Direct Response Security On Rogue Traders

[PeterJames]

I have received a reply from NSI

Dear Peter

I am writing reference your observation concerning Direct Response Security Systems Ltd.

At NSI we realise that, regrettably, some unethical salesmen will breach the standards required of a NSI approved company. However, providing the right action is taken when dealing with such situations then we allow the company’s approval to continue.

Your observation concerning the subcontracting rules is an interesting one which I have escalated up the chain to our senior management team. As you know, we monitor closely all NSI companies whatever scope or discipline they follow and we will be monitoring the activities of Direct Response Security Systems Ltd, particularly in view of the recent Watchdog programme.

With reference to your query over NACP 3, you should be aware that as Direct Response Security Systems Ltd is a Silver company on our list , it has to comply with the particular regulations beneath (extract taken in quotation marks). A Silver company is slightly different from Gold and the requirements not so stringent.

Although you stated that your words did not form a complaint, they have not been taken lightly, are being considered, and deserve a response.

“10. SUB-CONTRACTING

Installation, commissioning and servicing of security systems shall be undertaken with competency by at least one trained and experienced technician, who may also be the proprietor or a director of the Company. Where sub-contractors are used for installation and/or maintenance of security systems, they shall be security screened in accordance with the Systems Silver Approval Criteria and these Management and Technical Requirements. Records of work carried out shall be maintained.

There shall be a written agreement between the Company and the sub-contractor covering confidentiality of information, training and assignment to agreed tasks.

** Surveying, Designing, Specifying, and Pre-Contract Negotiations

These tasks (on site) are restricted to the staff personnel (proprietors, directors and PAYE employees) of the Systems Silver Approved Company (or of some other Systems Silver Approved Company).

(For the purposes of this requirement “site” means the location or premises supervised (or to be supervised) by the security system (or proposed security system), or other location or premises occupied by the customer or prospective customer.)

** Installing

The Company is allowed to use sub-contract personnel, provided that final inspection and handover to the customer are carried out by a member of staff (proprietors, directors and PAYE employees) of the Systems Silver Approved Company (or of some other Systems Silver Approved Company), or by an established and long-standing sub-contract person having knowledge and experience of the Company’s standards, procedures, practices etc, and whose work is routinely subject to documented internal audit by the Company.

** Maintenance

The Company is allowed to use any suitable sub-contract person for carrying out maintenance activities, provided that he or she is an established and long- standing sub-contract person having knowledge and experience of the Company’s standards, procedures, practices etc, and whose work is routinely subject to documented internal audit by the Company.”

Wendy Round

Customer & Technical Support

[james.wilson]

Silver company is slightly different from Gold and the requirements not so stringent.

Really?

I thought silver was supposed to be identical to gold apart from iso?

[IAS]

Really?

I thought silver was supposed to be identical to gold apart from iso?

reading the extract above - not so it seems, wish we could sub service tests

[PeterJames]

re the quotes above that infer a guaranteed police response

You are right I have read it but cant think the exact page, it would seem fairly obvious that its not right as you cant guarantee something that you have no control over.

[Cubit]

You are right I have read it but cant think the exact page, it would seem fairly obvious that its not right as you cant guarantee something that you have no control over.

Semantics again Pete. No different to using WILL.

[arfur mo]

I have received a reply from NSI

Dear Peter

I am writing reference your observation concerning Direct Response Security Systems Ltd.

At NSI we realise that, regrettably, some unethical salesmen will breach the standards required of a NSI approved company. However, providing the right action is taken when dealing with such situations then we allow the company’s approval to continue.

sorry, this seems nothing but flannel to me, as how much 'unethical behavior' is allowed before any serious action is finally taken? if you can assume Mr A, Naughty Guy has been hard at it, by the time the 1st complaint rolls in and comes to the attention of the NSI, perhaps av1000 or more systems have been sold this way = just not good enough really don't you agree?

