Re: False alarms

["Everywhere Man" <alarminstall@xxxxxxx>]

Bob Worthy wrote:
> > > > > "Everywhere Man" <alarminstall@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > > news:1144702426.272614.144170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > What do you think about fining the centrals?
> > >
>
> > Very nice having an alarm unit at the local PD.
>
> It works well in every area it is implimented.<

Any stats would be a tremendous help.

>
>  What if the customer
> > refuses to attend the school?
>
> There is an incentive built in to attend. They attend after their third
> alarm and have received a $50 fine. By attending, the $50 fine is waived. If
> they don't attend they pay the $50 and the next will be $100.
> Another city, here in Florida, will waive fines equal to the cost of
> upgrading the system. That is also popular. If someone has $400 in fines
> pending, the city will waive those if the custmer spends the $400 to upgrade
> their system. <

It sounds as if your jurisdiction actually cares about this issue.
Those are some real nice options.

>
>
> > I believe we have lack of effort/interest here. They like to complain
> > but they won't sit down to address the issue.
>
> Those could be the most dangerous type. A quick knee jerk reaction type
> policy takes no time or effort on their part. The industry needs to stay in
> their face to get them to the table. <

That is why I addressed the Chamber. I certainly didn't want the PD to
be the ones discussing methods of reduction because they believe it's
by writing a ticket.
I stole their thunder when I mentioned the false alarm rate, while
making it crystal clear that it was 99% of the signals that were false,
and how the customer with 600+ falses affected them. If I left it up to
the PD they would have trashed our industry.

> >
> >
> > I contacted folks at IQ,
>
> I know you are affiliated with Brinks and they are a big supporter of IQ. In
> fact they could be the only supporter. IQ is a very weak Board with very
> little support and funding. I am not bashing the intent of the program, but
> it is underfunded and is not really going anywhere. Unless things are
> changing, Brinks in actually the one keeping it alive. <

A few nationals are involved with IQ, but I honestly don't care who
belongs and who doesn't. I care about their installation standards, and
I abide by them. They really do have a good program.

>
> the NYBFAA
>
> To fragmented to be a real force. They can't agree with each other to get
> anything accomplished. They have a reputation of being not a unified group. <

NY State is such a diverse place it's impossible to get everyone on the
same page.
We have NYC which is a fast-paced, high maintenance zoo.
Westchester, LI, Orange, Rockland, Putnam, & Dutchess Counties is more
like CT, and Upstate NY is hillbilly central.


>
> >and the RAA.
>
> Who are these folks? <

The Regional Alarm Association.

>
>  I was hoping to get
> > FARA involved as well.
>
> They are mostly law enforcement folks and work well with the industry but
> again have very limited funds. They will make phone calls to areas
> supporting a good ordinance program. Norma Beaubien has been a great contact
> for the industry, and John Moorehouse, also a FARA board member, is running
> a program at his Sheriffs office, here is Florida, that I mentioned has had
> a 78% reduction in F/A since he implimented their ordinance. He sits on our
> BOD, as the public safety liason, for the AAF as well. He is definiately a
> good person to talk with. <

Their membership application has been on my desk for 3 or 4 weeks. It
seems everytime I pick it up to fill it out I get distracted. I like
what they stand for, and I will join.

>
> >If we have an opportunity to get the government
> > to discuss alternatives to fines then we should jump at it.
>
> Enhanced Call Verification is the fastest proven method to reduce dispatches
> to date. There is absolutely no cost to the muni, no work on their part,
> simply a reduction in request for dispatch. It is the easiest, fastest way
> to go for immediately reducing dispatches. <

So what about the alarmcos that don't offer that? Are they now banned
from doing business in the city? What about the DIY shnooks who sign up
with these willly nilly centrals, or the trunk monkey with the receiver
in his garage?

> >
> > And our opponents here are the responders. The cops want people to
> > believe 99% of all systems false.
>
> Makes you think they may be getting ready for some sort of policy. <

yes a very simple policy. Fine them early and often to replace the cash
lost on the Mayor's 'Town Circle' project that is 2 years running now.
Did you notice in the article it talked about how the Mayor came AFTER
the discussion was over? They are gearing up to slam alarm users, and
if they get away with it then our industry starts to look like a hassle
to the customer rather than a security solution.

