Re: Generic Central Station Horror Tales

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

It's a good thing it's all hypothetical eh?

"Roland More" <NoSpamroland@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46e54eca$0$18937$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> It seems no matter how subtle or not, there seems to be nothing
registering
> about it at the head end. Besides it's the other end that needs anonymity.
> Perhaps it is like saying it is safe to identify the hospital but not the
> patient.
>
> "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:054217c7574488fb3063f92a4ad3de52@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Roland More said:
> >
> >>Would you expect a central station would pay off if they called your
> >>customer's alarm panel and removed the central station phone number, as
> >>well
> >>as the account number from the panel, and then the customer suffered a
> >>loss
> >>from a failure to dispatch?
> >
> > Pardon me, I had forgotten that you and Just Looking are the same
person.
> > I thought the original question was a legitimate question about
legitimate
> > central station errors, and did not realize it was a continuation of
your
> > expose of a hypothetical central station.
> >
> > What you now describe falls under the heading of intentional misconduct,
> > rather than an honest mistake.  Any dealer who found out his central had
> > reprogrammed his systems as locals without notice should run for the
door,
> > and the nearest lawyer.
> >
> > Of course, I'm speaking hypothetically, and I have no knowledge of any
> > central station actually doing anything like this, other than reading
the
> > comments you have made.
> >
> > I would say, however, that you have been about as subtle as a
sledgehammer
> > in your hints as to the identity of the company, and you are probably
long
> > past the stage of being able to use the word "hypothetically" as cover.
> >
> > - badenov
> >
>
>