Police Response

[IPAlarms]

OK, so the ACPO policy clearly dictates that an alarm system must have a URN before the police will respond.

I would be interested to hear views on what the police would be likely to do in the following two real world scenarios:

1. No alarm installed in house A. Next door neighbour looks out of the window and sees a dodgy looking character climbing thru a back window - clearly breaking and entering. The neighbour phones 999 and reports the incident to the police.

Will they respond ?

2. Camera system installed in house B. Owner is 100 miles away working when he gets alerted on his mobile of an intrusion. He sees clear images of the intruders on his mobile. He then dials 999 and reports the incident to the police (video verified).

Will they respond ?

[Service Engineer]

the ACPO policy clearly dictates that an alarm system must have a URN before the police will respond

The ACPO policy is reffering to Alarm systems, and it basically means that just bells ringing guarantees no response from the police. A neighbour phoning the police to report an alarm ringing is not likely to get a police response either, but that same neighbour ringing to report an alarm ringing and suspicious activity likely would.

1: Yes, it's as good as a confirmed Alarm.

2: Yes I would have thought so, almost as good as "1"

But actually getting Police response is a hit n miss affair at the best of times. Everything is prioritised.

[james.wilson]

1 Id say Yes.

2 Id say Yes..... for now. The police will stop like they stopped responding to alarms without urn's, else no point in the urn system and no way to control the false alarms.

[Guest anguscanplay]

OK, so the ACPO policy clearly dictates that an alarm system must have a URN before the police will respond.

I would be interested to hear views on what the police would be likely to do in the following two real world scenarios:

1. No alarm installed in house A. Next door neighbour looks out of the window and sees a dodgy looking character climbing thru a back window - clearly breaking and entering. The neighbour phones 999 and reports the incident to the police.

Will they respond ?

2. Camera system installed in house B. Owner is 100 miles away working when he gets alerted on his mobile of an intrusion. He sees clear images of the intruders on his mobile. He then dials 999 and reports the incident to the police (video verified).

Will they respond ?

I would say the answer to both should be yes but "in the real world..." the response isnt to the same level as the ordinary member of the public thinks it would be.

As Redbull says the days of non URN remote verification are numbered

[billythebellbox]

lets play you at your own game

OK, so the ACPO policy clearly dictates that an alarm system must have a URN before the police will respond.

I would be interested to hear views on what the police would be likely to do in the following two real world scenarios:

1. No alarm installed in house A. Next door neighbour looks out of the window and sees a dodgy looking character climbing thru a back window - clearly breaking and entering. The neighbour phones 999 and reports the incident to the police.

triple 9 system relies on publice spirit, sods law dictates they won't see nowt as their sat watching their home cinema telly at full whack?

2. Camera system installed in house B. Owner is 100 miles away working when he gets alerted on his mobile of an intrusion. However is in a bar bar & half cut the the music is too loud to hear the phone beep

kinda think a "proper monitoring" would be less of a compromise?

[james.wilson]

The issue is more of a public perception one I think. The general public beleive that if the ring up the police and say next doors alarm is going off that the police will respond. Unfortunatly as we all know they wont, or wont unless they are very very quiet etc. The public also believe that if the phone us and say MY alarm is going off and i can see people in MY house that they will also respond. Obviously if the system was never abused this will work very well..... but back in the day before URN's it got out of hand and that was the system the Police created to control it.... Would the police prefer an 'policed system' (sorry) or one that relies on the general public to not take the mick.

Other side of the coin is there will be a high profile breakin from one of these systems and the police wont respond.... what will the press make of that? And is the URN systems days numbered....

btw the police charge to create a URN and all calls to them from the ARC must be on a premium rate number..... calls from the public will be a FREE 999 call.... I do wonder which way they will go?

lol

[IPAlarms]

Thanks for the replies.

Other side of the coin is there will be a high profile breakin from one of these systems and the police wont respond.... what will the press make of that?

Exactly. The police are really between a rock and a hard place and I don't see that they have any other choice but to attend.

What if it turns out that the guy climbing thru the back window stumbles across a couple of young kids or an old lady that are alone and unable to defend themselves ?

Could you imagine how the police would explain not attending that incident because there was no URN ?

Now, commercial premises are a different matter.

[james.wilson]

Virtual Monitoring. I see your point but if it is permitted what happens to the URN system.. The police are used to bad press they have a traffic department that creates all that for them.

Why do you think commercials are different? maybe your argument would work on PA systems for police response without a URN but as a rule these systems will be unoccupied.

Also how would you control and stop a non approved monitoring station passing these calls on the non premium rate freephone number?

[Joe Harris]

Just to note - I would be happy to discuss my thoughts on this, but not on the public side

Regards the two points above - both would be as likely to get attendance if they have the resources free.

'J

[IPAlarms]

Virtual Monitoring. I see your point but if it is permitted what happens to the URN system..

The URN system is in place as a method of regulating the industry and therefore reducing false alarms. I don't think it is in jeopardy at this time.

Why do you think commercials are different?

In most cases burglaries in commercial buildings are done whilst there is nobody on site and there is no risk to life.

In domestic premises, burglaries often take place whilst people are actually still in their home, and in today's society - anything can happen.

In light of the above answers to the two scenarios, it seems like one can receive a police response to a domestic property when there is a "verified" confirmation that an event is taking place. That begs the question - why bother having URN's for domestic premises ?

Also how would you control and stop a non approved monitoring station passing these calls on the non premium rate freephone number?

If said monitoring station has video verification of an event, then I guess there is nothing to stop them. Should there be ?

If the person in scenario 2 handles all of his video verification himself - does he have a right to phone 999 - or the local police ?

What if he goes off to Spain for a couple of weeks - is it not reasonable that the non-approved monitoring centre should be able to take care of things on his behalf ?