Estate Agents

[golfball]

Ahh i see what your getting at.

Your gaffa is right, if the client wants to pay you to work on his system thats under contract then that then becomes the clients problem. The dodgy ground would be if it was monitored but on a basic bells only thats fair game, it would nullify the existing contract though the minute you opened the lid. and of course what goes around, comes around!

now thinking about it whats to stop a company giving the estate agent a "bung" for every take over and maintanance contract gained.

Which is why I would like to see all the correct info given to the new owner on purchase

[golfball]

AND?

We do the same printed bell boxes banners on key pads phone no stickers on pannels .But it wont stop it happening

[ian.cant]

AND?

We do the same printed bell boxes banners on key pads phone no stickers on pannels .But it wont stop it happening

Which is why I would like to see all the correct info given to the new owner on purchase

So your point is, now youve contradicted yourself im sort of lost!

[golfball]

Yes i Know i contradicted my self a tad but what i am trying to get at is that the first contact btween the new home owner and alarm company should be with the installing/maintaining company complete with the current maintanance contract so you cut down on fred telling mr and mrs jones that daves alarms will sort that out for you

the new owner gets

the log

the maintanance schedual

when it was last serviced

when its service is due next

a Free re-coding / instructional visit (when key holder info can be updated)

and a new maintanance contract for the new owner

[ian.cant]

But the homeowner is free to choose whoever they wish to call and as the maint contract isnt transferable they can do so happily as its not under maint or warranty most likely!

[golfball]

Yes Free.

How many customers would be more inclined to stay with the installing company if the first contact they had was polite, helpfull and free, from the company that put the system in in the first place and know all about its history

[Guest]

If we know the customer (exiting) and there is time left on the contract we may do a quick freebie instruction if its on a run of ours. With an onus on the new user to sign a new maint contract.

Works every time, we get the new business.

Then again we are all on 1st name terms with our customers anyways. Nothing like a coffee and a dougnut on a service visit ehh. B)

[arfur mo]

just a question,

i know its common practice, but why do companies make maintenance contracts 'not transferable' on a premisses. obviously if the client moves he/she has to have a new contract at the new address.

is it not a a bit short sited to treat a prospective new client this way who may have paid say a sum to the outgoing owner to cover the remaining period? ok for a paperwork change fee but not the full monty.

i see it as you/i have been paid for a complete year, so whats the problem with who owns it? if they have four heads and/or 5 legs then charge them stupid they desrve it perhaps

for example, i really get p'd off when the car park rules insists i pre-pay on entry and and i'm not allowed to donate the remaining time which i have paid for (but over paid) to someone else.

you can't 'feed' the meter, if you are going to be 3 hours insted of 2 you 'have' to move the vehicle, although i could park fo 8 hours if i pre-paid on entry. its a big gripe with me and i feel its sharp practic.

i would see a non-transferable agreement in the same very poor light as a company trying to be slick in gaining revenue, i would drop it like a stone at the first opertunity and sign up elswhere in shear spite.

i may be nieve and so be it, but i'm just darned curious as to the ethos and justification applied.

regs

alan

[golfball]

The problem exists becuse no one is told how much is left to run on a maintance contract or whether it exists

I agree maintance contracts should cover the system not the customer and then they will become transferable

to do this each system should be given an id no (funny its what we do now)

the contract should be worded so that it covers the life of the system and the new occupant made aware of time left to run on contract ,how to renew etc,or something like that

but to achive this the new occupier must be given at the time of sale ALL relevent information at the time of purchace which at present they are not obliged to do.

[Guest]

The problem exists becuse no one is told how much is left to run on a maintance contract or whether it exists

I agree maintance contracts should cover the system not the customer and then they will become transferable

to do this each system should be given an id no (funny its what we do now)

the contract should be worded so that it covers the life of the system and the new occupant made aware of time left to run on contract ,how to renew etc,or something like that

but to achive this the new occupier must be given at the time of sale ALL relevent information at the time of purchace which at present they are not obliged to do.

I thought every system had its own ID number from the installing co and t/o co (delete as applicable)

How else do you keep track of PMV`s, fixes and flases?

Well where i have worked we always gave a system a company urn, ( soz pun not intended).