arfur mo

seems your sales ability is hindered by near complete ignorance of how to initiate and gain trust in a strangeri did not say or or suggest it will sell only alarms - i'd never be that limited. fact they want a decoy is enough to tell me they are worried about their security to some degree, but not sure they want the inconvenience of using one and the risks of false alarms, but perhaps not thought about cctv or video door entry as example. Fortunately i've no need of this tactic today so i can choose, but for those starting or short of work fitting a flashing or otherwise decoy, is a simple way of getting invited in with no advertising costs. your not leafleting, door knocking, cold calling or pressure selling - simply extending that cordial meeting. by using your sales 'patter' to put at ease, and gain their trust. Now you might offer to price no pressure, and if they go for a small sytem the decoy is included, all sorts of honest ways to close sales - 3 year warrantee's as glowing example . but you can't do that without meeting them.

lol!

many thanks Adrian, the refference to APCO requirements not allowing (i may well be wrong), but i thought that was a comment from i got from James? so perhaps i misunderstood. this little tiny one man band voice is getting to long in the tooth to joins BSIA now, can you imagine the disruption i might cause them .

An pure example imho, i have said it before - about time the inspectorates stood up and told APCO it is 'us' the alarm trade who now how best to electonicaly protect vulnerable targets.

Then surely, the rules, like the law "is an ass"?

Short question - if fobs are so easy to clone why is code and fob not allowed?

Hi Vince, the old stuff could be a challenge . Today panels are in multi zones so the problems are pre devided, add in memory even simplistic like the S9100 with no time/date made a hell of a difference. IMHO Service engineers need to learn how to cross question clients/keyholders to see if what they said was actually possible well before the meter comes out, not to disrespect or talk down them. The 'story' is often embeleshed because they simply don't want to appear to be stupid, or feel a need to seek the engineers respect. Other times it is down to attempting to avoid a call out charge, or the embarresment their error has caused, i've known owners actually force a lower member of staff take the can, just to avoid their own embarresment. to that end, i try to quickly establish the thought in their minds i understand that not every one knows all about alarms, like i don't know about being a machinist or whatever trade they do, i'm not there to embarrase, snear or poke fun at, just fix the system. I see putting keyholders at ease to talk to you, without fear of being 'fined' as a big part of the skills. The firms i worked for with exception of Combat you had a defined 'patch' to look after, tbh the systems were in fairly poor state and clients not communative due to the feckless way they were treated. Found many systems not being used due to problems with faults and not being fixed, i could easily have continued that way i just like a quiet patch, where i know i'll get home at a regular time. I soon estabished if they told be upfront they messed up i'd make it a no charge fault, this saved days and days looking for non existant suposed problems caused by user error, while i go on with the real issues. On PMV's i worked my way through each installation even new ones as though it was faulty, openning j/b's and detection, lifting carpets to get to pressure matts, making diagrams of their exact possitions. remaking connections and so on, not to be seen as a smart ass, just a personal pride and to give me a simpler life, with less arguments with clients over bills. A side and very positive effect, you can teach a client as much as you like, if they have little respect for you, or the alarm co they will learn little. Gaining their respect, gains trust and a positive way of reducing faults and false alarms, because they tend to observe the better anti-false alarm practices you have instilled. Arfur

I would not say 'bring back old stuff', but the skill sets and knowledge used are seemingly dwindling. today you have 'off the shelf' detcetion, banged in at speed, but life expectancy is only 5 - 10 years, the systems i serviced or added to, were often well over 40 years old. this meant those who worked with them, often had to try really hard just to make it reliable, by designing around problems such as damp in old buildings etc. on service your could walk into a building such as Willerby Tailoring in Basildon, every window covered in tube and batten, stood at one end you could not even focus on the far end with 20/20 vision, and all on one zone, on a fault you just got on with it, measure the return with meter on milli amps, looking for itermittents shown by the meters needle movng about. Later on DMM's were a boon, because you could see fluctuations far easier at distance on the earlier LED displays, LCD's are now are the norm, but for that job trust me the LED display could be seen from a very long way, meant you relied less on the keyholder or security gaurd watching it for you as you 'crashed' it out. Arfur

I'd do that if it falls over again, otherwise don't fix what ain't broke . Always worth having it supplied from a small ups, this stops short power outs from causing glitches also remove most mains power born problems. Arfur

Wonders of windows? Have a look at the hard drive leads, also remove and refit memory stick (carefully). Sometimes on older machines the pci cards get dhisturbed due to the leads getting yanked,then cctv software often detects a change in configuration and crashes especialy on old kit, worth simply puling and refit cards pushing them down hard into the slots. Arfur

