Brinks Monitoring Issues
Robert L Bass
parts of the state when I was still installing. Can you tell us what make
and model your alarm is? If it's one of the commonly available systems,
such as Ademco or ITI, you can replace the panel and lock Brinks out (not
the other way around). OTOH, if it's a totally proprietary system, you're
sunk.
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"NiTeOwl" <> wrote in message
news:PeTn8.28018$%U4.64...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> I had Brinks install an alarm 4 years ago. I bought extras (glass
> breakage, all windows connected & all exterior doors) paid over
> $260.00.
>
> I signed a 3 year monitoring plan 24.95 36 mos. Per the contract I
> sent them a notice to end the monitoring 3 1/2 years after I had it
> installed.
>
> Even though we completed our contract they told my wife they would
> come out and rip the box off the wall and would be here within the
> next few days. I called them back and told them we bought the system
> and could not come into my home for any reason.
>
> That day per the caller ID they dialed into the system totally
> disabling it. I called them and they said "you requested to cancel the
> monitoring" The keypad displayed NOT READY call for service.
>
> I thought the system would continue to monitor the home and the siren
> would still alert everyone in the event of a break-in.
> I found the phone connector near the service panel, I knew it dialed
> out, but I didn't know they could dial into the system and alter it.
>
> I had them re-enable everything, and will continue to pay for the
> monitoring of this old and outdated system.
>
> The moral of this story...Once they install a system you become locked
> into paying monitoring fees, or the system wont work.
>
> Any suggestions appreciated...
>
> NiteOwl
>
>
Brian
>
>That day per the caller ID they dialed into the system totally
>disabling it. I called them and they said "you requested to cancel the
>monitoring" The keypad displayed NOT READY call for service.
>
Here's one possible solution. It's not very ethical, but neither is
locking you out of a system you supposedly OWN. Now that the panel is
working, just disconnect the phone wires from the board. You can't
just unplug the cord from the jack. It's probably a 31X. If you do
that, your house phones won't work. Be sure to tape the wires up so
they don't short to anything. It should work, unless there's a line
cut warning, or the panel ceases to function if it doesn't 'check in'
every so often....
just a thought.
J. Stevens
--
Jack Stevens
alarman2...@yahoo.com
remove NOSPAM to reply
"NiTeOwl" <NiT...@dalake.com> wrote in message
news:PeTn8.28018$%U4.64...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> I had Brinks install an alarm 4 years ago. I bought extras (glass
> breakage, all windows connected & all exterior doors) paid over
> $260.00.
>
> I signed a 3 year monitoring plan 24.95 36 mos. Per the contract I
> sent them a notice to end the monitoring 3 1/2 years after I had it
> installed.
>
> Even though we completed our contract they told my wife they would
> come out and rip the box off the wall and would be here within the
> next few days. I called them back and told them we bought the system
> and could not come into my home for any reason.
>
> That day per the caller ID they dialed into the system totally
> disabling it. I called them and they said "you requested to cancel the
> monitoring" The keypad displayed NOT READY call for service.
>
m..leuck
"NiTeOwl" <NiT...@dalake.com> wrote in message
news:PeTn8.28018$%U4.64...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> I had Brinks install an alarm 4 years ago. I bought extras (glass
> breakage, all windows connected & all exterior doors) paid over
> $260.00.
>
> I signed a 3 year monitoring plan 24.95 36 mos. Per the contract I
> sent them a notice to end the monitoring 3 1/2 years after I had it
> installed.
>
> Even though we completed our contract they told my wife they would
> come out and rip the box off the wall and would be here within the
> next few days. I called them back and told them we bought the system
> and could not come into my home for any reason.
You did not buy the system, if you notice on the main box it should clearly
say you do NOT own the system
> That day per the caller ID they dialed into the system totally
> disabling it. I called them and they said "you requested to cancel the
> monitoring" The keypad displayed NOT READY call for service.
Yup, figured they would do that
> I thought the system would continue to monitor the home and the siren
> would still alert everyone in the event of a break-in.
Not with a Brinks system, ADT usually lets the panel continue operation but
mainly because they have so many accounts its a little hard to disable them
all (my guess)
> I found the phone connector near the service panel, I knew it dialed
> out, but I didn't know they could dial into the system and alter it.
>
> I had them re-enable everything, and will continue to pay for the
> monitoring of this old and outdated system.
