Re: Which system is better?

["Robert L Bass" <Sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"tourman" wrote:
>
> I'd be interested in hearing opinions on this point. Is it better to give
> "instant" response with it's inherent risks for false alarms, or build in a
> dialer delay, or cancel codes to ensure there is more protection against
> false dispatches, but with the inherent "risk" the client thinks he's
> getting poor response from his station.

For most of my clients we called the authorities immediately on burglar, panic
or medical alarms.  Because fire departments in CT won't turn back once
dispatched we always called the premises first on fire alarms.  Clients were
instructed to disarm (triggering a cancel code) and then to call us if it was
an accidental alarm.  Our agreement said that they could be charged for false
alarms that were not properly and promptly canceled but we never actually had
to charge anyone.  Once in a rare while we'd get a client who was so
irresponsible that we'd just drop them at the end of the first year.  Other
than that, things worked well for us.

As false alarms became more of a nation-wide problem over the years various
communities instituted rules requiring a verification call before dispatch and
we would of course honor those.  But by and large, immediate dispatch worked
well for us and for our clients.  Most really like the fact that we could get
the PD on the way faster than others who insisted on calling the premises
first.

BTW, with one type of alarm we always called the fire department first --
carbon monoxide.  We would notify the FD, then call the premises and warn them
to go outside immediately and stay there until the firemen cleared the
building.  On several occasions this saved lives.

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

==============================>
Bass Home Electronics
DIY Alarm and Home Automation Store
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
Sales & Service 941-870-2310
Fax 941-870-3252
==============================>