Home Alarm Advice Please

[Guest RICHL]

hi all,

just off to z land,

Hi RICHL,

you asked what i meant by 'close regard' it was alternative to 'lip service'. knowing the standards and applying them not always follows.

i can't find the post so sorry for not addressing whoever.

someone mentioned fines being issued for non-compliances to registered installers, can i suggest you add up all the compliance certs issued over a the last year and devide that by the total inspectors available in both inspectorates to see what figure you come up with with pro rata per inspector - i'll be generous include all inspectors from both bodies, nearest 5 thousand will do and this is for the last year only.

so if you then add-in the previous year figures, and the one before that how many non-compliances get noticed against not noticed?

the sites inspected are 'fed' to the inspectors, if they go to site i was told by an NSI inspector they do not lift j/b lid's, so all i can say is OMG how can you really be checked?.

come on, hand on heart say 'we never ever turn a blind eye' - not too many if you were honest imo.

it's like speeding we should not do it the law says so, some are very diligent 28mph third lane M4, other's say 1 ticket every 100 k miles covered is ok to live with so 140mph in any lane - get my drift?

so, come on now - crocodile tears or what?

regs

alan

Often I do take an inspector to a particular site. This is usually because I want his opinion on it. Nothing wrong in that, after all I do pay his wages. Most sites for inspection are phoned and an appointment made with him present.

Re junction boxes, personally I view them as bad practice anyway so dont them.

Not wishing to cause offence Alan, but your arguements against the approval system are kind off ill-informed. If you would like to discuss any of these things further then I suggest starting a topic in trade, as we are posting a lot of stuff for the O/P to have to wade through.

[arfur mo]

Re junction boxes, personally I view them as bad practice anyway so dont them.

Not wishing to cause offence Alan, but your arguements against the approval system are kind off ill-informed. If you would like to discuss any of these things further then I suggest starting a topic in trade, as we are posting a lot of stuff for the O/P to have to wade through.

hi RICHL,

i have done so in trade, among my earliest post's, and become the site periah and crowned a king because of it, so possibly i've got the most 'ignored' record on here.

i needed to fight my corner, it was not my choice of 'battle ground' when chosen, i'm an unregistered group memeber being tarnished out of hand, perhaps not intentionally but i take my rep very seriously.

the OP (if he read it all) might now have a broader more ballanced view, and concider from an advantage point of better knowledge, the phrase 'ask a non-approved installer' alone was a trigger as it implie's 'dis-approved' to the public, so please use non-registered or non-affiliated term.

why do i say 'being fed'? i asked inspectors from both side's how they select which sites to inspect? this was from my own stand point as i have one in derby and one in portsmouth several in west london and live in Essex. the answer was they go within a few miles of the office and the jobs are 'randomly' selected from these.

imo far too open to abuse by the crafty minded, pick out 30 local jobs, so send your smarter streetwise engineer's in to do a maintenance and look them over, report iffy one's pick others to make the 20-30, it's not to hard to do if that way inclined - they paint hospitals for a Queens visit, and leave patients to die on trolleys. and what was that phrase to build confidence? you pay his wages!

to be truly random and so effective they would need to ask for say all jobs in the SS14 or EC1 area, then pick from these when they arrive - not beforehand, even so what happens to the jobs in Epping when the office is in Holborn?

j/b's is an example reference, but covered other items which are very easy to open and look for sin's, the impression i got was not much other than a control unit got openned, nothing i was told at the last ifsec or since changed that view. many companies use JB's for door contacts, some still install lace wiring and frames, hard to do without a jb. what about LIMs ZEMs are they not just intelegent versions of JB's?

far more non-activations or false alarms are caused by poor or miss wires, than detection not best placed, cables not clipped at regulation intervals or a contact incorrectly spaced from a corner.

i beleive NSI and SSAIB are a good thing to be in, perhaps strangely i beleive for most they should be in them, but it's far and away from the 'perfect' portrayed and pushed by the openning reply.

so i don't like being represented as bad news, risky or shady simply because i'm not registered by choice, especially when the 'other side' has it's obvious problems too. i'm sure as a quality installer you would be offended if you were tarred with the same brush as a less compliant company by me, just because your registered. BT were at one time, would you like me to say all registered companie's are just like BT alarms were - i so doubt it.