Why do you consider it old and outdated? you know nothing about it as you
previously stated
> The moral of this story...Once they install a system you become locked
> into paying monitoring fees, or the system wont work.
Maybe with Brinks but rarely with everyone else
> Any suggestions appreciated...
Rip it out and get another system, why continue paying on it?
m..leuck
programmed a couple of them and they send straight SIA
Nice looking keypad
"Robert L Bass" <rober...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cxTn8.166924$1g.14...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
J. Stevens
> Here's one possible solution. It's not very ethical, but neither is
> locking you out of a system you supposedly OWN. Now that the panel is
> working, just disconnect the phone wires from the board. You can't
> just unplug the cord from the jack. It's probably a 31X. If you do
> that, your house phones won't work. Be sure to tape the wires up so
> they don't short to anything. It should work, unless there's a line
> cut warning, or the panel ceases to function if it doesn't 'check in'
> every so often....
> just a thought.
>
Think again. What you suggest WILL kill the house phones.
Ratchet
there is 2 Dan's.
"Dan" <Ratc...@greenapple.com> wrote in message
news:M3%n8.135$a22.1578@news...
> If you had a panel, keypad, doors and all your ground level windows wired
> and then ONLY paid $260, chances are it is a leased system(meaning it is
> owned by Brinks). To have that system install and purchased outright you
> should have paid $700-$1000 dependant on prices in your area and how ever
> many doors and windows you have. You can't even buy a nice average sized
tv
> for $260 now-a-days or even the recent years. Most likely a good portion
of
> that $260 went to the installers paycheck just for installing the system.
> Brinks dialing into your system and shutting you down I don't agree with.
> They should have asked nicely and upon you telling them no, they should
have
> asked you to pay a buyout fee or sent you to a collections agency.
>
>
>
> "NiTeOwl" <NiT...@dalake.com> wrote in message
Dan
Robert L Bass
to get in without Brinks' assistance? Note: I'm not suggesting you post
methods -- just wondering if it is doable. Somebody ought to help this guy.
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"m..leuck" <m.l....@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:ItUn8.119544$702.24995@sccrnsc02...
Robert L Bass
The RJ-31X design allows you to unplug the cord without interfering with the
house phones.
If the panel is programmed for periodic test, it will go into trouble mode
when it fails to reach the central station. The same will occur after an
alarm as well. For an alarm that's not such a problem as you would expect
to have the thing making noise and so forth anyway. Resetting a trouble
alert is usually just a few button presses. What you don't want is to have
it go into trouble every night at say 2:30 am.
Of course, the other side of this is that a company which would behave so
badly probably doesn't go to the added expense / trouble of processing daily
test signals anyway. As such, especially considering their unethical
behavior, I'd say pull the plug and refuse to pay. In fact, I'd also
suggest he file a complaint with the licensing agency, Consumer Protection,
the BBB and write nasty letters to the editors of every major newspaper in
the area. Nothing like turning up the heat on a rotten alarm company. :)
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"Brian" <no...@biteme.com> wrote in message
news:6c30au0t9mqvj9a44...@4ax.com...
Brian
wrote:
>Think again. What you suggest WILL kill the house phones.
gah! of course you are right! Guess who wasnt thinking!
m..leuck
it is with an Acron 670 programmer or by downloading
3-digit account numbers too, wierd stuff
"Robert L Bass" <rober...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7y_n8.265601$uv5.23...@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Robert L Bass
Replace it.
--
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"m..leuck" <m.l....@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:by7o8.112208$Yv2.33891@rwcrnsc54...
m..leuck
>
> Thanks Mr. Bass for your responce:
> I opened the panel and it has the following on the board:
>
> Scantronic Inc. 1994 p/n: 101-000139C 13Jul94
> The Rom Chip: 118-875430 BHS-2000C 18Sep96
>
> It must be BHS "Brinks Home Security" proprietary.
> Maybe you can tell me were to look for the model?
> If you have any suggestions I would love to here them.
>
> Thanks again,
> NiteOwl
1.Take a small screwdriver
2. slowly open the cover
3. take loose the wires from left to right
4. take out the board
5. look at it closely then throw it in the trash
J. Stevens
--
JS
m..leuck wrote
Barry NJ
that monthly recurring revenue and they will give the system away to get
that monthly dollar. They are more a marketing company than a provider of a
security system. Of course, we are all out there to make a buck but the
older, traditional companies at least put a system in that you owned and
charged a straight monitoring fee.
