Service Engineer Posted November 14, 2004 Author Posted November 14, 2004 well "That`s that" sorted then ..? ........................................................ Dave Partridge (Romec Service Engineer)
antinode Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 Manuals seems like touchy subject. One of the many reasons I can't wait unti I'm in the trade myself I wonder how I'll get on Trade Member
Monteey Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 I can't wait unti I'm in the trade myself You poor misguided fool Mark Hawks Ex BT Openreach Field Service Now Self employed telecom and data engineer www.mphtelecom.co.uk Also back doing sub contract work in the security industry. Retained firefighter Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue
Allso Posted November 16, 2004 Posted November 16, 2004 I've followed this dabate with interest, and have read all of the arguments put forwards by installers for engineer manuals to be unavailable to end-users. It increases security, stops end-users tampering with their systems, and cuts down on false alarms. Can I ask if any installers who have installed or who are maintaining their home or business alarm systems themselves, have arranged a take-over visit from an independent local company, and have had their panels locked with an engineer code unknown to them? If not then why not? Don't you want to have the benefits as well? Allso
Allso Posted November 16, 2004 Posted November 16, 2004 I'm having a good question day today - must have too much time on my hands! So I've got another question for those security-conscious installers reading. Why should an installer working for the "Tin Can and Flat Battery Alarm Co. Ltd.", located in the sleepy village of Upper Nowhere, have easy access to the full engineering manuals for the new "Milky Way Infinite Zone Extra High Security 1.6GTi Turbo" alarm panel when his company only ever install the "Standard Panel" (produced by Bogg & Son Ltd.), and no-one in the Greater Upper Nowhere area will ever have the new Milky Way panel fitted? From a security point of, he shouldn't, as he doesn't need the information to carry out his job. If you believe engineer manual access should be restricted, where will you draw the line? B) Allso
Guest RICHL Posted November 16, 2004 Posted November 16, 2004 Engineer access should be restricted to the panels which they are expected to work on. Simple really. Regarding your question above - why have a dog and bark yourself?!
Guest Posted November 16, 2004 Posted November 16, 2004 As far as I am concerned - I wont supply engineer manuals whith a new install due to the fact the system comes with a 12 month waranty as standard - If the punter messed with the panel this would invalidate the warranty. The manual is not normally required as the system should have been properly specd and configd in the first place and would have been If we installed it.
Allso Posted November 17, 2004 Posted November 17, 2004 Can I ask if any installers who have installed or who are maintaining their home or business alarm systems themselves, have arranged a take-over visit from an independent local company, and have had their panels locked with an engineer code unknown to them? 31547[/snapback] The point I was trying to make, and didn't make very well, is that installers always have access to the full manuals for their own panels, so they never experience the frustration that some users feel when they can't get hold of one. Only by having their own panels locked could an installer fully empathise with users!! Somehow I knew that you wouldn't all be rushing to have your panels taken over!!
Allso Posted November 17, 2004 Posted November 17, 2004 ....what makes you think we would tamper with our own system where we shouldnt?Pete 31589[/snapback] Exactly! - what makes you think every user with an engineer manual would tamper with their own alarm when they shouldn't? B) You'll probably say "my experience", and I can't with that. But shouldn't trust between user and installer extend both ways. I have the installation manuals for my alarm, but not the engineering code, and I don't tamper with my system. I did get an undertaking from the company that they would reset the engineer code to one of my choosing should I decide to change to another company in the future. I asked them for this before I sent the cheque (users note that this is a good time to ask!!). This compromise is fine with me. As a result I don't feel totally locked into their services, and at the same time my security isn't compromised. My last alarm company went out of business overnight. The first I knew of it was when I rang them to arrange some extra sensors and got "this number is not recognised". I had no engineer manual or code, and none of the three companies I asked would take my panel over (DA Abacus 8ABI - put in less than 6 years before), so I had to have the expense of a whole new panel - hence my rather strong views on this issue. Allso
amateurandy Posted November 17, 2004 Posted November 17, 2004 Allso raises an interesting point there; users protecting themselves against the failure of the alarm company that holds the master codes and manuals for their system. In my business (IT) there is a process of "escrow" used, with a third party holding critical information that is released when the supplier defaults or goes out of business. This is in order that the user can continue to do what they would expect to do (within reason) with the software (it is usually applied to software) they have bought or licensed. Is there any similar scheme run by a trade body or one of the inspectorates? Or could there be? Maybe it should be standard in all "good" contracts?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.