Advice on upgrading HKC Securewatch to latest IP panel??

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

All systems should have a good lifespan. With all electronic goods manufacturer recommendations would be 10 years. I would have lots of brands of systems out there at 20 years +.
I am sure you would have lots also but ofcourse you only mention HKC.

All systems should have a good lifespan yes, I am glad you have shown such confidence in the OP's panel, from a manufacturer which you only spend your time on these threads moaning about because they charge for things that other manufacturers do not.
I did not mention HKC, The OP mentioned he had a HKC panel.
Yes i have plenty of older systems out there that were manufacturer by others.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Likewise you say you use other systems but you give the impression that only the one brand is suitable for everyone's needs.
To simplify this down it is clear from this you are happy to point out vulnerabilitys when I suggest something but not for your own suggestions..
You constantly go on about duel path but only offer HKC as a solution even though this is possible through most systems.

You really do have a bee in your bonnet about HKC . Anything that ticks the most boxes in a requirement situation will not only satisfy all current requirements but will also future proof it.
But you are again missing the bigger picture here, you responded to the OP straight away advising that his panel ( which you subsequently mentioned will give him more years of service ) should be ripped out and replaced with the most expensive panel on the market firstly and secondly with one that can currently only work with his dodgy broadband.
Then you go on about FREE FREE and FREE, therefore you were happy to advise this OP that your suggestion was ideal for his dodgy broadband.

When did I offer HKC only as dual path?

I have never seen 3 letters that would rattle someone so much.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

We have been comparing different systems via the sticky. This clearly shows the differences is services, options, features and costs.
You ask questions about how different systems are tested to the standards, but at the same time criticise other systems that conform to those standards. Then when it doesn't suit your argument you dismiss those same standards.
I have made some recommendations to do likewise with what vulnerabilitys there are with different options. But you clearly wanting to point out vulnerabilitys with some but not others appear to show clear agendas.

Just on this whole standards thing, we know that HKC & Vanderbilt use 3rd parties to test their products to EN50131, we do not know as yet do GSD, Risco etc. So the big question here is, if a manufacturer does not use a 3rd party to check their products, then is it really good enough that they can just stamp it on the side of their product?
If that is the case then they are down there with the systems that can be bought in places such as B&Q etc.

The big thing here is, again you jumped on the usual solution. Oh this company have free this and this company have free that.
You did not consider the now obvious issues with the OP's broadband connection.
You use the Free word to save the OP money, but at the same time you did not offer the OP all of the solutions, the cheapest of which, rather than ripping out his panel etc was from HKC .
In this situation, with dodgy broadband and the usual weakness's with routers anyway, you did your usual and promoted everyone except HKC.

I suppose I am lucky, I do not have issues with any manufacturer and I can actually give people advice without a chip on my shoulder.
Oh and it is not my fault if it is HKC that is usually the one that ticks more boxes than the others.

KoolKid

I don't have a chip on my shoulder I have HKC systems out there and I will install it if that is what a customer wants. However when all is explained to them with different options they choose other options. Usually followed by a line like, I had 3 other installers out to quote me and none of them showed me any other systems or I asked for another panel but they couldn't install it..
You really are contradicting yourself on the standards. Are you now saying that all panels conforming to the same standards are somehow different because they are tested by someone else??
If a panel doesn't comply that's someone else's job to establish. I don't think it's for you or I to make wild accusations about.
You really seem to be the one obsessed with the free options. I have continually mentioned I offer both but you just keep repeating free with increasing repetitively. Strange..
Again the OP option to replace the panel was not the dearest option when you factor in annual €60 per annum. And before you go on another free rant he has already stated he just wants to have the app and has no interest in downtime or redundancy etc.
Can you not move on from finding faults and vulnerability with one offering and not the others and let us give people options and let them choose.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

I don't have a chip on my shoulder I have HKC systems out there and I will install it if that is what a customer wants. However when all is explained to them with different options they choose other options. Usually followed by a line like, I had 3 other installers out to quote me and none of them showed me any other systems or I asked for another panel but they couldn't install it..
You really are contradicting yourself on the standards. Are you now saying that all panels conforming to the same standards are somehow different because they are tested by someone else??
If a panel doesn't comply that's someone else's job to establish. I don't think it's for you or I to make wild accusations about.
You really seem to be the one obsessed with the free options. I have continually mentioned I offer both but you just keep repeating free with increasing repetitively. Strange..
Again the OP option to replace the panel was not the dearest option when you factor in annual ?60 per annum. And before you go on another free rant he has already stated he just wants to have the app and has no interest in downtime or redundancy etc.
Can you not move on from finding faults and vulnerability with one offering and not the others and let us give people options and let them choose.

