Re: Computer virus???

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On May 23, 11:33=EF=BF=BDam, "Robert L Bass" <RobertLB...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote=
:
> "Nick Lawrence" wrote:
>
> > ... (one of the largest dealers anywhere) was merely one of many dealers=

> > which has improperly employed the "local programming lockout", it is a b=
ig
> > problem in the CA marketplace. We know (as does almost everyone here) of=

> > other large US regional dealers doing the same evil, anti-competitive,
> > anti-consumer acts.
>
> Nick,
>
> You are absolutely right. =EF=BF=BDThe illegal and unethical use of progra=
mming
> lockouts is extremely common in the alarm industry. =EF=BF=BDThey are but =
one of
> thousands of dealers whose practices are anti-competitive and anti-consume=
r.
> Many of the installersd who post here will of course deny it, though they =
know
> full well the practice us widespread.
>
> > As to their "nefarious agenda", one can surmise the dealer's intent when=
 it
> > refuses to remove the "local programming lockout" from the customer-owne=
d
> > panel, at the customer's written request, upon termination and full paym=
ent
> > for the contract term.
>
> Precisely. =EF=BF=BDThe only purpose is to make it more expensive and more=
 difficult
> for the consumer to switch service providers. =EF=BF=BDNo one posting here=
, especially
> Olson and Leuck, is unaware of the problem. =EF=BF=BDDon't expect them to =
post an
> honest opinion on the subject though.
>
> > Unfortunately, "defaulting the board" (returning all programming options=
 to
> > factory presets, thus losing zone identities, keypad alpha words, user
> > arm/disarm codes, bell timeouts, false alarm protections, etc) means tha=
t
> > the system will no longer properly work as a "local", thus merely adding=
 to
> > the customer's misery, and robbing him of much of what he paid for. Way =
to
> > go!
>
> The operative word here is, indeed, "robbery." =EF=BF=BDBy depriving the c=
onsumer of
> what he purchased and paid for, the alarm company commits an act of theft.=

> The legal term is unlawful conversion. =EF=BF=BDAgain, these guys know it =
but they'll
> never admit it.
>
> > Alas, if only the outgoing dealer would merely remove the "local program=
ming
> > lockout", the receiver, download and account numbers, test timer etc, an=
d
> > return the installer code to default, leaving the system fully operative=
 as
> > a non-reporting "local" system, the whole issue could be avoided.
>
> Correct. =EF=BF=BDThere are a few who actually do the right thing. =EF=BF=
=BDUnfortunately,
> it's next to impossible for the customer to determine in advance if he's
> dealing with an honest dealer or another jiminex.
>
> --
>
Well if it isn't Piece Of Shit from the Dead, talking out his ass
again.

Why don't you tell us all where you get the information about exactly
who and how many alarm companys lock out their customers. Why don't
you tell us if it fits your adgenda here in this group of professional
installers (that excludes you) to continuously berate installers so
that  you can boost your own ego.

Are there companys who lock their customers out (?) sure. Do more lock
out than don't(?) you have no way of knowing. Anyone (other than you))
would not dare to say, except what they've experienced and what they
themselves do. You hear it only for the cheap DIY'ers who have been
locked out. And maintaining your constant stupidity, you spout that
more companys lockout than don't. Well, we'll just write that off to
your dementia before your death.

No one  here knows what the percentages are but if you take a reading
from those who post here, it would appear that most don't lock out
their customers except for non payment ..... which is only right. I've
only experienced from other companys a few times in almost 40 years
that someone would not unlock a board and it appears from what I've
heard from others, that is more common than the lies you are telling.

But it really doesn't make that much difference what  you say or do.
We'll soon be rid of you.