Liability issue - Contacts

Question:

Ken,

It is well documented that security contacts made with reed switch

technology are easily defeated with magnets and are susceptible to failure

when exposed to power surges (lightning, etc.). The knowledge of these

inherent weaknesses is well known in the security industry, but is

typically kept from the customer.

It would seem that this "failure to warn" the customer of the potential

faults of these reed switch contacts could subject a security dealer to

potential liability. The situation could be further compounded by the fact

that reasonable alternative devices that are resistant to magnetic defeat

and contact welding, are available in the market place.

Wouldn't it be wise for all security dealers to at least offer their

customers the option to purchase a more durable higher security level

contact - letting the customer choose the level of security they wish to

purchase?

There is a new white paper that can be accessed at:

that explains the technologies now

available to provide high security contacts for every installation.

Spending a few minutes reading it could save a dealer potential legal

headaches.

Regards,

Rick Kirschman

Answer:

I have no technical knowledge and therefore offer no opinion on the

different types of contacts that are available to the alarm industry.

We can frame the issue this way : will using contacts that are known to be

inherently defective or less reliable and thus potentially cause an alarm

system to fail to operate as intended to detect and report an unauthorized

break in, result in liability?

The answer should be obvious. You should not be using any equipment or

technology that you believe or suspect is inferior to other available

equipment or technology, at least not without disclosing this information

to your subscriber and explaining why you are still recommending or willing

to use this inferior equipment or technology.

I suppose there could be reasons for using it, such as pricing or

availability. But this needs to be your subscriber's decision, and I

caution you that it needs to made by a sophisticated subscriber after full

disclosure. Don't think for a minute you can bury this in a contract.

So I am certainly not endorsing one contact over another, or suggesting one

to be better than another. Just remember that your subscribers expect you

to be an expert in security and rely upon you to install systems that will

do what your subscriber's intended when they signed up for your service.