Alarm and Security Science: ‘I Was Not Emotionally Ready to Hear That’

Many alarm companies across the United States seek to add monitoring accounts to their subscriber base by taking over existing systems.

While this is a common practice, the takeover alarm contractor takes on risks, and they can vary depending on what the new contractor does and/or does not do, regardless of just using contract language such as “Connect to Existing System for Monitoring Only.”

With that in mind, would your company knowingly monitor an existing residential fire alarm system that does not comply with NFPA 72 standards? Would you agree to monitor an existing burglar and fire alarm system if it had serious defects that could foreseeably compromise its detection, reliability and performance capabilities?

If your inspection uncovers those problems, will the customer authorize the necessary repairs or are you concerned that they will just find another company willing to monitor the system as is? If so, you may lose the account, but in my view, no job is better than a bad job and taking over an unreliable, unsafe system can invite disaster and liability against your company.

How Would You Handle This Alarm-Related Quandary?

A homeowner in Bergen County, New Jersey, contacted me because his new insurance carrier required written proof from an alarm contractor that his home fire alarm system was working before issuing coverage. In most cases, insurance carriers simply ask whether the homeowner has a fire alarm system, and the customer’s answer is enough if they say that they do.

Before I began my inspection, the customer had his own ideas about what should and should not be done. Those ideas did not include determining whether the entire system had been properly designed, installed, programmed, inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with NFPA 72.

As an alarm contractor, I have a duty to adhere to NFPA 72® and determine what work, if any, is required based on my inspection and the ultimate testing of the system that will be performed.

Interestingly, it is critical to amplify that the customer placed great weight on the fact that all of his remote system keypads showed “Normal,” but I explained that this could not be relied on, nor was it tantamount to performing an NFPA 72 inspection and testing. He responded, “NFPA what?”

As we discussed the system’s history, I learned that all of the smoke detectors were original, more than 20 years old, and had never been tested. Based on that information, I advised the customer that all of the smoke detectors needed to be replaced.

With regards to the system’s carbon monoxide alarms, I found that all of them needed to be replaced because they had exceeded their functional and reliable life expectancy and were past the manufacturer’s expiration date labeling that was located under each sensor’s cover.

The system also showed no trouble condition indication on the CO alarms because the initiating devices’ onboard trouble contacts had never been connected to the normally open protective loop circuit by the “installer.”

Conscious Disregard for Family Safety

In my opinion, this reflects a conscious disregard for the family’s safety and needlessly increases the risk of a carbon monoxide leak going undetected in the home by these mission-critical sensors. I also found that one of the smoke detectors had been removed from its base but because it was T-tapped, the circuit did not change state, as is required under the supervision requirements of NFPA 72.

When I provided this prospective customer with the costs to restore the fire alarm and carbon monoxide sensors to a functional state, and then perform a 100% NFPA inspection test, he stated, “I was not emotionally ready to hear that.”

My response was straightforward.  If you do not feel emotionally ready to hear the costs, imagine what it would feel like if someone from your family were seriously injured and/or killed by an undetected fire and/or carbon monoxide leak due to the serious defects and irregularities that I had identified. Immediately thereafter, he entered into a contract with my company.

I am glad to report that he and his family now have a fully compliant and functional life safety system. Make sure that you have professionally trained and supervised installers and sales professionals who recognize the criticality of NFPA 72 and adhere to its mandatory minimum compliance requirements, or exceed them, in the services that you provide.

Finally, I strongly recommend providing each of your employees with the current edition of NFPA 72 that your state is following and making sure that they understand how to apply it.

The post Alarm and Security Science: ‘I Was Not Emotionally Ready to Hear That’ appeared first on Security Sales & Integration.

from Security Sales & Integration https://www.securitysales.com/insights/alarm-security-science-i-was-not-emotionally-ready-to-hear-that/618990/
via CCTV