Re: avoiding being "locked out"

["X. Boschman" <XBoschmanNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Russell Brill" <russwbrill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:AZ1Oe.8858$Wi6.6527@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I agree Crash... Any panel I monitor stays locked out, if the customer
> cancels I remove my CS information and restore the installer/download code
> to factory default.... Regards, Russ
>
> "Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:6S%Ne.2$FY6.1560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > The main reason for locking the panel is to protect proprietary
monitoring
> > information and protect the owner from having programming changed
> > (possibily by a moonlighter that doesn't know enough abt the system),
all
> > my panels are locked. If a client wants to change monitoring co's all
they
> > have to do is call for it to be unlocked and I remove our proprietary
> > info.
> >
> > Unfortunately, some less than ethical companies may use this feature to
> > hold their clients hostage.
> >
> > hmmm.... I have to admit that it may be useful if the client hasn't paid
> > for monitoring in 9 months.
> >
> >
> >
> > <powercat@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1124629286.071477.270930@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Greetings I know a commercial alarm system installer who moonlights on
> >> residential set-ups.  Basically I do the unpleasant part (running the
> >> wiring) and he does the programming and is paid appropriately for that
> >> task.  What he does not do is sell alarm monitoring to avoid a conflict
> >> with his "real" employer.
> >>
> >> This all sounds very fair to me.  He does say "pick an alarm monitoring
> >> company that won't "lock out" your panel and prevent you from switching
> >> later".
> >>
> >> In short how do you know if a company is engaged in that practice
> >> (obviously I can ask).  This sounds very shady to me especially if I
> >> own the equipment.
> >>
> >> Thanks for any comments.
> >>

Both you gentlemen are using "lock out" for its intended purpose.  I have
always said that there is dubious legal grounds for a monitoring (or
installing or servicing) company refusing to turn a panel's control back to
its owner when they terminate relationships.  If there are no outstanding
contractual obligations that can activated an agreed upon seizure of the
alarm system, claims would need to be pursued in the appropriate legal
venue.

In the old Radionics a locked out panel could be sent in for defaulting for
a nominal fee, but we always advised reciprocal cooperation when both
companies were still in business.  Customers can flow in both directions,
after all, and word of mouth on a difficult termination doesn't help the
resistant company, and generally gains them nothing.

My line, repeated with great frequency, was "The lockcode is not intended to
prevent takeovers, but to protect proprietary data."  Mr. Gordon explicitly
speaks in this spirit.

X.