The VoIP issue continues to raise concern for the alarm industry. The
service is becoming more available and the service providers are increasing
their advertising efforts. From what I understand the VoIP service remains
less reliable than POTs service. That being the case, what notice or
information do you need to give to your subscribers regarding VoIP
communication and their alarm system? I am still of the opinion that it
is not possible to list all of the equipment and services you are not
providing, either because you don't offer the service, it's not available
to your subscriber, or the more likely reason, your subscriber doesn't want
to pay for the additional equipment or service.
The standard contracts I offer require the subscriber to provide
telephone communication service and to test the system and report the need
for service. The contracts also provide that additional equipment is
available for additional charge.
The contracts provide for the equipment and services that are being
offered rather than those that are not. Thus the contract will not specify
that additional motion was offered and declined; no radio or cell back up;
no additional smoke detectors; armed guards, etc. This is not to suggest
that your contract would be wrong to mention these items; I just don't have
room for them and I don't presently think the disclaimer is necessary. I
do however have two suggestions.
First, while I don't think you need to list endless equipment and
services that are not being provided, I do think that you should specify
equipment or service that either the law, local custom or common sense
would dictate. Since I am not that technical, let me just illustrate
with some examples. You protect all the openings of the first floor of a
building but the subscriber doesn't want to pay to protect the second
floor, easily accessible. Or the subscriber wants only a basic alarm
system with no monitoring. Law requires smoke detectors in certain places
and the subscriber doesn't want to pay for them, or UL requires certain
installation that the subscriber won't pay for. In these situations I
would add a provision where the installation or service is specified that
these typical and expected items were specifically recommended by you and
declined by the subscriber. Have that disclaimer initialed by the
subscriber.
I am also being worn down by the endless requests for what to do about
VoIP. For now, I recommend a separate letter. With the onslaught in
advertising for the VoIP service one letter is not going to be enough. The
letter should go out periodically, several times a year. I would include
other information offering additional services and equipment that is
available.
The VoIP notice can be as simple as stating that "while offering
certain features as well as cost savings, VoIP may not be as reliable as
standard telephone service, and may not be compatible with the alarm
system. If you change to VoIP contact alarm company and request inspection
of the system, etc". The letter I am suggesting can be sent separately or
with other mail, such as billing and invoices.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Ken,
We decided to take a more agressive approach to this VOIP service. I have
sent a letter not only to our customers but also verbally worn our new
customers about the VOIP not being as reliable. I have become more
concerned about the fire systems in a residence where MR & MRS Jones trust
my company to provide a service. I cannot in any way stop someone from
using VOIP but I can tell them which I have in writing that we do not
service it. I have even written to Cablevision letting them know that I
will hold them responsible for any loses if they did not explain the
reliability of there VOIP services to the customer. I have even written a
letter to about 5 different insurance carriers warning them of the problems
with VOIP services. Like most situations in our society today this will
remain a quiet issue until a family dies in a fire. My only goal is not to
be that alarm company that was monitoring that family.
John Pearson
American Alarm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hi Ken,
Thank you for putting me on your news letter.
my background is VoIP, I have done alot of it, but as I told you new to the
alarm industry.
Legal or not for fire is a great question, one no state that I know of
would want to tackel as many carriers now deploy voip internal to their
networks.
As far as reliability, simple signalling such as contact ID, if
provisioned to available spec, will echo across a network if all
routers and switchs between the networks are working.
An important issue in this regard is service level provided from internet
providers and every network in between, which is the problem in the
service, and any network could potentially block inband udp packets
that carry contactid dtmf signalling at any time or potentially route fire
alarm signals out of state or country before reaching a termination
gateway. Also, most voip providers dont provide security or any type of
encription making the service incompatible with HEPA standards which could
effect installations.
In Florida they said in my recent alarm class that you could not use voip,
and had to use a pots line, but a "pots" is jargon for plain old telephone
services and in the voip world it is still unregulated.
if you have specific questions on voip interfaces let me know as I have
some resources with the technology and could provide you with
specifications.
Thanks again for your letter.
Regards,
Cy Caine
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ken,
I been in the Industry along time, and every time the Industry has went
into a panic, sometimes for no reason, Does anyone remember the Panic of
omy Ameritech kna SBC went into the alarm business we made it and most of
us are still here, and where is Security Link, sold resold and sold
again.Here is a thought capitalize on VOIP, sell Uplink, Telluar or Alarm
Net-C services and make more money, educate you customers and tell them the
if they want to replace or remove there phone lines and also sell the
feature of phone line cuts, it also give you peace of mind that signals are
going to reach the central, it's a win win all around.
++++++++++++