You could try fitting a UPS (uninterruptible power supply) to the computer, that will stop supply born interference and power flicks. Windows basded machines running 24/7 often glitch, a ups is good practice on all kit like phone systems as well as CCTV. See if that clears it up, might still be an overheating problem hard to say, points to a 'common' issue, but are all cameras from the same power adapter? Cheap enough to replace if not sure. Might cost 100 bucks to get an experienced tech out, but he could also save you wasting far more money with your shots in the dark approach, and to be fair you've had a free ride so far - so is that really a lot of money? Arfur

James - do i have pictures, are you having a laugh? only in my head Arfur

its arrived, have read while recouperating better than counting sheep i'd guess? Arfur

scroll down to his -: 16. At 10:09pm on 03 Jun 2010, leederrig wrote: I worked for Direct Response for 12 months,changing my job only last week,I can honestly say at no time during my time as a canvasser there was i ever told to scare,mislead,or push potential customers into a demonstration,Quite the opposite in fact,all canvassers are told to inform the public of the benefits of a monitored alarm system,the costs if they were to go ahead,and to have an informative,polite conversation at all times.I do hope people that have watched this programme have the common sense to be still openminded enough to maybe contemplate monitored security,because the benefits far outweigh the costs.The programme shown tonight was unfair and unjust,and i wish david price and the rest of the company all the best in the future. and he worked for them now left, if anyone he would dish the dirt would you not say? and this 22. At 6:04pm on 04 Jun 2010, faz12 wrote: I currently work for direct response as a canvasser, and to be honest i dont think its as bad as people and watchdog are making out. I've been working there for almost a year now, and i can honestly say, not once were we trained to mislead people or give out wrong information. What the actual script is, that it guarantee's you a response from an alarm recieving centre, not from the police. Neither do we make out to be the police, its only saving people's lives, and i dont think there's any harm in that! However i do agree that chris hook the rep was wrong in saying that to an elderly woman, but what we were all taught at the start to be clear about what we say, and have polite conversations with customers. We do mention the dont pay for the equipment itself, and avoid using the word free. And tell them about the 299 installation, if they are then interested after that, we mention about the monitoring and maintenace. At the above comments, im not too sure who's been rigning customers and giving out wrong information and using threats, but eevryone is trained very well before they get the job, and after that, if they still make mistakes, they get the sack straight away. But i hope god blesses Drs and all the members of staff. As there are also many other copanies out there who are doing even worse sales pitches!! and this -: 23. At 9:01pm on 04 Jun 2010, barry bradshaw wrote: i worked for direct response as a salesman for about 1 year, and could not beleave what this guy chris hook was saying in the house, since the programme as been on i have spoke to quite a few other people who did or still work for direct response and was shocked in what this guy said. when you go on direct response's training course which last for 3 days, you are told the exact opposite to what chris hook as done and said, dave price and the training people can only tell you what you should be saying and its not to scare customers and give them figures that are untrue. chris is proberly the type of person who will do and say anythink to get the sale. i remember selling a deal for direct reesponse once and when i came out the house i said to my manager i not sure but i think this guy as memory problems, within a couple of hours the company cancelled the sale and said we wont be installing the alarm. Plus if they ever contacted a elderly person on there own we was not allowed to see if customer unless they had a family member or neighbour with them. also the company made us all to sign form's saying we would not lie or mislead customers in the house. This means they are trying to do things right, once a man like chris hook is in the house it's out of the directors hands. Just remember this and perhaps we all should remember - we are only as good as the worst employee. Arfur

in case memories fail, here is the link to the BBC/rouge traders memorandum http://www.bbc.co.uk...ctresponse.html

one of the comments that sticks with me, Matt Albright saying "our actress has informed Mr Hook she is concerned about crime" thats it, no clarificarification and just before he makes his appearance. not showing that segment or how it was 'couched', she could have asked about rape statistics or womens knickers being stolen off the line, so what is he supposed to do, flog her a smoke alarm instead? you might note, not any other references to scare tacticts made, nor did not say this it is one of many incidents regarding scare tactics - actually, RT never mantioned anything about using scare tactics regulary by the company as an ethos or encouraging its reps. the big deal was the 1st egent, 'free' box and the very hidden fact of the year on year costs, no scare tactics mentioned here iirc. so what did she actually say? crime covers many spheres exactly what was is she concerned about? how did she express herself, imo it was nothing more valid than cheap shot at an amateurish entrapment without knowing it better, at least more honest to have shown all that very important segment of the pre-conversation, in order for anyone to make a fair assessment of the scruples or lack of, in question let alone make accusations. tbph without doing so = invalid and outrageous misuse of cameras and public emotion. Arfur

hi secboy, good to see you back, hope alls well Arfur

yes there were several misreps, and did laugh at the direct contact and the off duty Police, nore serious was the reference to a Police contact as referee. in fact that was corrected by him to be a probation officer iirc the above was gross, naughty and likely plain dishonest if intended to mislead, but not fearsome. we have to separate them from alleged 'fear tactics' which afronts most decent people, and then were they fear tactics or full information as i tried to demonstrate we could all be accused of? Arfur