Barry May
"NiTeOwl" <NiT...@dalake.com> wrote in message
news:uZbo8.30058$%U4.66...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> The system board has 1994, Seems old to me.
>
> "You did not buy the system, if you notice on the main box it should
> clearly say you do NOT own the system"
>
> The contract we signed says, "you may pay an additional fee at the
> time of installation to purchase the equipment."
>
> ATD was giving them away at $99.00 back then. Regardless of who owns
> it they should not have dialed in and disabled it without telling us
> they were doing so.
> At which point I would have said don't bother, we will continue
> paying.
>
> I wish I had installed my own system, maybe this will help others
> finding themselves in the same boat I am in.
>
> Thanks for your responce,
> NoteOwl
m..leuck
"J. Stevens" <no...@nothanks.net> wrote in message
news:%8do8.3189$Va.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
Robert L Bass
numerous complaints of similar abuse of clients by these companies as well.
It's not that they are all bad or even that most are bad. The problem is
that ADT corporate apparently does nothing to police the ranks and there are
a *lot* of bad dealers.
If you decide to replace it, either hire a local guy (after thoroughly
checking his references) or just do it yourself. Either way, I'd nail
Brinks to the wall for what they did to you.
Best of luck.
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"NiTeOwl" <NiT...@dalake.com> wrote in message
news:VKbo8.30053$%U4.66...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
>
> I did disconnect the phone jack from the phone jack and ran test on
> the system. The keypad displayed " CP Trouble Call 800-445-0872."
> The keypad beeped every 15 seconds.
>
> I plugged it back in and it stopped the beeping.
> I will continue to pay for the monitoring. Not worth the trouble for
> 25 bucks a month.
>
> I will look into buying my own system or sign up with ADT or a local
> alarm company to avoid using Brinks. Since their customer service is
> so poor.
>
> Thanks for your response,
> NiteOwl
RobAZ1
>I had Brinks install an alarm 4 years ago. I bought extras (glass
>breakage, all windows connected & all exterior doors) paid over
>$260.00.
When you had the system installed, were you paying for the equipment or did you
pay for the installation? For $260 you got one sweet deal for all you had
installed. Sounds like you only paid for installation.
>I signed a 3 year monitoring plan 24.95 36 mos. Per the contract I
>sent them a notice to end the monitoring 3 1/2 years after I had it
>installed.
Remember to keep the monitoring fees as a separate issue over installation
cost.
>Even though we completed our contract they told my wife they would
>come out and rip the box off the wall and would be here within the
>next few days.
Sounds to me like they own the system. You probably were leasing the system
just like you can lease a car. Your initial $260 was the down payment and
such, just like on a lease car.
As for ripping the box off the wall, was that their words or could they have
said they would "remove" the control box? It's not unusual for a consumer to
hear more than what was said. When the city told me they needed to trench in
my front yard to run a new electrical cable, all I heard was they were going to
rip up my front yard.
>I called them back and told them we bought the system
>and could not come into my home for any reason.
Once again, does your contract say you own the system or does it specifically
say, and did they require you to specifically sign or initial that they own the
system?
>That day per the caller ID they dialed into the system totally
>disabling it. I called them and they said "you requested to cancel the
>monitoring" The keypad displayed NOT READY call for service.
Isn't that what you requested? You canceled monitoring and they complied.
They shut off the monitoring.
>I thought the system would continue to monitor the home and the siren
>would still alert everyone in the event of a break-in.
The system could do that but since you stopped paying for their service, they
stopped providing you service. If you want the alarm to function as you
desire, hire someone to program it for your use. You can't expect them to
provide a service without payment and it seems like they only provide service
to those that pay them. But, they probably wouldn't do that because in their
eyes (and possibly by contract) it's not your system to do as you like.
> I knew it dialed
>out, but I didn't know they could dial into the system and alter it.
Virtually all alarm panels can be downloaded.
>I had them re-enable everything, and will continue to pay for the
>monitoring of this old and outdated system.
What makes it outdated? Does it have the capabilities to be armed and
disarmed? Does it identify what's going on? Will it sound an alarm if the
protected area is violated? Can it notify the monitoring center? If it can do
all this, seems to me to be pretty "modern". Also, the panel and equipment
might be able to do ten times what you think it can do, just that you're not
using it or they may not offer all the capabilities of the system to everyone.
I've seen their keypad at shows and it's almost the same as anyone else's with
a few extra features and operations they offer.
