Re: LOCKED PANEL

["Just Looking" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Why would brinks be willing to service what it claims the customer doesn't
own and can't ever own? How can that make any sense?

"BDEBJ" <biteme@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46df2933$0$15423$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Brinks will not service the system the customer owns unless
> > they resign another 3 year contract.
>
> not true...brinks will service the system at the normal serv charge
> which is $50 for the 1st half hour and $20 for each 15 minutes after that.
> they do not have to sign any contract at all!!!
>
>
>
>  Since the panel is not keypad
> > programmable, it is the same as locking the panel out even though the
> > customer owns the equipment. There lies the problem. The customer has
> > been ripped off.
> >
> > Angry Man In Gauteng
> >
> >
> >
> > > Interesting eh?
> >> >
> >> > Just for clarification .... when you say "MY system" I'm presuming
> >> > that this is a system that you installed and your customer paid for
> >> > and you're now monitoring it   ??????
> >> >
> >> > I'm asking because .....there are those people who say, that after a
> >> > panel is paid for, that you should unlock it. That it belongs to the
> >> > subscriber. Which .... it seems that this is a case that if Brinks
> >> > were to find the panel unlocked, that they'd take it over in a
second,
> >> > because they;d be the first one there and you'd be SOL at even having
> >> > a shot at it.
> >
> > RHC: If Brinks were the first one on the scene, and they did their
> > sales job properly, they probably would get the business. So what !
> > Doesn't give the original company the right to lock a board which has
> > been SOLD to someone else.
> >> >
> >> > So, it seems that to the "anti Lockout people"..... locking out a
> >> > panel is only good if you keep the account away from a National
> >> > company but not alright if it's a small company........ or one that
> >> > only thrives on doing takeovers?
> >
> > RHC: Who gets the business National or otherwise has nothing to do
> > with the fact that someone has locked a board that belongs to someone
> > else. Frustration at not automatically being given the ongoing service
> > business is no excuse to justify doing so
> >> >
> >> > Funny how that works   ..... huh?
> >> >
> >> > Must be these "anti lockout people" have some kind of a "thing" just
> >> > for the Nationals. Or .... who knows ...... could be that they're
just
> >> > hypocrites in desguise.
> >
> > RHC: Yeah...sure.....same old
> >
> >
>
>