Question:

*******

Hi Ken

    We bid projects.

    Often they will list component items by part # and also say 'or equivalent'.

    What if the system does not work as expected using the listed items?

    What if the system does not work as expected using equivalent items?

    Case in point is a video system that uses a wireless link.

    I do not think I would use the same solution for the project if I were asked to write the spec.

Thanks

timO

********

Answer:

*******

    The selection of equipment, while often treated as routine in most sales [especially the mass market variety home installations] is often given little thought.  Your company has selected the equipment it is comfortable using [or if you are in a dealer program you have agreed to use branded equipment]; your cost of that equipment may be one consideration.  Availability, manufacturer warranty, ease installation and repair are other considerations.  In most cases your subscriber doesn't really care what brands you use. 

    So in most situations you are the one selecting the equipment.  That comes with some element of responsibility, and risk.  You are the security expert and your subscriber rely upon you to select the right equipment to accomplish the intended security needs. 

    The question arises, does your contract need to specify the equipment in detail?  When I first started representing this industry one of my larger alarm company clients simply identified the installation as "burglar alarm" or "fire alarm".  I was OK with that that then.  Now, I don't think it works.

    First of all, many jurisdictions, New York included, requires that the contract specify equipment by make, manufacturer and model number.  My standard sales contract provides for this information.

    Secondly, you should identify the equipment because it will prevent challenges later, at least as to what should have been installed.  [the subscriber may still challenge you on the selection].  The standard contracts do contain provisions that provide that the subscriber is not relying on your expertise for selection of equipment and that additional equipment is available.  That may not be enough to get you out of trouble if a loss is attributable to defectively designed or used equipment, and you knew of the defect or deficiencies at time of installation.

    The standard form contracts also provide for substitution of equipment with equivalent equipment.  As in the selection of the original equipment, you will be responsible for selecting equivalent equipment and called upon to justify your selection if a loss arises or if the subscriber challenges you on it.  What constitutes equivalent equipment is up to you as the expert, supported by manufacturer specifications, code regulations and industry standards.

    In a bid situation you are often off the hook on the initial selection of equipment because the bid package will specify what equipment you are to use.  If the bid permits equivalent equipment be sure to get someone's approval of your selection.  Don't leave it to after the installation and you are wondering why you haven't been paid in full, or worse, after a loss and you are challenged on your selection.  Remember, you have the burden of proof to support your selection of equivalent equipment.

    Another thought is what about the initial equipment specification prepared by others.  What responsibility do you have for that selection.  Check the bid package carefully.  What does it say about your obligation to notify the subscriber if you believe the specifications are wrong or selected equipment is a wrong or poor choice?  You see that kind of language in AIA contracts - takes the heat off the architects [that's who writes the AIA contracts].  Better to use the Standard Alarm Contracts - that puts the onus on the subscriber, not you. 

***********

Comment on Line Seizure

*************

Ken.

    One of the toughest concepts to grasp for new tech's and some veteran installers to grasp is the topic of LINE SEIZURE.

    Line seizure is done BY THE ALARM PANEL and there is not a panel in the field manufactured after 1984 that has a built in communicator that does NOT have a line seizure relay incorporated into the ON BOARD COMMUNICATOR.  There are some panels (even modern ones) that do NOT HAVE A COMMUNICATOR and require the use of a SLAVE communicator. These devices have ALWAYS BEEN MANUFACTURED with a line seizure relay.

    FCC Regulations require the installation of an RJ31X Jack (This is a Subscriber Network Interface) The ONLY PURPOSE of the jack is to allow the DISCONNECT OF ANY CPE (Customer Provided Equipment).

    Richard J is  correct if he determines that a panel does not UTILIZE line seizure if the panel is simply paralleled onto the phone line however some less than knowledgeable dealers did not use the RJ31X jack but instead cut and hardwired phone lines in and out. (((This topic is covered in the NTS training courses CERTIFIED TECHNICIAN LEVEL 1,  ADVANCED BURG, and Trouble Shooting Maintenance.)))

    If he is taking over an account that I trust would generate a profit, the addition of an RJ31X jack to a system should not be a major expense to absorb and add while re-programming the system.

     This would insure a proper connection and reduce liability.

Joel Kent

FBN Security Co LLC

********************

Ken,

    First, my complements on your highly informative news letters.

    For those that don't know, line seizure means the alarm system connects directly to the phone line first and all other phones, faxes, answering machines, computers, etc are then connected through the alarm system.  In the event of an alarm, the alarm system disconnects all the other equipment while it dials the monitoring station and reports the alarm.  The system seizes the line until it gets a reply from the monitoring station that the entire message has been received.  The monitoring station then sends a "kiss-off" and all other equipment is reconnected to the phone line.  It works the same whether its a standard phone line, Cable, VOIP, or whatever the customer has.  Properly programmed, the alarm system will even disable call waiting, if the customer has it, to prevent any interruption in reporting the alarm to the monitoring station.

    Now to the question of line seizure.  Most alarm companies provide an insurance certificate to the customer for use in obtaining an insurance premium discount.  It is often used as part of the sales pitch since the discount can often pay for a substantial part of the monitoring costs.  Some certificates I've seen even show it as a UL listed system.  Some insurance companies wont offer a discount without such a certificate, and many require it for commercial installations.

    Do you or any of your readers know if line seizure is required as part of a "UL Installation"?  It's always included in the installation instruction books, and often found on the basic wiring diagram on the inside of the alarm panel's door.  This would clearly indicate the manufacturers consider it part of a correctly done installation.

    Line seizure greatly increases the odds of an alarm getting through to the monitoring station.  Without it, all the burglar has to do is take a phone off the hook as soon as he gains entry and the system can't call out.  Also, incoming calls being recorded on an answering machine and faxes will prevent a call out by the system.

    So it boils down to the question whether the lack of wiring proper line seizure is an incorrect install per manufacturer's spec.

    Also, I'd love to know if it's considered a UL installation without it. 

    I don't have access to the volumes of UL specs, but I'm sure you or one of your readers have answers on this.  I think we all could benefit from knowing, as I have seen many systems installed without it, and it seriously compromises the chances of an alarm getting through.  This potential liability would increase dramatically if fire detection were part of the system.

Thanks,

Jim

***********  Can anyone from UL help answer this?  How about ETL, any comment?