>The moral of this story...Once they install a system you become locked
>into paying monitoring fees, or the system wont work.
You mean..
Like once you stop paying for cable, the set-top box won't work?,
Like once you stop paying for insurance, your coverage is gone?,
Like once you stop paying for electricity, you bulbs will go dark?...
Now I know you're going to say that those items will still work, but not with
the company you stopped paying for service. Just like your alarm, the cable
box will still work, but the company isn't going to come out and set it up so
you can use their cable for free, the insurance company isn't going to tell you
how to skirt the insurance requirement, and the power company isn't going to
come out and help you hook up a generator to your house. So the alarm company
you stopped paying isn't going to setup their alarm as local.
The moral of this story is, you probably signed a contract for installation and
an agreed period of monitoring. They reduced the installation cost because of
the contract. They probably own the equipment and you agreed to that. Now that
you ended service, they shut off the system. Seems fair to me. If you want
the system to work, hire someone to set it up that way for you, But don't
expect them to help you use their equipment for your use without paying them.
ALL alarm companies are businesses, not charities.
RobAZ1
>Either way, I'd nail
>Brinks to the wall for what they did to you.
Robert, just curious, what did they do that was so unethical? Seems to me they
excercised their contractual right to disable the system from sending signals.
If brinks owns the system, they have the right to get it back. Why the poster
even said the contract stated they could pay an additional fee to own it. Did
he pay that fee?
Someone else stated that the control box even states Brinks owns the system.
If you lease a car, at the end of the lease you have three options:
1. Give it back.
2. Buy it.
3. Continue paying.
The customer probably had the same options but attempted to inject option #4.
Keeping it without paying!
Robert L Bass
That would indicate that either they sold it to him (which now appears not
to be the case) or they gave him the impression during the "sale" that he
was purchasing it. That is a fairly common practice among some of the more
unscrupulous dealers in the industry. If they did that, they deserve every
thing he can do to them. If not, they still should have told him what they
were going to do and given him the opportunity to discuss it. Who knows?
Perhaps he would have decided to stay with them anyway.
As to #4, now you are assuming the worst of the end user. We don't know
this gentleman. Why no give him the benefit of the doubt?
Regards,
Robert L Bass
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
The Online DIY Alarm Store
http://www.Bass-Home.com
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota, FL 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
rober...@comcast.net
=============================>
"RobAZ1" <rob...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020403012617...@mb-fy.aol.com...
RobAZ1
>If not, they still should have told him what they
>were going to do and given him the opportunity to discuss it.
I think that's where we all agree to disagree. I take the position that
people, by their very nature, will always try to add into what was actually
said. The poster said they said they will rip the system off the wall, yet we
all know that the reply was probably; we will remove the system.
The danger is when any business becomes the target of consumer rage and we
support that rage without thinking that, "hey, that could be me with a
variation".
If a large company has a three year contract and a consumer wants to break it
simply because they don't feel they need the service anymore, is their contract
any less valid over a smaller company with a one year contract? The issue has
nothing to do with contract length or what size the company is, the issue is; a
business right to enter into and enforce their contract. It seems that all it
takes to forget that many of their standard business practices are the same as
your practices, with maybe a slight variation.
>We don't know
>this gentleman. Why no give him the benefit of the doubt?
>
I answer simply, Why not give the alarm company the benefit of the doubt?
Bossman
> pay for the installation? For $260 you got one sweet deal for all you had
> installed. Sounds like you only paid for installation.
I hear this same complaint several times a week. Brinks does charge
for installing their basic system, around here its usually $49 - $99
for 2 doors, a motion, keypad, siren etc. They do not tell the
customer that it is a lease. This information is buried in the
contract and as we all know, customers rarely, if ever, read all the
fine print. They will answer truthfully if asked, but most customers
do not know to ask, as most companies are selling the equipment, not
leasing it. When I speak to a customer who is considering cancelling
Brinks, I often hear how some Brink's rep made it clear that when they
remove the system, ;arge holes will be left in the walls, and that
Brinks won't be responsible for patching them. This emphasis on 'holes
in the wall' results in the mental image of someone ripping the system
out, as the original poster indicated.
I can sympathize with this poster, because I here similar stories on a
weekly basis. While all consumers should read carefully any contract
they sign, I still consider this type of legal 'smoke and mirrors'
game to be highly unethical.
Steven Craddock
contract. Why is it everyone wants something for nothing (or very little)?
