March 24, 2012
***********
Question
***********
Ken:
I use a 3rd party 24 hour alarm monitoring station who I run the Alarmnet radio services thru. We have had numerous occasions when the radios go into fault and may or may not restore in a reasonable amount of time. I have been told that the SMS side of the service will transmit an alarm signal, however, I have proven this to not always be the case. I do not feel confident that SMS as the backup will carry the alarm signal in the event of an emergency. AT&T has to troubleshoot and attempt to find and correct the issue, once notified by ALARMNET. (AT&T is the carrier which ALARMNET runs through).
What might happen if one of those radios (which has been working for months, if not years without any issues) suddenly fails due to AT&T changing their towers and it takes AT&T weeks to diagnose and rectify the problem and restore signal to the radio. In the meantime, someone's grandmother suffers a loss because the radio was in comm fail and was unable to send an alarm signal.
While I understand the Alarmnet radio was originally designed as a backup means of transmission, they are increasingly becoming the primary means of transmission as more and more people either abandon their land line or worse yet, trust their phone service to a VOIP or cable carrier which has no battery backup for the modem or router.
What liability do I face as the installing, servicing and middle man for the monitoring station? To my knowledge, my company does not have any contractual agreement with Alarmnet. When AT&T's service fails, who is now responsible?
Is there verbiage in your alarm monitoring agreement which protects my company in the event of an AT&T failure?
As always, your forums and emails have been extremely valuable in an ever increasing volatile industry.
Thanks.
R
**************
Answer
**************
Alarm contracts have what I call "protective" provisions that insulate and limit alarm company exposure for liability when the subscriber suffers damages. These protective provisions address equipment, system, transmission and human error, and therefore you should be protected from the type of claim you describe.
There is one reservation. If you do not believe a product or service is reliable, or falls well below acceptable standards for the product or services intended use, then you may be opening yourself to more than a claim for negligence. I am not suggesting the the product or service you mention is below standard, I am not technical, but you need to have at least some confidence in the equipment and services you offer.
There is specific disclaimer language in the Standard Alarm Contracts that you are not responsible for transmission failure.
Incidentally, I am surprised that you do not have a contract with Alarmnet. Are you sure you don't have a contract and that contract requires you to indemnify Alarmnet if there is claim from your subscriber? Same with the central station. You most likely have a contract with the central station too.
************
Comment on municipal v central station monitoring
************
Ken, I have been following this blog on Municiple VS Central Station monitoring for several years. My simple suggestion is to get a stop watch and test direct connect to a municiple receiving system verses central station response. Municipalities do not shut off Fire Reporting systems when they are directly connected. Judges can rule criminal negligence if contractors do so during or after a building is connected and there is a fatal fire.
On ADT the worlds largest Central station provider:
Bill Blake, former Superintendent of Alarms for the City of Quincy tested alarm receipt for direct connections via Master Box, Dialer reporting by ADT, and Radio Boxes reported via Wayne Alarm, a central station.
The Master Box system has been installed for nearly 100 years and continues to report directly to the city. NFPA headquarters is directly connected to the city via a Gamewell Masterbox.
When Wayne Alarm placed in service Radio Master boxes, Bill Blake tested them thouroughly and found that alarms were reported within one minute and was willing to accept Wayne Alarms, a UL & FM Central Station.
A fire was reported via a City of Quincy Master Box that was used in conjunction to an ADT reporting system via digital dialer that also reported alarm , trouble and supervisory fire alarms to the Central Station per NFPA and state code. The Quincy fire department was dispatched on receipt of a Master box alarm and because the fire was caught early enough it was extinquished.
When the Fire trucks returned to the station ADT called in the fire alarm 20 minutes after the fire was out. ADT at one point was considering sending their calls to an Indian Call center as it would be most economical.
No one solution fits, that includes Central Station reporting or direct municipal reporting but they all have their place.
The fire departments have the ultimate responsibility for the protection of the City residents, their property and the safety of their men.
This is why NFPA designates the fire alarm superintendent " the authority having jurisdiction" AHJ and he is personnaly accountable for the safety of the lives and property of his jurisdiction.
Wayne Alarm represents the best of Central Stations protecting lives and property.
However what if Wayne sells out to another Central Station company that is not as professional and moves their receivers out of the state or out of the country, the residents could be placed in harm's way. Municipalities must have the choice of direct wire or Central station to insure that the residents rich and poor are continually protected. ADT maintains Keltron municipal radio receivers in the Chicago area. Prior to that Keltron had direct connect municipal telephone receivers. The Radio boxes have worked well over the past 10 years , if not the municipality can change suppliers who are independent contractors.
I am not sure that ADT has a central station operating in Chicago or the State of Illinois. I do not have a substantial statistical data base on the number of fatalities due to a lack of adequate response by central stations or turn off of service. However, litigation attorneys are waiting for a broad based analysis to come forward for future reference.
Time to get out the stop watches and verify.
Blair Ames
Montgomery-Ames Associates
**************