Re: Lying Competition

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Apr 7, 1:54=A0pm, "E DAWSON" <edaw...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "tourman" <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> news:f50ccbbe-5e41-4fba-82b0-0a01533fed1f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> On Monday, March 25, 2013 10:22:21 PM UTC-4, Chris wrote:
> > Anyone here ever have issues with other alarm companies - door knockers=
 or
> > real companies - trying to steal your clients by telling them you're ou=
t
> > of business, etc.
>
> > Anything that should or shouldn't be done about them?
>
> > - Chris
>
> You are quite right ! Sometimes it seems as if some of the alarm companie=
s
> are worse than the low life we are trying to protect our customers agains=
t.
> Thank goodness they are in the minority; however there are enough of them
> that they can do quite some damage.
>
> Up here in Ottawa, I like many companies, do our fair share of takeovers.
> One of the larger firms up here in Ottawa (Kodiak Alarms for one)with abo=
ut
> 10,000 customers, seems to be getting away with disreputable practices. A=
LL
> their alarm boards are locked regardless of who owns them; ALL of their
> boards don't have any kind of auto test programmed in, so they never know=
 or
> care whether their client's systems are working or not.With so many
> customers going VoIP today, this is an invitation to disaster !! I know t=
his
> through multiple takeovers,as well as talking directly to their installer=
s.
>
> There are so many others that I have comprised a list of installer codes =
for
> local companies that lock their boards, and I willingly give it out to
> anyone who asks. I figure that's the only ways to beat these lowlife
> companies at their own game. If they don't lock boards, they're not on my
> list !!
>
> Then we have companies like DSC that deliberately encrypt their newest li=
ne
> of boards so they can't be unlocked...!!
>
> Door knockers and others of their ilk will always be with us. For many,
> money is always put before ethics in the way they operate. As long as
> customers are stupid enough to believe you can get something for nothing =
in
> this business, these guys will continue to flourish. It's been the same f=
or
> the 20 or so years I've been in the business. I doubt anything will chang=
e
> any time soon...
>
> Hi,
>
> I hear and understand what your frustration is in regards to disreputable
> companies. I do think differently in regards to locked boards though. The
> fact that a company locks the boards while they are monitoring them, does
> not translate into being a disreputable company. We do lock boards when t=
hey
> can be locked, while we are monitoring them, to protect ourselves from
> "disreputable companies" trying to take over any monitored system under a
> monitoring agreement, as well as 'disreputable customers' who are trying =
to
> leave un-ashamedly prematurely.