bad or sloppy companies registered or not are bad news for all of us, the badge is not an impregnable shield is what i need to point out to the OP. it should offer you more protection. but like that brilliant insurrance add 'it don't always work like that'.

i am more than comfortable discussing these issue's, i've done it for years. i don't win them all mainly because of insurrance - not quality. i lose very few clients when they have it pointed out to them, i have also swayed brokers oo.

the above is all in good faith hopefully sensible deabte, not meant to critacise, put down or cause offence to good companies and or their engineers alike in any way. i'm not saying i'm perfect by a long chalk, but i don't wear any badge to proclaim i am either, so at least i am honest.

just want to put over that point of view from the quality side of non-registered installers

perhaps i should start a registered body for non-registered organisation's?

regs

alan

[morph]

The assumes of course that all approved firms have no integrity at all, of course in reality this is not the case.

If your intention is to steer the inspector away from particular jobs, who are you really cheating at the end of the day? Obviously the client needs to be in the premises to be inspected and indeed willing to have 2/3 people walking round. If you are a small one/two man company then you have no issue at all about what jobs an inspector can look, because all your jobs would be installed to the same standard and when your firm gets bigger, you organise all your jobs so that they are visited by different people at different times so flaws and problems will get highlighted and rectified. If you use subbies it

[morph]

The assumes of course that all approved firms have no integrity at all, of course in reality this is not the case.

I assume that you mean "non-approved" and in that case you are of course correct there are many non-approved companies that do good work to the customer's satisfaction, (but not necessarily to standard).

In effect anyone who installs not to the standards will not be able to prove competence or that the system is fit for purpose.

Exactly .... and didn't I see in a recent quote that someone was installing to DT245?

No Roger I did mean "Approved Firms", as Alan infers that "Approved Firms" do not have any integrity, by way of the way that they select what jobs are inspected. Clearly a very high percentage of "Approved Firms" have high levels of profesional integrity and Alan is wrong in his inference.

[morph]

Arther I welcome debate and will not at the moment be adding you to my ignore list but i do have a couple of comments.

You say that you try to sway brokers away from the normal approved route, Im sure you are an excellent compnany that installs very well to high standards etc, i have not seen your work so cannot comment either way, but.... when we watch watch dog, or old dogs new tricks etc, how many of the companies invloved are approved. While im not saying all unappoved companies are really bad (far from it), its seems that all really bad companies are unapproved. And whilst steering your friendly broker away from approved to you is no bad thaing (assuming they dont have an un-insured loss) what happens when your not used and a

[arfur mo]

hi alarmgard,

i don't want to pervey a feeling of i think i'm always right 'king arfur' fashion, but if we don't examine each other views and question closely why someone holds them with an opem mind, we will never understand that point of view or stand point.

i'm honestly pleased you personally responded - we have crossed swords in the past, i hope we see each other as among those who do care for quality and doing the right thing, even if we do rub each other up the wrong way on most ocasions.

i honestly don't assume or mean to imply all registered firms have no integrity, just wearing the badge is no guarentee of it for an individual company. if they don't it's not to hard to fudge or work the system, and if they start from a base of cheating, they will not be too worried about cheating themselves - unless caught out publicly.

having people walking arround, obviously not all companie's or homes would be best pleased without notice. they do have a certificate of compliance issued by you so implie's they may be quality checked as part of it. if i were registered there would be a not to that effect accompanying it.

but if not, point out its part of the service from an indipendent inspector at no cost to them. and no harm in pre-sending a leter to ask if they would object to a sudden visit in working hours, lets face it, you already know most those who would be annoyed from the routine maintenance visit's carried out.

"The assumes of course that all approved firms have no integrity at all, of course in reality this is not the case."

i agree totally a well run firm like yours is briliant, but wearing the badge is not cast iron proof of it, many non-registered firms are also run as excellently as you discribe.

A small unapproved installer who does not have or understand standards correctly can not claim to have the approval of their customers simply because the system works on handover,

agreed, but saying non registered (un-approved) is also wrong as your only yardstick, so you can not say either he don't based on it

, you also rightly say -:

"as the customer very rarely has an understanding of what the system should and shouldn't do other than if a pir/door is activated".

it works both ways as how is he/she any more aware of standards with the rogue or straight registered companies?

