May 28, 2011
******************
*********
Comment
**********
Ken
You should research and read the entire thing, but one of the main issues is that the Alarm company did not properly inform the fire department that when they called the house, and SOMEONE took the time to answer the phone, that person told the dispatcher there was a fire. When the dispatcher called the Fire Department, after being on hold (they called the regular line, instead of dispatch line), they just reported a Fire alarm. This meant that potentially fewer rigs were rolled than if they knew there was a fire. Two residents, and 2 Firefighters died in the fire.
We need to be pro-active and make sure the dispatch numbers are correct for each customer, and the right jurisdiction. We may want to create a written COMPANY policy that we present to the CS, making it clear on our end that the CS provide ALL information available or known about by them, not just the alarm condition. IT might isolate US from the problem, and lay the blame more on the CS. OF course in this case, no one at the home every picked up the phone and dialed 911 .. Can you imagine that a fire that size did not have neighbors or others calling in also?
Either way, who was right, and who was wrong was not the issue. What matter in the end, was the potential RISK if they lost the case (attorney said up to 20 million dollars). The insurance companies settled, and the industry took a hit. Since settled, it cannot be appealed. The alarm company goes down in history as wrong, based on the settlement, and it invites the next person to do the same ..
Michael
************
Subscriber objecting to contract provisions
**********
Question
***********
Ken,
We recently received a contract back from a new customer that had many of the paragraphs lined out. We use your contract. Come to find out, this customer is an attorney and will not agree to the clauses included in your contract; specifically par. 1 Term, only allowed one year, not automatically renewable, (6) Exclusive Remedy (Whole paragraph lined out), (7) Customer understands the Company is not an insurer….(8) Third Party Claims (Whole Party Lined out) (16)Notices:Limitations on Lawsuites;Jury Trial:
My thoughts are to send it back to him and decline to monitor his system with those provisions lined out as I believe it exposes us to too much liability.
How do you recommend handling the contract with this customer?
Keith Colorado
************
Answer
***********
Recommend him to ADT or one of your competitors you don't like.