March 16 2012

 

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

Question on contracts

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

Ken

We use your Standard Security Equipment Lease and Central Office Monitoring Contracts. Now we need a contract to cover alarm monitoring, maintenance service, equipment replacement if it fails of itself, equipment installation, and remote assistance under a 5 year agreement where they own the equipment at the end for a small buyout. The proposed system is alarm, access and video bundled into a package where the customer can view the video and receive alarm notifications on his PDA but we take care of the alarm and access system remotely. Alarm monitoring is via central station.

Do you have such an animal?

With Highest Regards,

David

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

Answer

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

The All in One has been updated to include remote access by the Subscriber via Internet capable device. That contract will cover sale, installation, service, inspection and monitoring. Check with our contract administrator Eileen Wagda at 516 747 6700 x 312 to make sure you have the latest version for the All in One.

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

Question re insurance provision and indemnity

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

Ken

Can you clarify this.

Quote

"Often the best way to resolve the issue is by the parties agreeing to look to their own insurance, which means neither seeks indemnity from the other"

My thought were that we did ask to be indemnified. Not that we would "not indemnify" each other. So are you saying we should take out our indemnification clause. Should we replace it with a clause about insurance? Or that we should mutually agree not to indemnify?

My main reason is this. I had a recent commercial client with a small account ask to have the indemnification and hold harmless clause completely removed. I politely declined and responded that it either needs to stay in or they must look to someone else for monitoring. All very politely. So I am either misinterpretting your above statement or missing something about removing the indemnification clause.

Leo Taylor

ESI Security

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

Answer

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

The quote is out of context. Here is the quote from the February 14, 2012 article [all articles can be read on my web site]

"It's not a question of who is supposed to indemnify whom. Actually it's the insurance companies that are supposed to be providing the indemnity protection; they charge enough for it. You don't. The battle of the forms usually starts with the indemnity issue. Often the best way to resolve the issue is by the parties agreeing to look to their own insurance, which means neither seeks indemnity from the other. Also, having the same insurance company solves a lot of haggling because both you and your subscriber look to the same carrier for coverage."

The full article can be read here https://www.kirschenbaumesq.com/earticle909.htm

The Standard Form Contracts all have a provision that the subscriber indemnify the alarm company. Some subscribers object to that provision, and some insist that the alarm company indemnify the subscriber. When faced with that an objection to the indemnity clause I have suggested that the clause be omitted entirely.

When the subscriber insists on indemnity I have suggested that you try and omit the indemnity clause and provide that each party agrees to look to their own insurance coverage. If this is included then the subscriber would not be able to sue the alarm company for damages covered by the subscriber's insurance.

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

audio in funeral home Question

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

Hi Ken,

I appreciate all your work and sharing of these e-mails.

I have a special circumstance here. I am doing a A/V project for a funeral home. We have set up a video camera tied to a DVR to be able to share the broadcast via internet to those who are not able to make the services (i.e. they are in Iraq or out of state). This will allow them to log in with a password and listen in. Ideally, near perfect. However, reading all of your e-mails, I am concerned about the assumed privacy of conversations people may have and it being shared, even though only via a password to see. Should I hook up audio? Both the funeral home director and I are concerned about the liability since I follow your e-mails everyday. We would of course announce "Cousin Joe" in Florida is watching and listening to the services, but what about he one who arrives late? I can do a mic mounted at the camera in the ceiling or tie it to the handheld which would be passed around.

Your thoughts?

Larry

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

Answer

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

The audio should be positioned so that only the speaker at the podium is

heard. Since the speaker has obviously consented to the broadcast there is no

problem. The mike should not be so sensitive that it picks up conversation in

the room. It would be inappropriate for someone to record or intercept those

conversations no matter whether they are in the next room monitoring the

ceremony or out of the country.