Your observation concerning the subcontracting rules is an interesting one which I have escalated up the chain to our senior management team. (sorry = more flannel) As you know, we monitor closely all NSI companies (think i tend to disagree here) whatever scope or discipline they follow and we will be monitoring the activities of Direct Response Security Systems Ltd, particularly in view of the recent Watchdog programme.

just more flannel i'm afraid, as surely they already knew of the alleged problems and till no solid tangible corrective action taken, seriously, what has any company got to do? - frog march AOPs or vulnerable people to the cash point in a coach?

With reference to your query over NACP 3, you should be aware that as Direct Response Security Systems Ltd is a Silver company on our list (phew, well thats OK then ) , it has (not on this performance dear) to comply with the particular regulations beneath (extract taken in quotation marks (would that be the 'P' taken). A Silver company is slightly different from Gold (hats off now, thats realy nice, showing such concern for the DDA colour blind) and the requirements not so stringent. (shat! i just new it was not going to last).

so Silver can use either one finger or two to wave at the Regulations?

Although you stated that your words did not form a complaint (pity i did not contact her ), they have not been taken lightly (), are being considered (and how long for?), and deserve a response ( i await with baited breath).

“10. SUB-CONTRACTING

Installation, commissioning and servicing of security systems shall be undertaken with competency by at least one trained and experienced technician, who may also be the proprietor or a director of the Company. Where sub-contractors are used for installation and/or maintenance of security systems, they shall be security screened in accordance with the Systems Silver Approval Criteria and these Management and Technical Requirements. Records of work carried out shall be maintained.

and for Gold the same or do more stringent rules apply?

There shall be a written agreement between the Company and the sub-contractor covering confidentiality of information, training and assignment to agreed tasks.

** Surveying, Designing, Specifying, and Pre-Contract Negotiations

These tasks (on site) are restricted to the staff personnel (proprietors, directors and PAYE employees) of the Systems Silver Approved Company (or of some other Systems Silver Approved Company).

(For the purposes of this requirement “site” means the location or premises supervised (or to be supervised) by the security system (or proposed security system), or other location or premises occupied by the customer or prospective customer.)

** Installing

The Company is allowed to use sub-contract personnel, provided that final inspection and handover to the customer are carried out by a member of staff (proprietors, directors and PAYE employees) of the Systems Silver Approved Company (or of some other Systems Silver Approved Company), or by an established and long-standing sub-contract person having knowledge and experience of the Company’s standards, procedures, practices etc, and whose work is routinely subject to documented internal audit by the Company.

i always thought if i were the subby i could run cables, put kit on wall but not do final connection - so is that for the 'Golds' or was i simply misinformed? not read it anywhere but was told this a few years back where i helped out on a large office building (nad did all the connecting and i even programmed it up ).

** Maintenance

The Company is allowed to use any suitable sub-contract person for carrying out maintenance activities, provided that he or she is an established and long- standing sub-contract person having knowledge and experience of the Company’s standards, procedures, practices etc, and whose work is routinely subject to documented internal audit by the Company.”

Wendy Round

Customer & Technical Support

i note the word 'suitable' here, while you/i would make darn sure they were up to scratch and honest, it leaves the door open way to much of a crack to abuse imo

Arfur

(very overly underwhelmed!)

[jb-eye]

Having read the NSI responce my first impression is dissapointment.

i thought NSI silver was similar to the old NACOSS before ISO approval. My mistake. It seems Silver is nothing more than SSAIB in a lot of ways.

[norman]

ouch!

[Guest Oxo]

Having read the NSI response my first impression is disappointment.

i thought NSI silver was similar to the old NACOSS before ISO approval. My mistake. It seems Silver is nothing more than SSAIB in a lot of ways.

Not really, Silver has the same audits as Gold, only difference is they do not use ISO.

They still do all the stats for FA management ect.

[james.wilson]

oxo

it appears from the nsi quote that on at least 1 thing (exc ISO) the rules are less, to use their words, stringent.

It makes more sense for it to be similar to the ssaib as many people on here have commented that gold rules are not relevant to the smaller company.

does anybody have a list of the differences?