James, Woa! Whoa! there, lets be very clear here, my own standards and ethic's, i'd back against you or anyone else as a clear winner (well, until i get my turn on watchdog that is - then i'd proove it . ) i'm discussing the perceived operations of another company, examining the validity of the hostilities they have received, and putting up as i see it a valid defence as though i was their PR rep if you like. that off my chest, i'm pointing out we could all be accused of high pressure tactics, while simply doing our job to the best of our ability. A big part of which is to inform where clients are vulnerable to any known and fairly common risk, prior to our visit they may not feel they have any issues, but are being actively prudent in not bolting the door after the horse has left. lets expand on what can happen. at this point do you leave it at -: "a burglar could break in here" " i suggest a contact and/or viper" "i suggest a PIR in this room" forget possibility statistics, or we will be saying "not much chance of being burgled - don't bother with an alarm". so we have to work as though there is going to be a break in at some time, and when that happens we detect and deter on order to defend the client. so perhaps there is a child sleeping in this room = risk assessed of kidnap, assault or worse, or woman alone, perhaps her partner works nights = risk assessed of again at of serious assault or worse. so perhaps that woman as in the WD scenareo, so would you not advise the reasoning behind your recommended additional protection offered in those scenarios? well i'd be astonished if you did not. now they will ask the difference's, so do you say 'i'm not telling you?' no of course not, you expand further what each will do and the advantages/disadvantages of each in some detail i'd hope. now, all thanks to you, now they aware there is a fair risk of intrusion made from that window, SHOULD they suffer an unlikely break in, and could now even be in some fear from this point onward of just some such intrusion. 1) well meaning but clumsey advice. 2) prudent advice as a professional security adviser with legal ramifications to you 3) or shear fear tactics to flog as much equipment as possible? if you can''t clearly answer the above - i'd ask why was Mr Hook expected to, or so very wrong in your opinion to mention very real perils likely during an intrusion, like rape, like strangulation, like assault and to an apparently lone woman? should he stay quiet in the hope she will never be subjected this? just about every house, we could sell a basic simple 'trap protection' alarm system, a front door contact, pir in the lounge and pir on the landing, theory based on eventually the intruder will trigger one of the devices and leave, and many such systems exist. so by selling any more protection we offer an earlier detection if they enter through the dinning room or toilet window, and while we know it as prudent to fit it are we also inadvertently instilling some sense of fear, that not adding more detection is now unwise, leaves the customer feeling more vulnerable than they otherwise they would be, so now feeel through fear "better to be safe than sorry". while you feel fair and honest doing so to g/p, could it not also be construed as using pressure or fear tactics? so imo, takes a bit more thinking about - before you hang anyone. o, in a false and acted out very loaded scenario, one where we did not hear what or how many of the prior questions were put by the actress, in a scene aimed directly to place him in a very bad light and so his firm, was Mr Hook now so really wrong? i have said i can only comment on that shows content. Trading Standards as i understand it were unhappy at the 'free box' and warned Direct Alarms for that tactic. The lady in the 1st clip was complaining mostly about the finance and the 'free' box claimed over £1k of kit deal, so not any fear tactics i could see here. lets try be a little more fair here be fore we go all puritanical, none of us charge what we've paid for any kit, mark up will add a percentage, and who dictates what this is? so i might buy a box of bits for £250.0 but de to my name and rep for reliable and tidy work, it means i can fit that for £2k. this equated i'm selling the kit for £1k after labour is taken out, so that kit cost me £250 but to me is worth £1k. shocked? we all make a profit do we not? Chubb's as example charge a premium in comparison to others for near the same system and facilities, with o critism from me, but just because they can having the kudos of being famous. People are often happy to pay more for a well known name assuming and expecting a superior service, nobody ever accuses these companies of ripping off people by over charging. so without seeing here home in full and how much kit was actually going into it, how can anyone say how much it was 'worth'? to direct alarms? l'd say on a larger home the system could be 'worth' easily that with additional accessories like keypads, radio fobs there's are many 'sub subjects' going on in here and in the main thread i.e. mainly the companies past record, sub contract salesmen or GH's claim "no alarm i've ever heard of can stop a rape" (:hmm:well, i think i can see his point of view now - perhaps his companies only fit silent PABs ). should i really need to tell you how to suck your own or others business eggs? Arfur