To me this is where the term "cowboy" is most appropriate in effect a firm that installs systems that do not conform to a stated standard other than what the firm say is the correct.

this i find is a common cry, but not thought through properly. non-registered is not the sole stamp of a cowboy, as there are also registerd cowboys out there too. so until you can totally irradicate them, your view imo is not supportable.

not trying to be anoying here but when you say

"In effect, anyone who installs not to the standards will not be able to prove competence or that the system is fit for purpose".

well there is a few flaws can i suggest in your argument, a system may not comply with current standards but will still protect a premmises to a designed degree, concider the wickes or B&Q kit, we frown on them, but at the end of the day it sounds a bell or siren if the instructions are folowed..

to follow this through, a system installed today way below our current regs say to 1990 BS.4737 par 1, not ideal but can still perform effectively and so be 'fit for the purpose' it's designed for.

kit installed 20 years or more ago (god bless the 9100 rip) and still working today, not be seen as up to todays standards, perhaps even well below them, but still protects very effectively.

so to run the 'cowboys' line based solely on regs non-compliance alone = 'not fit for the purpose' is i hope you see not really supportable.

obviously high risk instals your view is upheld as the insurrance co would do a flip, but they form a minority of the market for 'needed' alarm systems.

our OP is talking about his house and although we don't know the risk most are 2 up 3 downer's so i have assumed from that point.

regs

alan

[arfur mo]

[Exactly .... and didn't I see in a recent quote that someone was installing to DT245?

oh behave rjbsec

i corrected that and quickely and admitted it and why it happened

regs

alan

[arfur mo]

hi james, not been on watchdog yet - or house of horrers, are yo saying 'go to make up now'?

i don't activaly sway clients away from the 'approved ' route but having a long time customer base i get the call on older systems "are you an approved installer with NSI or SSAIB". i know whats happened, they want to save a few bob on the premiums so the broker suggest having the system taken over by a registered company and he can get his comission.

i then have to break it to them i do not charge anual R&M on bell only systems, and only monitoring on the few i still have URN's on and they pay me only AFTER a call is completed. no charge for being on standbye 24/7 x 365. so how much will they actually save? add the instal price of an upgrade it don't take rocket science.

i then get asked to phone the broker 'for them' don't lose too many, and got several brokers as 'freinds' now - did their alarms just cracks me up.

I would also like to have a standards debate with maybe yourslef and a handful of unapproved companies to ensure the knowledge of current regs is as high as you say.

don;t really think Its viable, we figt enough in here i had to watch my bak at IFSEC

JB's are not a good idea but are sometimes unavaoidable, sealed contacts, roller shutters shunt locks, panel moves etc. I think it depends on the quality of the joint and dont myself class jb's as poor working practice. BUt that one is definetly poor

we all have our own idea's so lets agree to differ, perhaps because i'm from the really 'old school' days mens that J/B's i have no problems with. they offer a local test point of that equipment and a means of isolating for testing the main run to the controls - so whats wrong with that? it's a service aid as long as they are sited properly and connected carefully.

i know you are not alone in your view but do not undersatand why it is this such a contenscious point - deemed below par if used, they conform within the standards don't they?

regs

alan

[arfur mo]

hi all,

i think this is now a 'done deal', discussing the o f registered or not merits has answered one of the OP's questions and i'd hope that the public readers have enjoyed an earnest debate by experts who feel pationately about this trade that we are proud to be in it.

it also proves we can put out points without throwing bunns arround

so i'm off to start a thread in trade about JBs and have a bunn fight

anyone care to join me ?

regs

alan

[Guest CNS Rawdon]

At risk of getting into trouble I would like to ask trautbeck if theyve stopped using 4 core cable for everything. Im sorry but I work in Leeds and have seen many many very rough systems fitted by the big name in leeds.

trautbeck is right they sell thousands of systems and they have at least one bell box on most streets in Leeds.

I would like to think quality has improved but Ive been called into fix faults and the only option to me has been to fit a complete new system including wireing.