Yeah right.... $49 install and I get 2 door sensors, one motion, main panel,
keypad, siren all $250 worth of equipment, not to mention the salesman's
commission, the installation fees, etc...... all for $49.... What a nice
company. And I can decide to quit paying monitoring when ever I feel like
it. Get real.
Wake up people, you get what you pay for... you really do!
"RobAZ1" <rob...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020403010351...@mb-fy.aol.com...
RobAZ1
>They do not tell the customer that it is a
>lease. This information is buried in the
>contract and as we all know, customers
>rarely, if ever, read all the fine print.
So because a consumer fails to read what they are signing, it's the company
that's at fault? I would venture to say that that makes every alarmco guilty.
I don't think anyone goes line by line and explain all the terms of any
contract. So why when it's one of the nationals we say they are bad, but when
it's one of the locals we say the consumer should have read the contract?
FYI, I have copies of contracts for just about every alarm company that works
this area, and the company in question's wording on this subject is plain,
clear and highlighted. So clear is it that a customer must sign stating they
understand that the alarm company owns the equipment. So I ask, why all the
fuss and blame tossing?
>This emphasis on 'holes in the wall'
>results in the mental image of someone
>ripping the system out, as the original
> poster indicated.
The images that the consumer placed on what was said is his issue. But if the
company said they were going to remove it and yes holes will be left that they
wouldn't patch, the term Ripped Out was never mentioned. I suspected the
poster was saying that to create a more horrible picture for us. But we are
above that, because everyday local or national, large or small, lies are told
and we defend our section against those lies. So why not defend against all
the lies that can hurt this industry versus only those that make us look
better?
Robert L Bass
>
> >They do not tell the customer that it is a
> >lease. This information is buried in the
> >contract and as we all know, customers
> >rarely, if ever, read all the fine print.
>
> So because a consumer fails to read what they are signing, it's the
company
> that's at fault?
That depends on the nature of the presentation. In some cases cvourts have
held that the companies were indeed at fault. It was a fairly common
practice among many reps with several of the large, national firms marketing
leased systems to homeowners to deliberately mislead the clients. Elderly
people who often need alarm services the most are unfortunately the most
frequent victims of these scams. The salesman bends the client's ear for an
hour, going on and on about how he is "investing in" security and "buying
peace of mind," etc. He phrases himself so the client thinks it's a
purchase. Only later, after the client gets fed up with slow to no service,
inept monitoring and/or numerous false alarms does he learn that he has not
purchased anything at all -- that the contract said in fine print the size
of an airline ticket contract that it's a lease.
Attorneys general from several states went after alarm companies for this
malignant practice. So yes, in some cases it is the company's fault. If we
are going to sell security systems, ought we not to be above reproach in our
entire dealings? When did the fact that clients are sometimes gullible
enough to believe the sort of rubbish some sales reps pitch grant us license
to lie and cheat? It's not enough to say that the client is at fault for
failing to understand the contract. It is also our moral and ethical
responsibility to clearly explain to each client exactly what we will and
will not do for them, the nature of the transaction, the renewal clause and
how and when to cancel monitoring. Anything less is just plain sleazy
business practice, no matter what mistakes the client may make.
> I would venture to say that that makes every alarmco guilty.
Perhaps it makes yours guilty and perhaps not. I'll let you be the judge of
that. I have always been very forthcoming with clients. I don't try to
obscure any aspect of the contract. I can't respect anyone who does.
> I don't think anyone goes line by line and explain all the terms of any
> contract...
I do. Why don't you do that? It only takes a few extra minutes and clients
really appreciate the effort made in laying weverything out on the table.
In fact, I think you'd have a better closing ratio if you tried it.
> So why when it's one of the nationals we say they are bad,
> but when it's one of the locals we say the consumer should
> have read the contract?
I don't discriminate. I don't like national or local crooks.
Nomen Nescio
From: "Robert L Bass" <rober...@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: Brinks Monitoring Issues
> > I don't think anyone goes line by line and explain all the terms of any
> > contract...
>
> I do. Why don't you do that? It only takes a few extra minutes and clients
> really appreciate the effort made in laying weverything out on the table.
> In fact, I think you'd have a better closing ratio if you tried it.
Oh right...I'm sure you explain the third party indemnification provisions
in great detail. And I'm sure you take the time to explain that if they
don't pay their bill, the balance of their contract is immediately due.
