Re: An ethical conundrum... Opinions welcome!

[Jim Rojas <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

tourman wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2:04 am, Frank Olson
> <use_the_email_li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>> We're hip deep in a major fire alarm system upgrade on two residential
>> high-rise towers with an interconnected parkade.  The old fire alarm
>> systems are being monitored by a company that obviously cares more for
>> the RMR than they do for the safety of their customer.  There are no
>> test signals programmed!  The service manager stated to me that test
>> signals are an additional cost which the customer opted not to send.
>> The company is charging the customer $22.00 a month for "basic" service.
>>    The communicators haven't been transmitting for over two years (that's
>> when the electrician removed them from the wall and placed them neatly
>> in the corner of the electrical room).  The alarm company's invoice
>> supposedly has a reminder to "test your system monthly" and this is all
>> they're relying on!  The customer started refusing the invoices within
>> three months of the panel's disconnection.  Granted, he didn't send the
>> company a proper notice.  The company suspended service on both accounts
>> last year (November).  Are they entitled to two years billing or just
>> one?  Should any professional alarm dealer even offer to monitor a fire
>> alarm system without a daily test signal?  I shudder to think of the
>> possible liability issues involved.
>
> RHC: IMO, they are lucky they didn't get sued. What sort of company
> would monitor a life saving system without daily tests. The fact they
> didn't factor in the price of daily test signals into their monitoring
> rate tells you a lot about this company. There is far too much of this
> kind of unprofessional crap in our industry. Sure the customer shares
> some responsibility in this but ultimately it's the alarmco who has a
> responsibility to ensure the systems they monitor are working. I think
> any Canadian court would find them negiligent in their duty....
>
> This sort of thing makes me wonder about another situation hereabouts
> that likely is also going on. Recently, the telephone company switched
> to 10 digit dialing with much fanfare and lots of time for alarmco's
> to get their act together. However, there are literally thousands of
> ancient panels out there that are totally incapable of 10 digit
> dialing. One of the large nationals (who shall remain nameless), I
> know for a fact, didn't switch out these old clunkers, and likely
> didn't even approach their clients for fear of the cost of switching
> costing them the account. How do I know ? Because I've switched many
> of their systems out, and the clients tell me they were never
> approached about the problem.
>
> So there are thousands of these old panels not transmitting to the
> station properly, and the customer and the station don't know it,
> simply because the company in question doesn't use any kind of test
> signal. But you can bet the RMR is still rolling in though....
>
> Yah gotta wonder.....

Mandating state licensing did not cure this problem did it? I haven't
look at a fire alarm inspection form in many years...is it even listed
there?

Jim Rojas