>
>  I made it clear to chamber members
> > that 99% of all signals are false.
> > I said our industry has ultimate control over the signals,
>
> That is where ECV comes into play.
>
> >control over
> > the quality of equipment used,
>
> Mandatory CPO1 standards.
>
> >and the extent of training.
>
> School for abusers
>
> > I suggested members contract with licensed, bonded, and insured
> > companies that abide by IQ standards of installation. I handed out
> > samples of the Installer's & Customer's False Alarm Prevention
> > checklist from the NBFAA, and I discussed how the end user is also
> > responsible because all they care about is price. I talked about the 7
> > day no dispatch policy and how it is extremely affective. I mentioned
> > two way voice, and video monitoring.
>
> All recommendations that have been here for some time now. These items
> should still be supported as methods of false alarm reduction.
>
> > It appears that some are reading this as me saying 99% of all alarm
> > systems are shit. I never said that, and I never would say that.
>
> People hear what they think they hear, not necessarily what is said. You can
> correct this by not addressing the senior centers luncheon. <

I guess they are accustomed to hearing the 99% of alarms are shitty so
much they assumed I was discussing alarm systems and not signals.

>
> > Maybe they should reread what I said, and then tell me exactly what I
> > was wrong about.
>
> They won't remember yesterday, let alone what they read last week. <

That's my problem. I forget everything

>
> > And YOU are allowed to skim read. I have a soft spot for old folks and
> > know how the eyes play tricks on you. Norm is a MUCH MUCH MUCH younger
> > guy than you so he has no excuse. Poor bastard is probably still
> > pecking away at the keyboard emailing a hate letter to the paper. NORM!
> > Read it again ya friggin hot head. Doesn't it make you laugh when you
> > see these kids go off half-cocked, Bob?
>
> Kids!!! Can't teach them anything. And the music they play, my God! And
> these are going to be the leaders of our country.<

:-)

>
> >
> > My point is the police (the people we rely on to respond) only see the
> > 99%.
> > Let's cut it down to 50% so we can take them to task for slow response
> > times.
>
> The 99% will always be there. You, me or the industry cannot improve that.
> What you really are referring to and if they are smart, what they really
> want (but don't know how to say it) is to reduce the amount of dispatches.
> Enhanced Call Verification will do that. Immediately!! <

Any info you can send me would be much appreciated, Bob

>
> > The more accurate we become the faster they will respond.
>
> I don't believe that for a minute. They (the opponents) do not believe alarm
> response is police work. <

yet publically they will always claim otherwise. That is why I am
pushing the envelope with them. I have a radio interview coming up, and
a follow up story being written on this. It's the forum of public
opinion that moves mountains since the keeper of the keys (the town
council) are all elected officials, and wouldn't want to piss off the
voters by appearing unwilling to resolve an issue they griped so loudly
about.

>
> >Here is what
> > I said our industry should do to cut the numbers down.
> > I said:
> > If the customer doesn't know how to use it we should teach them.
> > If it's faulty we should fix it.
> > If it's a chronic abuser we should shut them off.
> > If we don't do that then slap the fine on me.
>
> You were doing great until the last line.<

No, I believe if my company is the one providing service to the 600+
alarm character then shame on me for keeping him online.

>
> > Aint I just the big bad boogey man?
>
> Not really, I applaud anyone looking for an answer, addressing the concern,
> and being professional enough to put it out there as a possible resolve. It
> isn't your fault no one else agrees.<

I never expected anyone to agree with me, which is exactly why I
started this thread.
I wanted the differing opinions of people here, and knew who would
reply and who wouldn't. I knew that some would take great issue with my
statements but I welcome that because I also have to respect that many
of you were in this industry when I was in diapers. Many of you paved
the way for guys like me to earn the income I earn, and there is still
alot I can learn. It's the generation of alarm dealers that I belong to
who are for the most part responsible for this huge spike. We are more
interested in slinging paper than offering quality. We couldn't tape a
window if you gave us a month, and couldn't get a wireless device in
places you guys would get wires. I will never reach a point where I
know everything but I will never reach a point where I want to stop
learning, and your generation is the best source of information.
Seriously, thanks for replying.

>
> > I appreciate your opinions. You make valid points and welcome your
> > response, but if it ever gets out that I was involved in a serious
> > thread I'll have to shoot you.
>
> You will have to find me. I'll give you a hint, Frank is my counter guy,
> Ejad does my installs, I hang out at Sumo wrestling matches watching Norm,
> and get my Kicks and Giggles from RLB. <

Which Frank? There's at least two Franks but they are the same Frank
posting from different places.
If Ejad is your installer you must be out of business. A hard day's
work and a warm beer would kill Jim.
I really didn't need the visual of Norm in sumo attire, and I wish one
of those kicks for bAss would wind up in his ass.

> >
> > > Catch ya on the rebound...<
> >
> > Is that a comment on my weight? Saying I am shaped like a basketball?
> > Mom says I am not fat I am just jolly.
>
> No, she said "Jelly". Clean the crap out of your ears. <

Sorry i couldn't hear you.

>
> > I hope someone whizzes in your senior center lunch.
>
> There goes the seriousness of the thread. That is OK, it was (still is) an
> important topic. <

Sorry for adding a little levity to the thread, Bob. It is a very
important topic. I sincerely thank all of you for responding, and hope
this conversation continues so we can continue to discover more
prevention methods.