I'm equally sure you explain that if this happens, they will owe you
attorney's fees and collection costs. I'll bet you also explain to them
that the contract is assignable by you without notice, but not assignable
by the customer.
Okay, I have not seen your particular contract. But the terms I've
mentioned are commonplace in alarm contracts. Point is, none of us spend
time explaining what happens if something goes wrong. When you buy a car
on time, the dealer doesn't explain the repo provisions of the contract.
- badenov
Robert L Bass
"Nomen Nescio" <nob...@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:e848a5d92b7e64aa...@dizum.com...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L Bass" <rober...@comcast.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 10:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Brinks Monitoring Issues
>
>
> > > I don't think anyone goes line by line and explain all the terms of
any
> > > contract...
> >
> > I do. Why don't you do that? It only takes a few extra minutes and
clients
> > really appreciate the effort made in laying weverything out on the
table.
> > In fact, I think you'd have a better closing ratio if you tried it.
>
> Oh right...I'm sure you explain the third party indemnification provisions
> in great detail.
Yes, as a matter of fact I do. Don't you? It's really very simple to
explain, especially if you use a contract with large enough print so the
client can actually read it without the aid of an electron microscope.
Unfortunately, that meant our contracts were rather long (same words; bigger
print).
> And I'm sure you take the time to explain that if they
> don't pay their bill, the balance of their contract is
> immediately due.
Nope. I didn't include an acceleration clause in my contract. If someone
wanted to leave, I'd assist them in reprogramming their panel to a
competitor's station or to make it local.
> I'm equally sure you explain that if this happens, they
> will owe you attorney's fees and collection costs.
Nope. I don't bother adding unenforceable clauses to contracts. In
Connecticut such clauses are rarely enforced unless the company can prove
fraud on the part of the client.
> I'll bet you also explain to them that the contract is
> assignable by you without notice, but not assignable
> by the customer.
Yes. I explained that clearly. It's a standard clause in any long-term
contract. I dosn't recall anyone having objected to it.
> Okay, I have not seen your particular contract...
Thaty's right. You also have not seen me on a sales call -- I *never*
called a sales call a "security survey". I found that by being up front and
explainingevery detail of what I would do and the terms of the relationship
I could close a greater percentage of my sales than anyone I knew in the
industry.
> But the terms I've mentioned are commonplace in alarm contracts.
True. With some exceptions, they are a part of mine.
> Point is, none of us spend time explaining what happens if
> something goes wrong. When you buy a car on time, the
> dealer doesn't explain the repo provisions of the contract.
None? Well, I do. That makes at least one. I suspect there are plenty
more, though I'm sure we are in the minority.
Nomen Nescio
>> something goes wrong. When you buy a car on time, the
>> dealer doesn't explain the repo provisions of the contract.
>
>None? Well, I do. That makes at least one. I suspect there are plenty
>more, though I'm sure we are in the minority.
I'd be real interested in how you explain negative contract provisions to a
new customer. Sure, we can all gloss over the limited liability by saying,
"Of course, we're not your insurance company, and we're not going to
reimburse you if you get robbed anyway." But if you really, truly want to
explain the limited liability and third party indemnification, it seems to
me you'd have to say something like this:
"We don't guarantee that the system can't be defeated. In fact, we don't
even guarantee it's going to work at all. And if it doesn't work, or if we
make a mistake in installation, or if our central station screws up in
handling your alarm signal, you're agreeing that we're not liable. Plus,
if a court does find us liable, our liability is limited to $250, even if
we're negligent, regardless of how much money our mistake cost you.
"And not only that, if anyone else ever sues us because of anything to do
with this alarm, you agree to cover the cost of our lawyers, and to pay any
judgment against us. That would include, for example, if one of your
friends dies in a fire because our fire alarm didn't work, and his
relatives sue us."
Are you sure you explain all of that to your new customer, who's all
excited about the new alarm system you just sold him?
Robert L Bass
>>
>>> Point is, none of us spend time explaining what happens if
>>> something goes wrong. When you buy a car on time, the
>>> dealer doesn't explain the repo provisions of the contract.
>>
>> None? Well, I do. That makes at least one. I suspect there are plenty
>> more, though I'm sure we are in the minority.
>
> I'd be real interested in how you explain negative contract
> provisions to a new customer.
