Re: DCS Power 832

["Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

tourman wrote:
> alarman wrote:
> > tourman" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1167879343.493188.284360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > You are absolutely right on the money.
> >
> > No, he's not.
>
> RHC: Yes he is ! Dead on the money !
> >
> > >Here is the case that happens SO
> > > often and which I constantly get shit over on the newsgroup because I
> > > complain about it. This is no way for any professional company to act,
> > > and many people in the industry seem to not only turn a blind eye to
> > > it, but insist these things don't happen very often. Or they'll come
> > > back implying you are not being straight about this. This is the sort
> > > of self serving industry crap that the buying public so often have to
> > > put up with. No damn wonder so many people take a jaundiced view of
> > > those selling monitoring services !!
> >
> > <sigh>
>
> RHC: Well, I'm sorry that you find that so bothersome, but start
> looking at things more from the customers point of view for a change.
> You know damn well this sort of thing goes on all the time. And instead
> of starting on about how the poor company is being cheated out of
> revenue etc etc etc...ask yourself how the hell you would feel if you
> were getting screwed over like this. Seems to depend upon who's foot
> the shoe is on....
> >
> > This is a service, expected by the new homeowner to be performed by the
> > alarmco, which is not owed to the new homeowner. The homeowner's attitude is
> > that the alarmco owes this to him because he now owns the system. If the
> > homeowner wants the alarmco to reset the code, which was changed by the
> > alarmco for all the good reasons published here before, the alarmco has a
> > right to charge for that service if they so desire. The fact that the new
> > homeowner wants to use the system locally, and can't because he didn't get
> > the system defaulted by the seller, does not obligate the alarmco to perform
> > service for free of charge. BTW, I certainly would not connect to, and
> > reprogram someones alarm panel unless they were under contract with me and I
> > had some protection from liability. Also, I do not accept your premise that
> > this makes me a shady dealer, or somehow unscrupulous. These new homeowners
> > need to understand that if they move into a home with an existing alarm
> > system, that it is NOT the responsibility of the alarmco to hold their hand
> > for free.
>
> RHC: Jesus H Christ, who the hell said anything about doing it for
> free. On the other hand, I don't think they should stick it to him
> either ! Don't you guys ever read and think, rather than jumping all
> over the first point that may not be thoroughly brought out !  Nothing
> you say above changes the fact that it is HIS fucking property ! And
> the previous alarmco won't give him access to HIS alarm panel (or at
> least so it seems at the moment). The cost of the service to do so is
> NOT at issue here. And no one (least of all me) is saying squat about
> implying you are somewhat less than honourable. How in Gods name can
> you ever come to the conclusion that I am implying you are shady or
> whatever. Jesus, Jack ! Is our industry so anal that they can't or
> won't look at some of the practices that reflect badly on all of us
> rather than just assuming the worst every time about every customer.
> Lord knows, there ARE enough real idiot customers out there that we all
> have to put up with. But this guy is simply outlining a problem we all
> know happens all too often. And I repeat..it is NOT about whether this
> guy will pay for professional services, its about the fact that the
> company so far hasn't done what they should have done when the panel
> was disconnected from the first homeowner...put it back to a point
> where it can be used by them later again, or someone else that the
> homeowner chooses! It's his property pure and simple !!
> >
> > The homeowner may either do research and default/reprogram the system
> > himself, or pay a professional to perform the service.
>
> RHC:Absolutely right !! And that's what he said he has done, and
> approached the alarmco about it. And so far it seems they won't do
> anything for him unless he signs a bloody monitoring contract with
> them. What fucking planet were all you guys born on. That's fucking
> extortion no matter how you colour it !!!!!!
> >
> > If you buy a house with a lock on the garage door,  and no key is available
> > to the new owner, you should not expect the locksmith who installed the lock
> > for the original owner to unlock the lock at no charge. You said that "All
> > the previous company needs to do is dial in and change the installer code
> > back to factory - nothing more." is pure bullshit. How likely is it that the
> > homeowner is prepared for this? Is the alarm still connected to the phone
> > line? Is it powered up? Is little teen-age daughter using the line now? How
> > long shall my tech wait until you're ready for us to dial in? Is the alarm
> > still connected to the same phone line? Or has the phone company, or worse,
> > the "handy" homeowner reconfigured the phone wiring? Should the alarmco send
> > a tech out to correct the problem? At no charge, I suppose? Even if the line
> > is still connected, it still takes some time and effort for a skilled person
> > at the alarmco to access the file, reprogram a new phone number into the d/l
> > computer, call the premises and reprogram the code. And then of course, any
> > other problem the new "customer" has with the system becomes the alarmco's
> > problem. Right?
>
> RHC: No, all problems are clearly the homeowners problems, but give me
> a break ! No one is saying these problems don't exist.You and I run
> into them all the time doing takeovers !!  And no one in this thread is
> saying that the new homeowner won't have to take into account these
> sorts of situations and pay to have them rectified. If it's like it is
> up here, the telephone company may have royally screwed things up. And
> so far he is not saying that he is unwilling to pay for professional
> services (other than monitoring through the previous company). Why do
> you automatically read the worst into everything this guy is saying. It
> will be interesting to see what he comes back with after he calls the
> company tomorrow.
> >
> > So give me a break with your "keeping you from legitimate use of YOUR
> > property" bullshit, will ya?
> > js
>
> RHC: No, you give me a break from all your faulty assumptions about
> what this guy is asking for. Frankly, I hope he does get a professional
> to service his alarm, but it likely won't be from the previous company
> who seems only too willing to pass this guy over because he doesn't
> want them to monitor it.. That's his fucking choice ! He owns the God
> damn panel. If he wants a professional to set it up, he will have to
> pay the price. No one has said any different.
>
> Jesus H Christ ! I hope you fuzzy thinkers never sit on a jury judging
> me for some unproven wrong doing. If so, I'm dead meat before I
> start.....
>
> RHC


I just had to point out to you that some things in life simply can't be
responded to in a civil and placid manner. There are some things,
subjects, people and events, that deserve to be treated, categorically,
in the manner they present themselves. And I include myself in any
or all of the above, that may be applicable.

Congratulations.

Up till now, I had thought that perhaps you were related to the Pope.