with respects and sorry Roger but that is just so naive, if what you ay is true putting a traditionally pab by the bed (i actually fit mine by the bedroom door to landing) is a total wast of time is it not? alarm systems are proactive as a deterrent, i.e. siren cover, and reactive (i.e.) after intrusion or attempted intrusion commences of the perimeter. points to be made -: having an alarm system siren may well deter intrusion in the 1st place, and it's known even bell only systems do that to good effect. you are ex Police so would you not agree? if you do, then having deterred the intrusion it has already deterred possibly a personal attack from ever even starting in the 1st place - so how can you possibly disagree with that reasoning? with an alarm installed but lets say it is not set, intruder disturbs sleeping female occupant, she presses panic button, and in most cases the intruder makes a swift exit - if no alarm installed any female is at a far higher risk of a very serious assault like a rape or strangulation, just to stop her screaming. now as i see it, how on earth can you possibly with any of the above? and if you can't, Mr Hook is off it, and is perfectly correct, but our poor Graeme Doh is up the Swanny without a paddle. Arfur

tbh that was my 1st gut reaction, but i urge look deeper. i ask how can you acceptably inform the client about that flat roof (as example) is what you and i fully know it to be a serious vulnerability? surely if you don't then your advice is very vague. so lets say they do not have a viper fitted and the worst happens, by omitting to point out that very possible danger (however statistically unlikely), you lay yourself open to a charge of bad professional advice as the preferred prevention expert, that legal isse aside, on a sheer personal level how would you then feel, having not made them properly aware when you had the chance? imo it's not a scare tactic, i'd call it 'covering your ass and you concience'. you have not simply banged on the door on a cold call and started straight in with the worst scenarios that would be scare tactics plain and simple, and to be fair nor did Mr Hook do this, but was prompted with direct questions on crime off camera. you are there by clients invite and if asked to talk about crime prevention, you simply have to tell them all the aspects and risks, that allows them make the best decision for them, having been fully informed by you/me fulfilling our duty of care. Arfur

look guys, think its tme to decide the dividing line of what is informing a client and what is using fear tactic's, personally iusing fear to gain sales is deplorable, but it is not that easy even for experienced people to set these boundaries. the above is both complicated and tempered with the clients attitudes, i.e. i go into a new client to discuss their security, one of the first things i do is to gauge their true concerns best i can. just relating to 2 main types of the many types we meet. with all, i spend time explaining the detection placings and also most areas statically intrusions are also rare to experience 1st hand,. but they can and do happen, so is that fear tactics to mention it or am i making them aware? i can't deny if the question is posed, are we doing our duty in advising properly so they can best ascertain the level of protection will meet their needs? Type 1, Hyper/frightened, perhaps some have had an intrusion or incident, and now want if a fly farts the alarm activates, Type 2, Laid Back, others that say "they can take what they want - i just want to be personally safe while i'm at home or asleep". i find with the hyper worried i spend more time calming them to reduce the highers cost to sensible levels, then if they push for more they can of course have it i explain if you want that level of security, your into a motion sensor in every room, every window has a vibration sensor, a break glass detector and a contact on every opening section, a totally crazy spec unless it's G4 Risk, unlikely homes, so i'll do my best in assuring them a lower level of security will be adequate. i Tyoe 2, often i have to spend more time explaining the detection strategies and statically intrusions are also rare to experience 1st hand. imo the above is a fair starting point. so now i walk around and i see flat roof, drain pipes near a window, french doors, patio doors, adjoining balconies etc. all of which are amongst the favoured access points for intruders, and i/we know intrusions range from a stolen purses to full on assaults. so lets say i specify a vibration sensor attached on the patio door frame, when client asked why i explain it is the most popular 1st attempt point, then being asked how i explain often intruders often using a shovel from you shed. the intent is to show the method used with available implements, now client fears that could happen, even use the shovel on them as a weapon so now insists the shed is protected. so do i ague? was that fear tactics to mention the shovel? or just plain common sense to inform them to keep the shed locked? in that film it is stated about rape, about assault, about strangulation and has been frowned on as fear tactics, but he was actually told by the stooge she was concerned about crime, and the stooge is a lone female with obvious concerns.imo you must give a best you can the personal risks she is possibly at, and how a security system can give soe confidence in her security. so in all honestly should he just stay quiet, say don't worry love it will never happen? un-savory conversation content? definitely yes, unnecessarily graphic? maybe yes, but NOT when people directly ask your opinion on crime and we do nt hear how she put her fears and what they actually are. so well sorry people, agreed a little clumsey but i just can't see that in this context as an example of fear tactics. if you now concider the 1st lady she was concerned about the hidden high costs of a free box, nothing about fear tactics there then. Arfur