Florida has passed legislation that requires enhanced call verification(ECV) to reduce the number of false dispatches by police departments. Thelaw takes effect on July 1, 2006 and requires central stations to make twocalls before dispatching the police. The legislation was supported by theFlorida Alarm Association.The focus of this article is, who should pay for increased servicesmandated by new laws, the alarm companies or the subscribers?While this change in procedure may be perceived as insignificant in termsof added cost, new laws could certainly impose far more costlyrequirements.

Check your contract with the subscriberYour contract with the subscriber should describe the services you will beperforming and the amount the subscriber is going to pay for thoseservices. Even without specifically addressing the issue, it is obviousthat should the subscriber request additional equipment or services, thesubscriber would expect to pay for those services.But what happens when the additional services you have to provide are notrequested by the subscriber? In Florida central stations now have to make asecond call for every burglar alarm before dispatching the police. Thelegislation could just as easily imposed other requirements [I won'tenumerate because I don't want to give anyone any more ideas]. Otherrequirements could add significant cost to your services, and either youare going to absorb them or pass them on to your subscriber.

Your contract with the subscriber should address this issue. Here is aprovision in my Standard Commercial lease:

ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS: In addition to the payments set forth herein, Lesseeagrees to be liable for and pay to Lessor any excise, sales, property, orother tax, telephone line charges, and any increases thereof, which may beimposed upon Lessor because of this agreement. Should Lessor be required byexisting or hereinafter enacted law to perform any service or furnish anymaterial not specifically covered by the terms of this agreement Lesseeagrees to pay Lessor for such service or material.This or a similar provision should be in all subscriber contracts.

Recurring revenue contracts in the alarm industry are by nature long termcontracts. You have to do your best to anticipate the constantly changingtechnology, governmental involvement and your competition. Since you willlikely find yourself bound by the contract you prepared, presented to yoursubscriber and signed, you need to be certain your contract has the bestprotection and provisions for you.
You can read articles and order alarm contracts on my web site www.alarmcontracts.com
----------------

Ken,

I believe these costs to be minimal compared to the possibility ofadditional litigation it may cause. I believe that you need to give us someguidance as to what we do with any information ascertained from asubscriber we speak to on the second call especially if they are not at thepremise. Obviously we are all concerned these days with the fact that manyof our subscribers only have cell phones. When we contact them about a firesignal we always ask are you at the house? If not we send the fire dept.But what about when they say it's the maid or probably my child coming homefrom school, and it turns out to be somebody or something else.I believe that our industry needs to support these new ideas and work withthe responding agencies. However, we need some new ideas to control the newlitigation that will come with it.

Kevin

 

Ken,

the reason the ECV legislation was passed was not only to help reduce falsealarms, (which should be a goal of every alarm contractor), but also togive the customer peace of mind that the alarm companies aren't wasting taxdollars dispatching police to every alarm. It forces the central stationsto be more proactive and reduce the wasted dispatches and fines that areimposed for false alarms. Most central stations call twice anyway. At leastin Florida they do.

As far as additional costs are concerned, let the market determine theadditional rates to be charged, if any, (If I were using a wholesalecentral station and they increased my rates due to the new legislation, I'dfind another central station that wanted my business). I don't know of acentral station that would want to get rid of a customer paying them 100K ayear, just because of an additional call. Besides most central stationscharge additional for more than the normal amount of signals per account,per month.

In areas of the country that have gone to verified response, I believe thistype of ECV legislation would have prevented verified response.My highest reguards to Governor Bush, the State of Florida legislators thatvoted unamimously to support this new legislation; Along with The AlarmAssociation of Florida (over 800 members strong), The Florida Police ChiefsAssociation, The Security Industry Alarm Coalition and the many people inthe background that worked so hard to demonstrate the merits of these new laws.

Norm Mugford

Chairman

Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation

Electrical Contractors Licensing Board

Norm - I don't think Bush is on my email list - you may have to thank himanother way. Ken