Re: the police was dispatched to ... the wrong house

["Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Robert L Bass" <RobertLBass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xxbvi.359$xc5.28@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > You don't have enough facts on this to
> > know if they were inept or not...
>
> Let's see.  They don't bother monitoring Caller ID and they don't do daily
tests.  That's enough.  They're inept.

Hardly, daily tests do nothing but show the account sent in a test signal
once a day, it would do nothing in this instance, the original poster
mentioned they did not show the Caller ID on his signal, there is no mention
they did not handle Caller ID in general

BTW I don't recall the OP saying his system wasn't set for daily tests

  Oh, while we're
> on the subject, does Monitronics do daily tests on all residential systems
and open/close on all commercial ones?

If the dealer sets it up as such yes, how about your garage central station?
Did you have Caller ID?

>
> > 1. It is up the the installation company to set
> > up daily test signals not the central station...
>
> That depends on the central station.  You work
> for Monitronics and apparently spend your days
> programming alarms for them.  Do you configure
> all those systems for daily test?  If not, what is
> your excuse?

I do not spend my days programming alarms for them, I have never spent my
days programming alarm systems. Again you do not know what I do for them

>
> > 2. The responsibility of the central station is
> > to dispatch on a signal on one of their accounts...
>
> A *responsible* central station would care enough
> to make sure all accounts are properly programmed.

No, a responsible central station monitors installations by alarm companies,
it is up to them to make sure the accounts are properly programmed

> One very effective way to minimize the chances of
> a situation like this arising is to offer daily test and
> Caller ID monitoring as part of one's basic services.

No, daily tests and Caller ID do nothing to show a panel is properly
programmed

> Not doing this as a matter of routine practice is
> indicative of a rather cavalier attitude about the
> security of one's clients.  This of course brings us
> back to the previous question.  Does your employer
> offer daily test and Caller ID (or ANA) monitoring
> at no additional charge to encourage installing
> dealers to make use of the features?  If not, what
> is your excuse?

I have no idea what they charge dealers for monitoring, I'm pretty sure they
do but why don't you call and ask?

> If they had done the job properly in the first place
> the situation would have been far less likely to
> have come about.  It's a matter of actually protecting
> your clients, as opposed to covering your own arse.
> Your comment about liability indicates you're far
> more concerned about the latter than the former.

You conveniently miss the issue here which was what the responsibility of
the central station is and that responsibility is to dispatch when they
received the signal, you seem to alternate between time-consuming research
without dispatching and in a recent message dispatching like the rest of us
have been saying, so which is it?