Security Alarm System That Doesn't Provide Full Coverage

[duffbeer2015]

Hi all

 

Just a few questions if any engineer can help out with an opinion and whether my lay thoughts are justified.

 

Free security alarm with 24 hour monitoring giving full peace of mind.

 

A security alarm system paid for by a housing company on behalf of an end user (the tenant) - so essentially free of charge to the tenant (but probably with 3rd party contract rights for the tenant - but that's another matter) is allegedly fully 'fitted'. The property is a bungalow type with two main entrances the front door and the backdoor.  The property has 1x lounge/living room, 1x bedroom, 1 x kitchen and 1x bathroom. As of August 2014 there were 1 report of a burglary in the area where an intruder forced the way into a neighbouring property and made off with property. This property and similar neighbouring properties are designed for over 60's and house mainly elderly / disabled tenants.

 

The alarm is wireless (make and model unknown) where I presume that the equipment all links together through paring (like you would with a wireless router) and then the alarm system has a communication

device with a sim card fitted which is then monitored when activated by a monitoring facility 24 hours a day and incase of trigger a key holder or security response attends the property.

 

The alarm components consist of the following:-

 

1x Magnet door sensor fitted onto the main front door which leads into the living room / lounge - the door opens - it makes a buzzing noise - it knows when the other magnetic sensor moved away (I presume);

1x  wireless PIR sensor which is fitted in the living room / lounge covering the whole area;

1x PIR sensor in the kitchen covering the whole area of the kitchen.

 

BLANK SPACE

 

No PIR sensor or magnetic sensors at all covering the back door (also a main entrance point), the middle hallway space (if you want to call it that) which then leads into the bathroom (which also has no sensors at all) which then, from the bathroom floor leads right into the attic which obviously covers the whole of the house.

 

To test this, I set the system, waited sufficient time for it to activate properly and walked around to the back of the property. Opened the back door with the key, walked into the bathroom and up into the attic

without any detection whatsoever. Climbed out of the attic, walked to the front of the property and into the living room where only then it activated.

 

So essentially a full alarm system which doesn't cover a main access point, the bathroom or the attic.

 

I contacted the company who said an engineer would call out. Engineer calls out (who has no responsibility for doing anything allegedly) and states that "why would you need anything on the back door and why would anyone want to get into the attic" - the reply was because a) the back door is a main entrance b) the attic was intended for holding goods because there is no other storage space in the property and or

3) because potentially - someone hiding in the attic with ulterior motives could quite easily break in through the back, wait in the attic for a tenant to disarm an alarm though the front and then commit a further crime all without being detected. The engineer then says "if we give you one [an extra PIR / Sensor] we will then have the others asking for one" !!!

 

 

 

Doesn't this make the whole alarm system for peace of mind with 24 hour monitoring (free of charge) a fiasco i.e. defective? is it right to be alarmed that a number of tenants

supposedly protected are not sufficiently protected?.

 

I have suggested that I make a complaint in writing for the tenant and then if no joy ask them to remove the alarm system and have an ADT or similar one fitted for a paid for service - would you do the same?

 

 

 

 

Kind Regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RichL]

Its free of charge to the tenant, so no grounds to complain there.

 

The engineer is right. There are no rules/regs for coverage at this level only opinions and assessment, these form the design. The design would have been given to the buyer who must have agreed to it. Its basic, but been done to a price.

 

If you're not happy with the coverage the best option would be to agree to pay for extra to be added. Being wireless its a doddle. I would add that if the back door is not a timed entry zone then it does not need a contact (unless you specifically request it, for a door chime for example), none timed entry routes are usually covered with PIRs as they provide more cover.

[duffbeer2015]

. I will ask them how much to supply and fit an additional sensor

[PeterJames]

The other thing to consider is theft attractive property in the bathroom and attic. No burglar in his right mind is going to steal the soap from the bathroom, or your Christmas decorations from the attic. That said I would always recommend cover entrance points to the property

[charlie6]

RichL  "... I would add that if the back door is not a timed entry zone then it does not need a contact.."

 

There may be several occasions where this would be absolutely correct, however, this is the very door I would most definitely secure..together with rear windows. 

 

Since this is a tenanted property, he may or may not have third party rights on this occasion, it's open to debate. Is there some sort of surcharge on the rental agreement for having a security system ? I would suggest that with a skimpy system of this nature I wouldn't bother paying it, and if I were paying it I would insist on extra security features free of charge (no extra payment for further detectors).  

 

Duffbeer, I would suggest that you read your home insurance contents documents.

[james.wilson]

its all about the RA id assume there is comercial interests as your not paying for the system directly

[charlie6]

He could be paying 'indirectly' if there is a surcharge on his rent.

[norman]

irrelevant if not itemised.

[charlie6]

Explain Norman, explain..don't keep me in suspense.

[al-yeti]

Ra I would have thought covered the back in someway, but as above its "free" so price will be affected to