Re: Envisalink monitoring satisfaction?

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 11:03:52 AM UTC-5, Rocky wrote:
> "G. Morgan"  wrote in message=20
> news:olv6bah3rb7aifrs6mm72cudllo4fum62e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>=20
> Jim Wrote:
>=20
> >Oh, and one more thing. Take a look at some of the DIY help websites.
> >
> >By far, the most popular panels ..... by the thousands .....  in the han=
ds=20
> >of DIY'ers on EVERY DIY help web site is ... yep ...... DSC  .... with=
=20
> >Honeywell a close second.
> >
> >In return, please tell me how much loyalty do you think they actually=20
> >deserve ?????
>=20
> >I can't comment on DSC since I have not touched their stuff in 10 years.
> >I assume they are worse than ever, they were bad when I quit dealing wit=
h
> >them so long ago.
>=20
> >In fairness to Honeywell, at least they take a stance about not helping
> >end-users with installation issues.  Its been a while since I've called
> >support, but they would always ask my name and company before assisting
> >and keep a record of how often I called. You're right about end-user
> >installation manuals too - they are not "dumbed-down" for the masses lik=
e
> >a Home Depot sold DIY system might be.  Alarmnet radios have to be
> >programmed with proprietary programmers, or OTA (not something an
> >end-user can initiate).
>=20
> >The problem I see is online outlets selling professional parts to DIY'er=
s
> >*and* offering cheap monitoring.  No competent technician has inspected
> >the system, now online, and it's capable of summoning emergency response
> >to any location (even an incorrect location if the account number is
> >wrong!).  No one checks to make sure the appropriate signal is programme=
d
> >for the device(s).  If a smoke detector trips; it may send a trouble,
> >supervisory, or burglary signal.  That's a mistake that could be deadly
> >and not caught until its way too late.
>=20
> >I think there should be a national standard that all local responders
> >adopt which states that no emergency response will be summoned unless th=
e
> >system has been certified by a competent & licensed company.  That
> >certifying company *should* be in a contract with the monitoring company
> >to complete the liability chain.  The monitoring company should (shall)
> >require the DIY'er to undergo re-certification every time programming
> >mode is entered.  I suppose a remote panel connection would be good
> >enough for that, after the initial physical inspection.  Also, require
> >periodic (annual?) physical inspections for DIY installed & monitored
> >systems.
>=20
> >I guess you've seen the TV commercials for SimpliSafe
> >http://simplisafe.com/ .   It shows the DIY'er 'mounting' a PIR by
> >placing it on his fireplace mantle!  WTF?  I almost spit out a mouthful
> >of coffee when I saw that.
>=20
> "G. Morgan"
> As much as I agree with your assessment of the current situation,
> I DO NOT think Fed or Even State involvement will cure the problem.
> Not sure how it is in your state/local area, but here in Kentucky  all th=
e=20
> government uses regulations for is revenue collection..
> Safety is very low down on their list of concerns.
> ie...  they passed a law that restricts Emergency Aid Buttons that are=20
> remotely monitored to just one company..
> (unless you're a Hospital and self monitoring your own equipment)
> (I'll let you guess who makes most of the money on that little caper ...)
> ie...   fire alarm monitoring is only allowed under the NFPA 2002 edition=
..
> No allowance is given for VoIP  or Cellular,  POTS only....
> (AT&T  has already told the state PSC regulators they plan to drop POTS i=
n=20
> 2014/15)
>=20
> I guess we're all  just waiting for the "@#$% in a Hand Basket"  to come=
=20
> swinging by..   ;-)
>=20
> RTS
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://

I think you're right. Security is not the concern of politicians or any of =
the recent players jumping on the latest security system bandwagon. It's al=
l about the RMR. And without the politicians placing restrictions on the ga=
rbage that's being offered now and only looking for more revenue producing =
laws, the garbage will just pile higher and higher.=20

Most end users and/or DIY'ers will forego the possibility that they've done=
 something wrong .... willing to take the chance as long as they don't have=
 to pay anything (or very low rates) for anything. After all, they don't kn=
ow what they don't know. What if they don't get the call from their self mo=
nitored alarm system? They'd rather take that chance then pay for monthly m=
onitoring. Why "isn't" it alright to put a motion detector on a mantle? It'=
s a lot easier than having to mount that ugly thing on a wall.  Here's one =
for you ...... "A cat is not going to set off a motion detector because it =
isn't a person." That's what's out there. There's no effort by the alarm in=
dustry to educate the public about what the failings in these systems are b=
ecause the manufacturers are profiting regardless. It would be nice if the =
industry had a national association who would run educational adds to educa=
te the public .... right? But .... wait a minute .... we DO have a national=
 association ...... but alas, it's made up of alarm manufacturers and Natio=
nal Alarm companies that all profit from the lack of education to the end u=
sers. OH WELL ...... guess there's no help there. =20

When you're dealing with that kind of ignorance ..... and the seller isn't =
concerned about it ..... you know where all this eventually leads. To the t=
otal commoditization of security systems that offer worthless security whic=
h will reach the point that authorities will no longer respond to any kind =
of residential alarms.=20

I say again, if you're just starting out or midway in this trade, you'd bet=
ter diversify something fierce in the coming years. Security as you have kn=
own it is going to disappear.=20

All I can say I'm glad I was in it during it's heyday.