RHC: Yes, locking boards does have legitimate uses such as the ones
you've stated. And as long as the company doing the locking is
diligent enough to remember to dial in and unlock the board when the
client leaves them, I have no issue. But lets be realistic here; once
the client is no longer paying for monitoring, most companies dismiss
the need for any further action on their part. Also, many smaller
dealers leave the business, and most certainly wouldn't dial in to
them all and unlock the board. Hell....many are still not set up for
dialing in to their panels even if they wanted to ! So the end result
of locking boards within the total industry, is the proliferation of
locked boards, owned by customers, say when they buy the home, who are
now denied access to THEIR personal property. This is like me selling
you a used car with an inpenetrable padlock on the hood ! And on top
of that, there are the even larger numbers of companies big and small
that DELIBERATELY  lock the boards simply to be mean about other
clients taking over panels that they have installed. This is nothing
but chickenshit, but goes on in untold numbers of cases....it's
chickenshit because new boards today are no more than $50 or $60 bucks
wholesale, so it doesn't even have that intended purpose. When taken
as a whole, it serves more  to frustrate homeowners switching homes
than it does good for it's very few legitimate uses.
>
> One interesting story of note, I will mention now. About a year ago, we w=
ere
> monitoring a very large alcoholic beverage retail establishment. There wa=
s
> an Ademco 128FB board that had a fire system, burglary, and some access
> control tied into it. Now when we take over a system, we have to go
> line-by-line over all the programming and every little device or screw
> connection is checked out thoroughly. Yes, it is very time consuming, but=
 we
> assume that the last tech wasn't so swift. Most of the time, it proves to=
 be
> true. When we certify a system, we know that we have done everything
> possible to make it work right, and we should not have any surprises down
> the line.
>
> After having monitored this system about 2 years, I was called for a serv=
ice
> call to address a problem with the wireless door contact on one of the ma=
in
> doors. The 5816 needed replacing in this case. When I tried to get into
> programming with the installer code for this system, I found that I could
> not get in. Puzzled, I resorted to the power down mode, since this system
> could not be locked out. When I got back into programming, I first checke=
d
> the installer code section, and behold, I found that it had been changed =
to
> none other than "ADT's" installer code. Wow, I thought, that's a switch. =
I
> checked other parts of the programming and they had perverted that too.
> Realizing the gravity of the situation, I enlisted the services of a real
> police officer in the employ of the store, to personally witness the chan=
ges
> in the programming. I got his name, badge number, and cell number; and he
> agreed to help me any way he could. After taking up a conversation with t=
he
> manager of the store whom I was on good terms with, I was apprised of the
> fact that there had been 2 technicians for over half a day, that had gone
> thru that system some time ago. It appears that they were taking over the
> system until the time that they informed the owner that he would have to
> spend $800 on a compatible ADT cellular backup for his system. The owner
> nixed the take-over when he realized all that was involved. Problem was,
> those technimorphians had gone thru most of the programming already. By t=
he
> way, I don't consider an Uplink cellular backup incompatible with any
> central station.
>
> The company sent the owner a registered certified-receipt letter the next
> day, informing him how he had put our company at liability for his reckle=
ss
> behavior. He was given 5 business days to contact us so that I could go b=
ack
> out there and reprogram the entire system at his cost this time. A copy w=
as
> sent to the Fire Marshall of this large city that he was in, as well as t=
he
> insurance company of record that he was insured with. There was a clause
> that if the company did not hear from him, that they would assume that he
> went to another company... and he did. Good riddance!
>
> If this system could have been locked out, this would never have happened=
.
> The ability to lock a board is to protect the system while you are
> monitoring it, not to prevent an authorized take-over. Also, if you did l=
ock
> your boards, it sure would make it a little harder for the company that y=
ou
> mentioned from taking over your panels. By the way, we do send an auto-te=
st
> on a regular basis. You should have a strong clause in your monitoring
> agreement that thoroughly puts the responsibility of overseeing the phone
> line upon the customer's shoulders also; that makes them liable if they
> change to VoIP and their system won't communicate anymore because the pho=
ne
> line is now back-fed to the mainboard.

RHC: Certainly no argument that it might have prevented this attempted
takeover. But one instance does not excuse the major industry wide
abuse of this feature. Taken in total, it should be abolished from
panels and serves little real use.
>
> Since you say that you do have a list of installer codes from the compani=
es
> that lock their boards, it reasons that you have found a way to get into
> them. It is noble that you are willing to share the information to reputa=
ble
> companies that do reputable take-overs. Just make sure that the info does
> not get out to any 'bad' company. I do find that using 'ONE' installer co=
de
> company-wide, is a recipe for disaster. Do notice that in the paragraphs
> above I did say "with the installer code for this system" had been change=
d.
> If you can find a system to assign, randomly generate, or pull-out-of-a-h=
at,
> an installer code for each system that you monitor; you will more concise=
ly
> protect your customers' systems from these disreputable companies at larg=
e.
>
> As far as DSC is concerned, the boards can be gotten for about $40 or so,
> depending upon your particular supplier. That is not that great a cost to=
 be
> overcome. Keep them around until you eventually find out the code that so=
me
> tech put into an un-lockable system by the same company. And then again, =
you
> can send them to Florida, to get unlocked by Tech-man.com. Or better yet,
> you could even turn it into a deductible 'business trip' during the 'warm=
'
> months of February/March in Ottawa and bask in the sunlight and beaches o=
f
> the west coast of Florida. Tell him to take about a week when you drop th=
em
> off personally, no rush, take your time!

RHC: Jim Rojas and I have worked together for years in unlocking
boards. He does the US and I do Canada. We have over the years
exchanged "secrets" of this nature, although I don't pretend to have
the breadth of knowledge he does on this subject.  BTW, I don't
release the lists of installer codes...I simply give out the codes to
companies calling me directly, provided they themselves are not on the
list (if they are, they lock boards, and they can go to hell !! I
won't give them anything but the one finger salute !!)

The newest line of DSC panels (1616, 1832) cannot be unlocked because
DSC deliberately further encrypted their panels internally...as one
party from DSC told me.."every board you unlock is one new board we
don't sell"...So you have an industry wide situation that is totally
self serving to all in it, except the eventual customer, who more
often than not gets burned by someone in the industry.

Jim is correct; this honest, straightforward approach runs counter to
the norm in this industry. But that doesn't make it just or correct;
it just makes the industry and those in it who practice this
disreputable practice a little more dishonest than many of them
already are...

>