Re: question about VOIP and liability

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think every contract I have *ever* read makes the client responsible for a
working means of communication between the system and the CS. Kinda a dumb
story...musta been a slow newsday for pix.


"Everywhere Man" <alarminstall@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1156531433.381682.285980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Yes Brinks has that clause in it's contract and yes Cablevision warns
| customers that VoIP does not work with all alarm systems but why let
| the truth get in the way of a Help me Howard report? Has anyone ever
| seen a news station consumer advocate report where the company
| (regardless of industry) wasn't wrong?
|
|
| Don wrote:
| > doesn't brinks have a clause in their contract that states it is the
| > subscribers duty to maintain a pots line?
| >
| > "Everywhere Man" <alarminstall@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1156526334.567909.83060@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > > Channel 11 WPIX news in NYC just ran a hatchet job story about a
BRINKS
| > > customer in New Jersey and VoIP. Look for "Help me Howard" on their
| > > website and follow the link to the BRINKS story.
| > > www.wb11.com
| > >
| > > Bob Worthy wrote:
| > >> I am wondering if anyone has actually talked with your liability
| > >> insurance
| > >> underwriters about the pros and cons with this VOIP and security
| > >> communications issues. I know all of the techy types drewl all over
new
| > >> technologies and how cool it is and how we can make it work and all
that.
| > >> Hell, give us enough parts and we'll build a helicopter out in the
| > >> parking
| > >> lot. I know there are waivers and disclaimers being  presented,
signed
| > >> etc.
| > >> That is a step towards defending your company and you if your
corporate
| > >> vail
| > >> can't be broken, ha ha. :o[  Even those written by attorneys aren't
worth
| > >> the paper they are written on in a high profile personal injury case
when
| > >> the company knowingly hooks up to something known to be unreliable
and
| > >> thinks it is ok because we stuck something in the customers face and
had
| > >> them sign it. The industry somehow needs to bring together the powers
to
| > >> be,
| > >> manufacturers, insurance and attorneys, ANSI, approval labortories,
| > >> internet
| > >> providers, the bells, cable providers, etc. and come to some
conclusions
| > >> about this soon. Why is the industry letting this technology speed
pass
| > >> without getting on board? Do we really think waivers are all that is
| > >> necessary? I know this is wishful thinking, however, I feel that
every
| > >> time
| > >> someone connects to this technology, right now, is simply another
nail in
| > >> their company's coffin. Have a serious talk with your insurance
company
| > >> and/or the homeowners insurance company or the insurance company that
is
| > >> carrying a multi million dollar policy on inventory for your customer
| > >> about
| > >> the pro's and con's of connecting to this new technology and see if
they
| > >> will bless it. Chances are it won't be a problem as long as there are
| > >> alot
| > >> more dollars spent on additional coverage by you and your customer.
At
| > >> this
| > >> time that is just an assumption but I would be interested to hear the
| > >> outcome of your conversations with your attorneys and insurance
companies
| > >> about this issue since I am more interested in protecting what I have
| > >> over
| > >> putting on that one account that is questionable.
| > >
|