Your first paragraph is actually funny, so you are the 4th guy in and you chat to the potential customer. You tell them all about the free things that the other manufacturers have and you therefore talk them out of getting that dreaded HKC system .
I don't suppose you tell them about the pit falls of the free stuff do you?
Well we all know how easy the HKC stuff is to program and i suppose there are guys out there, as you often refer to as 1 trick ponies who only know HKC. Perhaps they think they do not need to know about any other manufacturers systems. I can only speak for myself however and i keep my options open.

I am not contradicting myself about standards, did you check your own exam results in school? Hardly. You do know that in order for something to reach a certain standard then it has to be checked over by a non vested interest.

Can you show me were i made these wild accusations please? I simply queried something that was all, there is a huge difference here.
I assumed that you would know the answer to that query off the top of your head as you are demonstrating your knowledge about that manufacturers products throughout these threads and you are also in the process of testing a Text dialler with them currently.
As i said i assumed you would know, so when you do find out please let me know.
Again i am not making any wild assumptions here.

Speaking of strange, you need to look within there or even go back to the second post on this thread, the one you wrote, you were the one who is actually the Free fanatic here. The OP put in a query, you were off with you free solutions, but only after the OP having to rip out a perfectly good control panel so he could avail of your free options.
You could have mentioned that HKC GSM as well in that thread but as usual and as demonstrated through out all your posts in this forum, not once will you even mention HKC.
You say you give people choices, well if so, do that and mention all their choices.
This while his broadband was dodgy anyway

You chose not to even mention that ? 60 per annum anyway, so the OP could not have made a qualified decision as on your 2nd post you did not give him all of his available options.

Again Free, rely on the clients router and all will be grand :rolleyes:

It is simple with you, anything but HKC.
You are the one here not giving people all of the options and letting them decide.

kub

KoolKid wrote:

Apology accepted & please accept mine for not being able to fulfill your request on this occasion. The second query would be better addressed with the EQA

KoolKid wrote:

PS. This was a response to a post that was later deleted.

Oh and as you brought it up about deleted posts, I had some issues with my posts last night.
You might notice that I have mentioned cut and paste on some of my posts.

KoolKid

You really are just going around and around here. I do tell customers about different options. I have said numerous times in this thread about free options and back up options but you just keep referring back to free...
Both options are available on systems I recommend. HKC only have a paid for option which some people quite simply don't want.
You trying to find fault with me will not change that.
Again you are critical of the free option but not the paid for back up using GSM.
Here's a scenario. Worst case, power is cut in a house, GSM is jammed and phone lines are cut. Now the house is broken into. The only alerts going out are comms fail. Would you prefer the notifications after 90 minutes that you are paying €96 for or 5 minutes from the system you're paying €40 a year from?
I notice that you didn't answer this the last time.
Your having a go at the standards really is showing desperation and really makes no sense and you know it. The systems conform to En50131 and they are inspected to that standard. We certify every job to that standard. That certification is accepted by all insurance company's, all monitoring stations and from the Guards. Yet not good enough for you. You stated you didn't know about Siemens or Risco testing procedures, so would you not use or certify these makes of system. This really sounds like you want to promote the one system and try to discredit others.
Besides you strong objection to people who don't want to pay for self monitoring option, regardless of the vulnerability have you any other logical argument to make.?
Again noting theat GSM backups have vulnerability also.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Hi
The Siemens/Vanderbilt SPC 4320 has IP on board. Very easy to set up & connect.
The GSD i1070 Works via Lan or WiFi . Again easy enough to set up and connect.
Those 2 would be the most popular panels we use as they have free apps & free usage options without any running costs.
Some good information on the sticky here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057394782

That is you isn't it? This is the 2nd post of this thread.

Just to keep things clear here.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

You really are just going around and around here. I do tell customers about different options. I have said numerous times in this thread about free options and back up options but you just keep referring back to free...

And we will continue to do that, going around and round. As per my previous post above where I have quoted your first response in this thread. You were the one who wrote that post and it is you who brought up all the Free stuff, without mentioning the pit falls and again not giving the OP all of the choices.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Both options are available on systems I recommend. HKC only have a paid for option which some people quite simply don't want.
You trying to find fault with me will not change that.
Again you are critical of the free option but not the paid for back up using GSM.

But i thought you mentioned on another thread that you were still testing the GSD text dialler, I know the Vanderbilt one is good, well still 2g, so all is good there as long as the mobile providers keep providing the 2 g service.

So you decided on in that post that it was pointless even mentioning the HKC option as you knew the OP would not want it anyway, that was kind of arrogant out of you don't you think?

