January 4, 2011
*****************
Question:
*********
Hi Ken
We recently encountered a situation where a customer failed to pay their false alarm fee to the local county. The county sent a letter to us and also to the monitoring station directing that no further dispatches be requested until the customer had been reinstated by having paid their fees. The letter further informs us there is a $500 fine for each violation if any dispatches are requested and that the alarm business license may be suspended or revoked. We checked to be sure the monitoring station had received the same letter and they told us they did, addressed specifically to them, which they sent us a copy of. We were then surprised to have them tell us they would continue to dispatch anyway unless they received a written instruction from us requesting them to stop dispatching.
We took issue with them, taking the position that we were not the party requesting they stop dispatching. It was the Police Department that was directing them to stop dispatching. We then received a letter from the monitoring station reiterating they would continue dispatching unless we provided a written instruction not to. Not wanting to get into a pissing contest, we sent them a simply worded email asking them to please honor the direction of the police department.
Do you feel this was a reasonable demand on the part of the monitoring station, or do you feel the letter they received from the Police Department should have been sufficient notice for them to stop dispatching, knowing we were in the loop?
It seemed unnecessary for us to get "in the middle" of this whole thing and become the actual party directing the monitoring station to stop dispatching, when in fact it was the authority that made this decision and provided the direction in writing to both of us.
The customer has now paid their fine and we have both received letters from the police informing us we may once again begin requesting dispatches. Today I received a letter from the monitoring station again telling me they received the same letter and would not begin dispatching again without written direction from me.
Anon frustrated alarm installer
************
Answer:
**********
This central station, in my humble opinion, is being overly cautious, but there are several issues at play here that you may not have considered.
First let's look at the false alarm fine. The subscriber was required to pay it, and ultimately did pay it. The treat to suspend or revoke the alarm license - who do you think that was directed to? The central station may not have a license, and suspending it in one jurisdiction, foreign to where the central is located, may be an empty threat. More than likely the threat is directed to the installer, you. You are the one who installed the system, and you are the one billing the subscriber for monitoring, not the central station. You are also the one who theoretically the subscriber is relying upon the service the system so the false alarm problem is resolved; the ultimate goal of the police department. If the central station continues to dispatch despite the notice from the police department the subscriber is going to continue to get fined and your license is going to be at risk. The end result of that scenario will be that your subscriber won't be happy with you and you won't be happy with your central station.
But, why is the central station refusing to monitoring the account in compliance with the police department's notice without your confirming letter? Two contract issues come to mind. One, the monitoring contract, both your contract and the central station's, may appoint you the exclusive agent to give directions to the central station on behalf of the subscriber. If not exclusive, then maybe the agent. The central station should take direction from you and / or the subscriber. Second, the central station's contract with you no doubt requires you to indemnify the central station from all liability and expense. By requiring you to involve yourself in the police department problem the central station is actually giving you the opportunity to decide how you want to handle the matter since you will eventually be called upn by the central station to handle and pay for any problems, especially monetary ones, that arises from this subscriber.
Having noted that however, I think that the central station could have handled this differently by notifying you that it intended to comply with the police department directive, with or without your input or consent. I would not have counseled the central station to require your letter, either in suspending or reinstating the dispatch to police.
While your frustration is apparent, a simply letter by you to the central, telling them to comply with the police directive, would be easy enough.
Check your contracts to see if you are the subscriber's agent and if you are indemnifying the central station. Those are standard type provisions, and they are in my Standard Alarm Contract Forms.
******************
Dear Ben (or Been) There,
Thanks for you confidence. Its a tough world out there and I guess if all you had to do is sit around and sell "contracts" it'd be a piece of cake, but it's not. It is called "work." It is what it takes to grow and not "luck out a few deals." It takes a little hustling, schmoozing, marketing, communicating, and even spending money to make the calls. To introduce yourself and sell the company and why you and your company is the best for the subscribers needs. It gives you the opportunity to give them a "package" of your wares and technology you have to offer. It allows you to direct your future mailings (yes, you need to do that) to them without annoying them. It might even have them on your side when and if they too belong to their local "tip club," and yep, "ain't" them refferals nice?
Wow, I sure can go on and on as I always have because I believe a little hard work is worth it in the long run, and the if and when you come to that time to sell (yep, it happens), you'll be the winner.
Marty Winger
Happy New Year everyone!