OK, sure. Here's an example. When I go over the limitation of liability
and third party indemnification I usually say something like this. "These
clauses are lawyer talk for 'No matter what happens, you can't sue us, even
if we screw up royally.' If anything bad happens in spite of our efforts,
even if we don't do a good job, the contract makes it impossible for you to
collect from us. Without this sort of wording, no insurance company will
protect an alarm company. Also, the theory behind the legal protection is
that we are protecting things of unknown value against unknown threat. If
we were to provide financial protection against a loss, we would be acting
as an insurer. We can arrange for additional protection if you want it, but
that would of course cost extra."
One client -- just one -- in over 20 years that I used that contract flat
refused to sign unless I redacted those clauses. I thanked her and her
husband (she a young lawyer and he a salesman) for their time and started to
leave. The husband asked me to wait outaside while they talked. A few
minutes later I was asked to come back inside. We signed the contract as
originally offered. I took care of them for many years in that home and
later in a larger home they built in a nearby town.
I don't win every sale. But I do win a larger percentage than anyone else I
know (with the possible exception of my brother from Denver, but he sells
insurance). I've found that the best way to explain contract terms that
protect me from lawsuits is to state clearly that the clause protects me
from lawsuits. There's no need to gloss over anything. Just tell them what
the clause is for and why it's there. If you're already at the point of
reading the contract to the client (yes, I read it from cover to cover), the
sale is pretty much in the bag anyway. Why risk it by trying to be canny
about something?
> Sure, we can all gloss over the limited liability by saying,
> "Of course, we're not your insurance company, and we're not going to
> reimburse you if you get robbed anyway."
That's not glossing over. That's telling the truth.
> But if you really, truly want to explain the limited liability
> and third party indemnification, it seems to
> me you'd have to say something like this:
>
> "We don't guarantee that the system can't be defeated. In fact, we don't
> even guarantee it's going to work at all. And if it doesn't work, or if
we
> make a mistake in installation, or if our central station screws up in
> handling your alarm signal, you're agreeing that we're not liable. Plus,
> if a court does find us liable, our liability is limited to $250, even if
> we're negligent, regardless of how much money our mistake cost you.
Actually, that's a paraphrase of the contract wording. I read the exact
wording of each clause and explain what it means in simple English, unless
the client is a lawyer. For attorneys and judges I usually just say, "There
are limitation of liability, third party indemnification and disclaimers of
warranty in here." Do you want me to explain them? The reply is
invariably, "No thanks," but more than 60% sign.
> "And not only that, if anyone else ever sues us because of anything
> to do with this alarm, you agree to cover the cost of our lawyers,
> and to pay any judgment against us. That would include, for example,
> if one of your friends dies in a fire because our fire alarm didn't
> work, and his relatives sue us."
>
> Are you sure you explain all of that to your new customer, who's all
> excited about the new alarm system you just sold him?
I make the entire contract crystal clear, including the clauses that protect
us from lawsuits. I also provide a 3-day "right of rescission" form in
large print and explain what rights that gives the client.
--
j. sloud
> I'd be real interested in how you explain negative contract provisions to a
> new customer.
I'm working on a monitoring, maintenance, and inspection contract
right now for a chemical processing plant. We're on our eighth
contract revision. First, their lawyers refused to sign our contract.
They came up with their own contract, which, of course, our lawyers
didn't like. Rather than refuse it, our lawyers simply added a 25
page "amendment" that basically contradicted everything that their
contract said. Were supposed to have a finalized agreement by this
week. Instead of our standard two page agreement, we now have a 57
page document. The sad part is that we've been providing service at
this plant for 25 years under our standard contract. They've had two
major explosions, and both times we dispatched before their personnel
called for help. Gotta love lawyers.
J.
RobAZ1
> It was a fairly common practice among
> many reps with several of the large,
> national firms marketing leased systems
> to homeowners to deliberately mislead
> the clients.
Are you saying that NO small local company has ever engaged in such tactics?
In this particular case it turns out te customer did infact sign specifically
that they knew the system was not owned by them. Yet the argument seems to
remain, and is directed only at the nationals. I know that more licenses have
been pulled for fraud in this state on the locals vs the nationals. The point
of my comments is that we are quick to blame a single segment of the industry
forgetting that the whole industry is guilty to some extent.
>I don't discriminate. I don't like national
> or local crooks.
Good, so i take it you will not be one of those who sits and waits for any
opportunity to slam a national when the same scenerio could be applied to a
local?
I have no favorite in local or national, but I do tend to defend nationals
whenever the topic is aimed to discredit them when locals are just as guilty,
just like I defend locals when nationals try to make them all out as trunk
slammers.
