Re: avoiding being "locked out"

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

hehee... I'm reading your reply and I get to the end and I'm saying...hmmm
WHO is this Mr. Gordon :-)

X Boschman...does the mean you usta work for Radx?


"X. Boschman" <XBoschmanNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:V13Oe.120996$5N3.70816@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Russell Brill" <russwbrill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:AZ1Oe.8858$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.
>
>