Re: pir false alarms

["Roland Moore" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree.

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3149630eb734f9ca60442b81e8dce34d@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Matt Ion said:
>
>>My take is, the installer who's billing him has failed to correctly
>>diagnose the problem and has merely treated the symptoms, and should not
>>be paid for an
>>incomplete job.
>
> The installer's job is to make the false alarms stop, not to determine the
> precise cause of those false alarms.  In other words, replacing relatively
> low-cost equipment like PIRs is often cheaper than making multiple service
> visits to try and nail down the exact reason the substandard PIR went off.
>
> If the customer is in a city that charges for false alarms, it's even more
> important to get the problem fixed immediately.  In this case, replacing
> the sensors made the false alarms stop.  Now, if he had installed three
> new
> dual-tecs and the false alarms continued, I would expect the tech to make
> a
> healthy adjustment in the bill, and spend more time figuring out what was
> really going on.
>
> The cost of the parts vs. the cost of troubleshooting labor is what
> counts.
> I gather you work mostly on more expensive video components, where it
> makes
> good economic sense to spend more time troubleshooting.  With a PIR, weigh
> the cost of the part against one additional service call, and it just
> makes
> more sense to change the damn thing.
>
> - badednov
>