I am critical of the free option yes, as Fred Funk said relying on domestic routers is a joke.
Someone pulling out something as simple as a plug for a router to plug something else in instead will disable notification.
Sorry i am professional, that to me is not good enough.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Here's a scenario. Worst case, power is cut in a house, GSM is jammed and phone lines are cut. Now the house is broken into. The only alerts going out are comms fail. Would you prefer the notifications after 90 minutes that you are paying ?96 for or 5 minutes from the system you're paying ?40 a year from?

But in that scenario the home has been targeted and therefore the installer has been complacent. Even if we go with your solution all that is going to be received is comms failure, not good enough.

A system in such a situation as that should be capable of transmitting something more appropriate than comms failures.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Your having a go at the standards really is showing desperation and really makes no sense and you know it. The systems conform to En50131 and they are inspected to that standard. We certify every job to that standard. That certification is accepted by all insurance company's, all monitoring stations and from the Guards. Yet not good enough for you.

Where did i say standards are not good enough for me? What i said was the Risk Assessment will determine the system that will be installed. That same Risk Assessment is part of the EN50131 standard.

Desperation? all i did was question did each manufacturer have 3rd party impartial inspections done on their products to ensure they comply with these same standards. That is a query, i don't think that is desperate.

Other than that, thank you, but i already know how certification works.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

You stated you didn't know about Siemens or Risco testing procedures, so would you not use or certify these makes of system. This really sounds like you want to promote the one system and try to discredit others.
Besides you strong objection to people who don't want to pay for self monitoring option, regardless of the vulnerability have you any other logical argument to make.?
Again noting theat GSM backups have vulnerability also.

As we are on a public forum, just be clear please. Siemens was the old name of Vanderbilt, same product, different name, that is all. I did not only mention Vanderbilt and Risco, i asked about GSD as well again assuming you knew the answer to that.
With regard to Vanderbilt and Risco, well yes i have certified systems with these manufacturers products, I often wondered about that accreditation on their panels. Again i assumed you would know about GSD off the top of your head.

My logical argument is that you as a professional is recommending people use free ways in which they should be alerted to some toe rag breaking into their homes, while their router is the way in which they are alerted, which in my book is not good enough.

KoolKid

kub wrote: »

That is you isn't it? This is the 2nd post of this thread.

Just to keep things clear here.

Yes note the word options. Again, I am saying there are options for free and options for back ups. Why are you just constantly repeating the same thing?

kub wrote: »

And we will continue to do that, going around and round. As per my previous post above where I have quoted your first response in this thread. You were the one who wrote that post and it is you who brought up all the Free stuff, without mentioning the pit falls and again not giving the OP all of the choices.

You mean in the same way you mention GSM and other options without the pitfalls & vunerabilities??

kub wrote: »

But i thought you mentioned on another thread that you were still testing the GSD text dialler, I know the Vanderbilt one is good, well still 2g, so all is good there as long as the mobile providers keep providing the 2 g service.

So you decided on in that post that it was pointless even mentioning the HKC option as you knew the OP would not want it anyway, that was kind of arrogant out of you don't you think?

Vanderbilt 3G GSM unit will be available by next week I believe.
I believe the poster has made it clear he didn't want the bells and whistles etc.

kub wrote: »

I am critical of the free option yes, as Fred Funk said relying on domestic routers is a joke.
Someone pulling out something as simple as a plug for a router to plug something else in instead will disable notification.
Sorry i am professional, that to me is not good enough.

Yet again its a feature. So every non monitored system you come across/service is a joke, as they have nothing at all. A PSTN monitored system can be disabled by cutting a cable. Do you tell all your customers that is a joke.
GSM can be jammed, do you tell all your customers using that its a joke.

kub wrote: »

But in that scenario the home has been targeted and therefore the installer has been complacent. Even if we go with your solution all that is going to be received is comms failure, not good enough.

A system in such a situation as that should be capable of transmitting something more appropriate than comms failures.

So say you have installed your app here with GSM back up & monitoring via that & PSTN . You have still been complacent???
What are you going to say next , every job should have a radio back up as well?
A comms failure is all that's possible here in this case. Wouldn't a notification of all comms failed in 5 minutes be better than in 90 minutes?

kub wrote: »

Where did i say standards are not good enough for me? What i said was the Risk Assessment will determine the system that will be installed. That same Risk Assessment is part of the EN50131 standard.

Desperation? all i did was question did each manufacturer have 3rd party impartial inspections done on their products to ensure they comply with these same standards. That is a query, i don't think that is desperate.

Other than that, thank you, but i already know how certification works.

