Re: Monitoring Conversion

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:41:39 PM UTC-5, tourman wrote:
> On Friday, September 7, 2012 1:02:42 AM UTC-4, Russell Brill wrote: > Do =
you mean this piece of s**t??? > > http://www.digitaldiverter.com/page/page=
/6747033.htm > > > > A word from the wise: People that want to switch monit=
oring service > > providers, but can't seem to get their panel dealer code =
defaulted, PROBABLY > > OWE their last alarm company MONEY... It's only a m=
atter of time before they > > screw you too :( > > > > Good Luck with the t=
akeovers...... > > > > Russ > > > > "ABLE1" <royboynospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wr=
ote in message > > news:HU82s.631846$2a.147255@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=
.. > > > Hey all, > > > > > > Sometime ago there was some discussion about =
a device to assist in a > > > takeover of a panel with out having to do any=
 programming. As I remember > > > it was a thingie that plugged in at the R=
J31X and would communicate to > > > your C/S. > > > > > > Anyone have a nam=
e or model that I can search for?? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Les Not =
necessarily ! A lot of companies lock boards simply because they can, with =
no regard to the fact that the panel is owned by the customer. Somehow they=
 think this keeps other companies from "stealing" their accounts. But with =
boards being sold to us at around $50 or so, it does little to stop other c=
ompanies; however, it does create a problem for new home owners who buy a h=
ome with an installed alarm system which they bought with the house, and wh=
ich is unusable for all intents and purposes without spending unnecessary m=
oney. In most of these cases, the only one getting screwed is the home owne=
r. We have one company here in Ottawa called Kodiak security, that makes no=
 secret of the fact they lock all their boards. And they have over 10,000 c=
ustomers being screwed that way.... I'm currently working with government o=
fficials and pressuring them to make this abhorrent practice illegal, as we=
ll it should be...

Hi Robert,

I hope someday you will find out that LaLa land doesn't exist.=20

Since the proportion of people who have alarm system compared to those who =
don't is so great and the fact that generally the public doesn't make compl=
aints about locking out panels .... and law makers are, in the end, only in=
terested in doing things that get the greatest amount of votes..... You kno=
w as well as anyone, that even if by some exreeemly remote possiblilty any =
bureaucrat would think that it was important enough to introduce such a law=
 ... the industry would come up with some other alternative.=20

Even though you hear the stories about Dudly Do Right saving the damsel in =
distress in the nick of time, you never hear about all the times that he go=
t there too late. And you'll notice that the villan always comes up with an=
other plan. Greed is a relentless villan and Dudly can't be everywhere.=20

Off the top of my head, how about ..... Sure Mr customer, here's your progr=
aming code. Now all you need is this here $400.00 programer to go with it.
Or why sure Mr customer, here's your code now all you have to do is get a c=
opy of the password protected software from the manufacturer for a fee of c=
ourse ..... $400.00. or Oh yeah, I forgot to mention .... you'll need to pa=
y a fee to the central station to download your programing instructions. or=
 .... Oh yes, did you know how to program hexidecimal?  or ..... or.=20

Ain't never gonna happen Robert. Just think of the Man from LaMancha.

You always seem to ignore the fact that the programing of the panel belongs=
 to the installer and the installer has a right to protect his property. My=
 contracts contain a clause that says that the program belongs to me, does =
not belong to the client, is leased and if they won't let me get it back th=
at they will owm me $350.00. If they decide to terminate my service and the=
y're up to date on monitoring fees, I will deprogram the monitoring capabil=
ity and default the system to be accessable with factory default access.=20

You may get something passed to the effect that a company cannot NOT deprog=
ram a system if the client has lived up to his original agreement but you'l=
l never be able to convince even a bureaucrat that a company doesn't have a=
 right to protect it's property. And, of course how do you stop a company f=
rom going out of business ......=20

Surely ..... it's a dilemma and unscrupulous people will take advantage of =
it. And it's nice to think that everything should be nice and fair and that=
 we should all hold hands and every thing in the world will be alright ....=
 but that's not the human condition.=20

But I do understand one thing about this subject. We're both crotchty old m=
en who will stick to our prinicpals ...... regardless.