comments on another husband and wife dispute October 8, 2026

KEN KIRSCHENBAUM, ESQ
ALARM - SECURITY INDUSTRY LEGAL EMAIL NEWSLETTER / THE ALARM EXCHANGE
You can read all of our articles on our website. Having trouble getting our emails? Change your spam controls and whitelist ken@kirschenbaumesq.com
****************
comments on another husband and wife dispute
October 8, 2026
*
comments on another husband and wife dispute from article on September 26, 2026
***
Ken,
   Once again, you have given excellent free advise on how to handle ’another husband and wife dispute September 26, 2026. Your advise was spot on for when such ’disputes’ arise.
   The question I have is, what’s to keep the disputing parties from calling the central station directly and changing passwords and emergency contacts on each other? In my experience, I always had my customers call the central station directly and make their updates themselves, ie password change, add a new emergency contact, etc. This reduced my paperwork/admin time at the desk because it had to be documented that this person, on this day, requested theses new phone numbers, etc. Then it had to be faxed, or emailed and hope it was processed promptly. Having the customer call directly also removed the possibility that I could make an error, like transpose a phone number, which I did once. Removing me from that equation made much sense to me. Certainly subscribers already know to call their central station to make such changes.
   So, what restrictions are there, or should there be, concerning this avenue left wide open? Thanks so much.
Cynthia Branen
Oregon
Retired Security Consultant
*
Ken
   If we know in advance there is a husband and wife should we have both sign the agreement?
Jason Alcock
*
Response
*
   Most central stations will permit direct requests or instructions from the subscriber; some prefer to deal exclusively with the alarm dealer. Whoever the central station is dealing with it needs to carefully document requests, especially those that might contradict the central station’s customary procedure. The Kirschenbaum Contracts TM authorize the dealer to act as the subscribers agent when dealing with the central station, but it doesn’t prevent the subscriber from calling the central station directly.
   Many central stations have portals that can be accessed by the subscriber who can make changes to when and how signals are handled.
   Interestingly, all the questions regarding how to handle a husband - wife dispute [could also be business partners] come from dealers, not the central stations. I think this is because the central stations simply will not entertain the kind of issues a husband or wife raise when in a dispute. The central station will invariably refer the subscriber to the dealer. One reason for this is that the central station has far less financial interest in any one particular subscriber compared to the dealer. Other reasons can be that the central station considers the dealer its customer, not the subscribers. That would be accurate from a contractual perspective, but unfortunately the central station is knowingly providing a service to the subscriber and that will subject it to tort [negligence] claims.
   Consider: A central station gets an intrusion alarm. Calls the premises for verification. Husband picks up call and gives a passcode. Operator hears wife screaming in the background to call the police because husband is going to kill her. Should central station dispatch?
   Does your answer change if the wife called the dealer and central station to remove the husband from the account and that request was denied because the husband as on the contract?
   What if the wife had called to remove the husband and it’s the husband who answers the verification call, provides the passcode, and the operator does not hear anything else?
   I’ll tell you how AI responds to the questions, which might give you an idea of how a judge or jury might respond.
   1. Should the central station dispatch?
Yes. Once the operator hears the wife screaming that the husband is going to kill her, the situation is no longer merely an intrusion-alarm verification call. The operator has received direct evidence of a potentially life-threatening emergency. The husband’s passcode should not override what the operator personally hears. The central station should immediately notify law enforcement, accurately report the statements and sounds heard, preserve the call recording, and document the incident.
2. Does the prior request to remove the husband change the answer?
No—the central station should dispatch in either event. But the prior request makes the failure to dispatch substantially more difficult to defend. It arguably gives the dealer and central station prior notice of a dispute and possible danger, increasing foreseeability.
The complication is that the wife’s request to remove the husband may not have been legally effective if he was a contracting party or authorized user and she lacked authority to remove him unilaterally. That account-authorization issue, however, is separate from the emergency presented during the call. Even if the husband remained authorized and supplied a valid passcode, neither fact should require the operator to ignore an apparent threat to life.
   3. Operator does not hear anything other than passcode
   If the husband remains an authorized user on the account, provides the correct passcode, and the operator hears nothing indicating distress or danger, the central station should follow its normal verification procedure and not dispatch. The wife’s unsuccessful request to remove him does not, by itself, invalidate his authority or convert every signal he cancels into a police dispatch.
   The central station should, however, have carefully documented the wife’s request, the reason it was denied, and any instructions given to resolve the account dispute. If the wife wanted the husband’s authority terminated, the contractual parties needed to provide legally sufficient, unambiguous instructions—potentially supported by a court order or other appropriate documentation. A central station should not be expected to adjudicate a domestic dispute or guess which contracting party has superior rights.
   Every situation has its own unique fact pattern and it’s a good idea to have legal advice available, even if to confirm your intuition on how to handle the issue. The Concierge Program has as one of its benefits unlimited [reasonable] access to legal advice. Don’t be hesitant to seek legal advice just because you’re concerned with the legal fees; the quick calls are an included benefit to the Concierge Program. Call Concierge Program Coordinator Stacy Spector,Esq 516 747 6700x 304 or SSpector@Kirschenbaumesq.com for more information or join here: https://kirschenbaumesq.com/page/concierge
*
STANDARD FORMS Alarm / Security / Fire and related Agreements.   click here: www.alarmcontracts.com
***
CONCIERGE LAWYER SERVICE PROGRAM FOR THE ALARM INDUSTRY - You can check out the program and sign up here: https://www.kirschenbaumesq.com/page/concierge or contact our Program Coordinator Stacy Spector, Esq at 516 747 6700 x 304.
*
ALARM ARTICLES:  You can always read our Articles on our website at ww.kirschenbaumesq.com/page/alarm-articles  updated daily

THE ALARM EXCHANGE - the alarm industries leading classified and business exchange - updated daily
*
Wondering how much your alarm company is worth?
Click here:  https://www.kirschenbaumesq.com/page/what-is-my-alarm-company-worth

Getting on our Email List / Email Articles archived:
  Many of you are forwarding these emails to friends or asking that others be added to the list.  Sign up for our daily newsletter here: Sign Up. You can read articles and order alarm contracts on our web site www.alarmcontracts.com
**********
Ken Kirschenbaum,Esq
Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum PC
Attorneys at Law
200 Garden City Plaza
Garden City, NY 11530
516 747 6700 x 301
ken@kirschenbaumesq.com
www.KirschenbaumEsq.com