | the previous alarmco won't give him access to HIS alarm panel (or at | > | least so it seems at the moment). The cost of the service to do so is | > | NOT at issue here. And no one (least of all me) is saying squat about | > | implying you are somewhat less than honourable. How in Gods name can | > | you ever come to the conclusion that I am implying you are shady or | > | whatever. Jesus, Jack ! Is our industry so anal that they can't or | > | won't look at some of the practices that reflect badly on all of us | > | rather than just assuming the worst every time about every customer. | > | Lord knows, there ARE enough real idiot customers out there that we all | > | have to put up with. But this guy is simply outlining a problem we all | > | know happens all too often. And I repeat..it is NOT about whether this | > | guy will pay for professional services, its about the fact that the | > | company so far hasn't done what they should have done when the panel | > | was disconnected from the first homeowner...put it back to a point | > | where it can be used by them later again, or someone else that the | > | homeowner chooses! It's his property pure and simple !! | > | >
| > | > The homeowner may either do research and default/reprogram the system | > | > himself, or pay a professional to perform the service. | > | | > | RHC:Absolutely right !! And that's what he said he has done, and | > | approached the alarmco about it. And so far it seems they won't do | > | anything for him unless he signs a bloody monitoring contract with | > | them. What f****ng planet were all you guys born on. That's f****ng | > | extortion no matter how you colour it !!!!!! | > | >
| > | > If you buy a house with a lock on the garage door, and no key is | > available | > | > to the new owner, you should not expect the locksmith who installed | > the | > lock | > | > for the original owner to unlock the lock at no charge. You said that | > "All | > | > the previous company needs to do is dial in and change the installer | > code | > | > back to factory - nothing more." is pure bullshit. How likely is it | > that | > the | > | > homeowner is prepared for this? Is the alarm still connected to the | > phone | > | > line? Is it powered up? Is little teen-age daughter using the line | > now? | > How | > | > long shall my tech wait until you're ready for us to dial in? Is the | > alarm | > | > still connected to the same phone line? Or has the phone company, or | > worse, | > | > the "handy" homeowner reconfigured the phone wiring? Should the | > alarmco | > send | > | > a tech out to correct the problem? At no charge, I suppose? Even if | > the | > line | > | > is still connected, it still takes some time and effort for a skilled | > person | > | > at the alarmco to access the file, reprogram a new phone number into | > the | > d/l | > | > computer, call the premises and reprogram the code. And then of | > course, | > any | > | > other problem the new "customer" has with the system becomes the | > alarmco's | > | > problem. Right? | > | | > | RHC: No, all problems are clearly the homeowners problems, but give me | > | a break ! No one is saying these problems don't exist.You and I run | > | into them all the time doing takeovers !! And no one in this thread is | > | saying that the new homeowner won't have to take into account these | > | sorts of situations and pay to have them rectified. If it's like it is | > | up here, the telephone company may have royally screwed things up. And | > | so far he is not saying that he is unwilling to pay for professional | > | services (other than monitoring through the previous company). Why do | > | you automatically read the worst into everything this guy is saying. It | > | will be interesting to see what he comes back with after he calls the | > | company tomorrow. | > | >
| > | > So give me a break with your "keeping you from legitimate use of YOUR | > | > property" bullshit, will ya? | > | > js | > | | > | RHC: No, you give me a break from all your faulty assumptions about | > | what this guy is asking for. Frankly, I hope he does get a professional | > | to service his alarm, but it likely won't be from the previous company | > | who seems only too willing to pass this guy over because he doesn't | > | want them to monitor it.. That's his f****ng choice ! He owns the God | > | damn panel. If he wants a professional to set it up, he will have to | > | pay the price. No one has said any different. | > | | > | Jesus H Christ ! I hope you fuzzy thinkers never sit on a jury judging | > | me for some unproven wrong doing. If so, I'm dead meat before I | > | start..... | > | | > | RHC | > | | >
| >
| |