Robert L Bass
> >From: "Robert L Bass"
>
> > It was a fairly common practice among
> > many reps with several of the large,
> > national firms marketing leased systems
> > to homeowners to deliberately mislead
> > the clients.
>
> Are you saying that NO small local company has ever engaged in such
tactics?
As always, you read into my posts things I never said.
> In this particular case it turns out te customer did infact sign
specifically
> that they knew the system was not owned by them.
I'm curious as to whether that's a typo or you think that "in fact" is one
word.
> Yet the argument seems to remain, and is directed only
> at the nationals.
Nonsense! You've seen me speak up against cheating by small independents
(like Milford Alarm, for example) many times. I have nothing special
against big, national players. In fact (two words), most of the complaints
by others as well as myself are directed at the misbehavior of a bunch of
independent "authorized dealers" who market under the ADT banner. In the
present thread Brinks came under fire from a dissatisfied client. I don't
know whether Brinks pulls the same trick with their name as ADT does --
allowing non-Brinks "authorized dealers" to market as thought they are
Brinks. Perhaps you can tell us if that is the case when you're not too
busy defending them.
> I know that more licenses have been pulled for fraud in this
> state on the locals vs the nationals.
And?
> The point of my comments is that we are quick to blame a
> single segment of the industry forgetting that the whole industry
> is guilty to some extent.
Speak for yourself. I don't cheat or mislead anyone. I know many people in
the trade who wouldn't think of pulling the kind of stuff some fast-buck
operators do. But then there are those few miserable sots who are ruining
it for everyone. Why do you not find that objectionable? You seem like a
straigh forward guy, even if we disagree on lots of stuff. Doesn't the
constant barrage of misleading advertising, deceptive sales practices and
outright fraud in this industry turn your stomach? If not, why?
> >I don't discriminate. I don't like national
> > or local crooks.
>
> Good, so i take it you will not be one of those who sits and waits
> for any opportunity to slam a national...
I pass up more such opportunities than I ever bother commenting on. Hardly
a day goes by without someone posting a tale of woe or adding to a thread
about some rotten scoundrel -- usually one of those "authorized dealers." I
mostly just read those and wonder how people still fall for the lies. That
applies equally to small, independent slime as big, national slime. Crooks
are crooks, big or small.
> when the same scenerio could be applied to a local?
You've ben here for several years -- perhaps as long as I have. When have I
shied away from speaking up against an independent running a scam? I took a
lot of heat for objecting to Milford Alarm operating without an alarm
license. I've spoken up against many of the other scammers who have
darkened our cyber-door (uh-oh, coined a new, dumb net-term).
> I have no favorite in local or national, but I do tend to defend
> nationals whenever the topic is aimed to discredit them when
> locals are just as guilty, just like I defend locals when nationals
> try to make them all out as trunk slammers.
On this we agree 100%. There had to be something.
wol...@attbi.com
You say a whole lot about what you provide, but it is not very
proper business practice to bad-mouth another company in a public
forum. I personally work for Brinks, and do not appreciate your
sentiment and the information you are providing people here. It
sounds like a businessman trying to denounce another company. It
could even be considered slander. My only statement is that Brinks
does allow 3 days for the customer to read over the contract and
decide if they like the system before the contract becomes binding.
Before then, the customer can choose to have the system removed and
any and all "damage" done to the home repaired. Beyond that,
everything is covered under the contract. I am not trying to proclaim
that Brinks does not make mistakes or that every policy is a perfect
one, but I do know that we are an honest company that tries to provide
the best monitoring we can.
-Wolfie
Tim
> My only statement is that Brinks
>does allow 3 days for the customer to read over the contract and
>decide if they like the system before the contract becomes binding.
No---Brinks does not. The Federal Law does!
We all know that there are large national and small local companies
that try to mislead their clients. One of the biggest clues is the
small print in their contracts. And don't use the excuse that
"everybody does it". To prove you are not one of these, next time
have the client read each paprgraph of the contract and have them
initial it after each paragraph or condition---at the end of the
line(s).
We have one local company--or maybe I should call it three, -- that I
don't know how he stays in business. Has gone bankrupt, changed name
of his company, paid for large "articles" in the local newspaper which
was not marked that it was an ad, been in trouble with the law plus a
lot of other things that have been told to me.
Even the state government dropped him--they called me.
Tim