December 25, 2010
*****************
*********
camera placement
*********
Question:
*********
Ken,
I have a quick question about video camera that record your own property. I have a client that is having problems with their neighbors and are constantly calling the police and filing reports. No domestic abuse has happened yet but my client wants to put a camera that records the front of the property that abuts their disorderly neighbors. are there any problems recording the neighbors property or do I have to focus the picture so the neighbors property is not in view? also the front of the house has a public sidewalk, would there be an issue if this sidewalk was in the picture?
Thank you very much for your advice.
Matthew
Securitysmith Inc.
***********
Answer
**********
I think you can have a camera view your neighbor's property as long as you are not viewing an area where the neighbor would normally expect privacy. The front yard is not a private area; a fenced in back yard or sun deck might be areas that would be off limits. The side walk is another place where privacy is not expected and your cameras can view the sidewalks.
Remember, video is permitted but usually not audio.
***************
service ticket with monitoring renewal on the back
**************
Question
**********
Ken,
Do you or can you have a service ticket with the alarm monitoring contract incorporated on the back? This would be used for service calls and renew customers at the same time.
Thank you,
Tom
***********
Answer:
**********
No. And the idea sounds like a great way to be accused of fraud. I don't recommend using a service ticket or completion certificate to renew and extend an existing contract.
************
Comment on right to cancel - in CA
**********
Ken
A few thought on ‘right to cancel’,’ R.T.C.’, CA law.
On a residential sale, this RTC can be waived by a customer if the customer deems the installation an ‘emergency’. The customer must waive the right of CX on a form separate from the contract. This makes sense when an installation is an emergency, busted water-heater, blown-out heater, or a recent/impending crime at the location.
In CA do not expect the Lic. bureau to either understand this, explain the law to a ‘complainant’ or to not take ‘disciplinary action’.
I had one last year where the customer wished to CX where we had done all as req. by law and been at the customers home, as scheduled, to start the job. The cust. Wanted to CX and receive a refund of their deposit. The lic Agency no only failed to be aware of the law, by supported the customer in a disciplinary action that went to an Admin law judge. The Admin law judge did not rule according to the law, but felt that we ‘should have’ accepted the CX. Yes, we have appealed.
I had one from two years ago where a Commercial customer, wished to CX a Monit Agreement ( no purchase agreement), NOTE that the RTC does not apply to Commercial customers. The Lic bureau, not only failed to explain to the customer the ‘law’ but also filed a complaint. Which also went to the admin law judge, who ruled that again we ‘should have’ allowed her to CX. Allegedly our sales rep ‘told her’ that she was not under a contract from another company, if she had purchased the store but not signed a contract herself. Not that she even produced a contract that she allegedly was bound to that we allegedly told her she was no obligated t to.Yes, we are appealing.
A services agreement may also be CX if it is in conjunction with a purchase agreement that was CX, but NO RTC if it stands alone. I won a SC case for the full bal. of a Monit Agreement, on appeal, on one of these. I also won a SC case where the customer asserted that he had CX within the three days, I had the customer confirm that indeed he had signed the Agreement on the hood of my truck, which was parked in the street. The judge confirmed for him that the law applied (as I pointed out) to residential contracts ‘signed’ in the home, for residential services. He had no RTC as the ‘street’ where it was signed, was not his ‘home’. Judgment in full.
The lesson to be learned is that you REALLY need to know the law, and that while you are legally correct, still expect to be cheated by Admin law judges and Lic Bureaus who ‘feel sorry’ for ‘consumers’.
Bruce Boyer