Question:
Ken,
It is well documented that security contacts made with reed switch
technology are easily defeated with magnets and are susceptible to failure
when exposed to power surges (lightning, etc.). The knowledge of these
inherent weaknesses is well known in the security industry, but is
typically kept from the customer.
It would seem that this "failure to warn" the customer of the potential
faults of these reed switch contacts could subject a security dealer to
potential liability. The situation could be further compounded by the fact
that reasonable alternative devices that are resistant to magnetic defeat
and contact welding, are available in the market place.
Wouldn't it be wise for all security dealers to at least offer their
customers the option to purchase a more durable higher security level
contact - letting the customer choose the level of security they wish to
purchase?
There is a new white paper that can be accessed at:
http://www.getmoresecurity.com/security/downloads/white%20paper/Higher%20Standards.pdf
that explains the technologies now
available to provide high security contacts for every installation.
Spending a few minutes reading it could save a dealer potential legal
headaches.
Regards,
Rick Kirschman
Answer:
I have no technical knowledge and therefore offer no opinion on the
different types of contacts that are available to the alarm industry.
We can frame the issue this way : will using contacts that are known to be
inherently defective or less reliable and thus potentially cause an alarm
system to fail to operate as intended to detect and report an unauthorized
break in, result in liability?
The answer should be obvious. You should not be using any equipment or
technology that you believe or suspect is inferior to other available
equipment or technology, at least not without disclosing this information
to your subscriber and explaining why you are still recommending or willing
to use this inferior equipment or technology.
I suppose there could be reasons for using it, such as pricing or
availability. But this needs to be your subscriber's decision, and I
caution you that it needs to made by a sophisticated subscriber after full
disclosure. Don't think for a minute you can bury this in a contract.
So I am certainly not endorsing one contact over another, or suggesting one
to be better than another. Just remember that your subscribers expect you
to be an expert in security and rely upon you to install systems that will
do what your subscriber's intended when they signed up for your service.