WEBINAR NOTICE:  The Central Station series  
Why you should use our central station
see schedule below for presentations


Next webinar: October 28, 2014  - SentryNet 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6448324896921683457

*********************
MORE ON FINING ALARM COMPANIES FROM OCT 10 AND 16, 2014
*****************
Ken,
    On October 10th you posted Lee Jones’ rambling about my interview with Security Sales & Integration that was published on August 14th. This now requires clarification. In my interview regarding Chico CA proposing to fine alarm companies for their customer’s false alarms, I referred to the decision of the second Fontana CA court case and stated, “The judge said you cannot fine an alarm company for false alarms that they did not cause, through their non-wrongful conduct”. I did not say the word “unlawful” and unfortunately was misquoted.
    The Fontana court cases were rare, sad events where the alarm industry continuously begged the city officials to please work with us but they refused. The end result was not only the industry-favorable court decision, but a new Police Chief was appointed and we settled all concerns with him. We gave him a verified response ordinance as he requested, and in the spirit of cooperation the industry waived the return of $123,284.00 in fines that were illegally collected by the city from alarm company operators. Although the city kept that amount, they then paid all our industry legal fees in full; it cost the city of Fontana over $180,000 in 2008 and over $170,000 in 2010. That “cost” did not include the city’s own legal fees, and there was undeterminable costs to their citizens; who then going forward, had to pay extra for private guard response if their alarms could not be otherwise verified. Ironically, during the first lawsuit, there was Lee Jones live (on city video) directing the Fontana City Council members with his piffle to “blame the private security industry” for false alarms.
    Fontana was an extreme exception. Almost 100% of police and sheriff’s departments work cooperatively with the industry, through SIAC, to develop a successful alarm program and ordinance. Time has proven Best Practices are highly successful and there are many cities, large and small with testimonials verifying that.
    There are three circumstances where the industry agreed years ago, that fining alarm companies is appropriate:

  •         If the officer responding to the false alarm determines that an on-site employee of the alarm company directly caused the false alarm.  In this situation, this will not be counted against the alarm user.
  •         If the alarm administrator determines the existence of a consistent pattern that disregards verification or written policy against verification, the alarm company can be issued a civil citation for failure to verify. To verify means an attempt by the alarm company, or its representative, to contact the alarm site by telephonic or other electronic means, whether or not actual contact with a person is made, before requesting law enforcement dispatch, in an attempt to avoid an unnecessary alarm dispatch request.
  •         If the alarm administrator determines that an alarm company employee made a false statement concerning the inspection of an alarm site or the performance of an alarm system.

        All other fines should be billed to the alarm permit holder of record.  Alarm users are responsible for the use of their systems, not the alarm companies, except as noted above.
Best Regards,
Jon Sargent
************************
Ken
    This is like beating a dead horse over and over again and then wondering why it doesn't move faster.   My feeling, and I stress apparently only my own, is if the municipalities are going to start charging alarm installing companies then perhaps they ought to be charging be repair garages when a car breaks down on the road and requires a trooper to make that safe for the record operator or perhaps they should start charging by the hour to investigate motor vehicle crashes and assess a fee to all of the operators for the investigation services since the accident is an unnecessary event caused by the operator.  The police department should be able to recover their expenses to investigate and direct traffic. Let's put this to bed once and for all;  false alarms caused by user error should be the responsibility of the end user not the installing company or maybe I can send my speeding ticket to General Motors
    From under the desk in the confusion of my mind
Joel Kent
Fbn
**********************
 Ken:
    The Oct 16 2014 newsletter is sure to stir up lots of response. I have an issue with both Lee Jones and Roger Score regarding what they wrote.
    First, in response to Lee Jones, VR or verified response is not restricted to a guard being dispatched. It can also be audio or video verification. In some areas, guard response is prohibitively expensive. This brings me to Roger Score’s post where he speaks of a one dollar a month fee to subscribers for guard response. I’d like to see that in NY. Guard response here can cost as much as $50 per run or $100 per month per subscriber. I’d be willing to guess that this is true in many congested cities throughout the US. And, with no guarantee of response times, it could be an hour before the police are dispatched.  In some areas, this is just a bad choice.
    Either way, I don’t think the industry comes out on top. It has the appearance of us being inattentive to and disregarding the high rate of false alarms. We in the industry know better, but I’m speaking of appearances. I’m sure many subscribers will point a finger at the industry, instead of realizing that the vast majority of false alarms are caused by subscriber error.
    Every subscriber will have a choice to make when these laws are passed. Hopefully they will be for verification rather than subsidy recovery, as I believe central stations will have a difficult time recovering the fines from subscribers.
    The choices will be no alarm, guard response, or video verification. What is most cost effective will depend on the location and cost of service there, how many alarms they typically generate in a year, and their need for quick response. Both alarm firms and central stations will benefit from the additional RMR, and I would think that police response will improve. Verified alarms are crimes in progress, not a “burglar alarm activation”. With a high percentage of actual crimes in progress, police departments will respond quickly in the hopes of effecting an arrest.
Mitch Cohen
BRIC SECURITY
*******************

                                  *****************************************************

                                          WEBINAR ANNOUNCEMENTS
                                             The Central Station Series
                                         Why you should use our central station
                                            Sign up for each presentation
Each Webinar will cover:

  • territory covered by cs 
  • types of alarms cs equipped to handle or specializes in 
  • description of cs facilities and equipment; redundancy of more than one location 
  • general policies on handling alarms 
  • what makes your cs stand apart from others 
  • pricing - why your cs charges what it does and special deals if any 
  • contracts the cs requires

**********
                 Sign up for each presentation.  All Start at 12 noon EST to 1 PM
***********
October 28, 2014  - SentryNet 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6448324896921683457
 
October 29, 2014 – Rapid Response Monitoring 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/4898797453548148993
 
October 30, 2012 – COPS Monitoring 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6318369219588363265

November 5, 2014 – Metrodial           https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5743009078427617281
 
November 6, 2014 - United Central Control   https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/2612275062661797378

November 12, 2014 -   Statewide Monitoring 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/339270067719231489
 
November 13, 2014 - Centra-Larm Monitoring 
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/3930780819384477185

                             *********************************************************************

                                                 Speaking Engagements

If you would like to schedule a free live video/webinar presentation for your association meeting or event contact Eileen Wagda at 516 747 6700 x 312.

                                                ************************************************