Re: Lufkin Security programming?

["Tom" <gigela@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I had recently good experinces with Lufkin such I would recommend them.
The customer service is very good. I had to call them since I could not
enter programming mode and it turns out I had a problem on the house
wiring (from panel to keypad). I liked to type of help I got from their
technical support (between other things there was no wait on the
phone).

I actually bought recently a Vista 20p panel from them, a touch screen
keypad, wireless smoke sensor etc. to replace an old panel that broke.
I programmed the new panel myself from scratch and it took me two
evenings.

I think DIY panel programming is an option too. You have the advantage
that you get it working exactly as you want and you know how to change
it later if after you use the alarm for a while you find out you do not
like some things (e.g. chime, schedule, delayed vs perimeter entries).

Robertm wrote:
> "Frank Olson" <Please-use-the-email-links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> message news:vMQ0f.91900$1i.38110@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > "Robertm" <Respond@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:di0g9a$930u$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Lufkin will charge $50 to remotely program my panel. From what I've seen
> >> of the programming manual on my Vista 15P, it could take me a couple of
> >> weeks to program and debug. $50 sounds like a good deal. Any comments on
> >> their services? Most online monitoring companies then charge an
> >> additional $35 setup fee. How much programming is done during this setup?
> >> Am I paying twice for the same service?
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> >
> > The $35.00 setup fee for monitoring is reasonable.  As is the $50.00 to
> > program and "debug" your system.  People don't work for free.
> I fully understand and I think both fees are reasonable. I didn't want to
> pay two different companies for the same job if there were a duplication of
> services. I have no problem with paying the going rate for an honest job.
> I'm in business myself and I charge my customers for my work, too.
>
> Bob