It comes across fairly obvious that you are implying self certification may not be good enough, or there is some issue. Regardless the systems have to stand up to the same scrutiny in each company's audits.

kub wrote: »

As we are on a public forum, just be clear please. Siemens was the old name of Vanderbilt, same product, different name, that is all. I did not only mention Vanderbilt and Risco, i asked about GSD as well again assuming you knew the answer to that.
With regard to Vanderbilt and Risco, well yes i have certified systems with these manufacturers products, I often wondered about that accreditation on their panels. Again i assumed you would know about GSD off the top of your head.

My logical argument is that you as a professional is recommending people use free ways in which they should be alerted to some toe rag breaking into their homes, while their router is the way in which they are alerted, which in my book is not good enough.

We all recommend different systems. Again I will offer both if people want it.
Still the same over & over.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Yes note the word options. Again, I am saying there are options for free and options for back ups. Why are you just constantly repeating the same thing?

You used the word options with regard to Free.
Here you go, read it slowly now.

Hi
The Siemens/Vanderbilt SPC 4320 has IP on board. Very easy to set up & connect.
The GSD i1070 Works via Lan or WiFi . Again easy enough to set up and connect.
Those 2 would be the most popular panels we use as they have free apps & free usage options without any running costs.
Some good information on the sticky here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showt...p?t=2057394782


Tell me please what redundancy both those panels, that you recommended have no running costs.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

You mean in the same way you mention GSM and other options without the pitfalls & vunerabilities??

Just be clear here now, are you suggesting that a GSM unit can be as vulnerable as a router? That someone could just unplug the GSM from where it is plugged in, is it ?
Just like that :rolleyes:

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Vanderbilt 3G GSM unit will be available by next week I believe.
I believe the poster has made it clear he didn't want the bells and whistles etc.

Is that like when a builder saying next week, because if the recent episode of 520.1 keypads is anything to go by, i won't be holding my breath.

Subsequently yes the OP did indeed mention that, but really as a professional you should be advising him on the best security possible.

KoolKid

Same stuff over and over. We have established routers are vulnerable to power cuts. We have established GSM s are vulnerable to jamming.
Both can be easily done once you as you know.
You have to be inside the house to unplug the router. Power can be turned off from outside. This requires physical tampering, jamming a GSM requires no physical tampering. Based on that yes GSM is as easy to jam as it is to switch off power.
We have established lots of back ups would be ideal, but not everyone wants to spend this sort of money on their security.
Some people are happy with no monitoring at all.
Everyone who walks in Harvey Norman's doesn't want the 70inch TV with UHD and Internet apps etc.
Each to their own. Let them take the advice and choose.
Have you anything new to add or are you just here to continue the same thing over and over.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Yet again its a feature. So every non monitored system you come across/service is a joke, as they have nothing at all. A PSTN monitored system can be disabled by cutting a cable. Do you tell all your customers that is a joke.
GSM can be jammed, do you tell all your customers using that its a joke.

A feature which you are recommending to people who know no better, a feature that is relying on their router, that a child could unplug :rolleyes:.
I don't know are you more interested in saving people money rather than providing them with better security solutions, because from a security point of view, you are doing them no favours at all.

Every non monitored system I come across is from a different era, besides your recommendation through a router might as well be in that category. Besides mostly i find that these are in buildings that are rented out and landlords only provide the basic's.

Be more specific please with your wording, if a PTSN line is cut, then notification is affected, the entire system is not disabled.

Besides cutting such lines is conscious thing, as i said previously, a person living in a house could easily unplug their router by accident, to say, plug in the vacuum cleaner.
Oh and don't forget your precious router will also be knocked out of that line is cut.

Again i advise my own clients in a more professional way than you do anyway, that is coming across very clear here.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

So say you have installed your app here with GSM back up & monitoring via that & PSTN . You have still been complacent???
What are you going to say next , every job should have a radio back up as well?
A comms failure is all that's possible here in this case. Wouldn't a notification of all comms failed in 5 minutes be better than in 90 minutes?

Well first off and again my Risk Assessment would have suggested if that sort of incident could occur and the system installed would be a reflection of that.
Therefore chances are there would be a radio as well, so the activation is transmitted.
Again i see the chip on your shoulder popping up, the 90 minutes is suggesting there is a HKC system with 90 minute polling. Well on high security sites that i have that polling period is a lot less than that and on some sites we have Vanderbilt, so what have you got to say about Vanderbilt? But my Vanderbilt is not going through a petty domestic router.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

It comes across fairly obvious that you are implying self certification may not be good enough, or there is some issue. Regardless the systems have to stand up to the same scrutiny in each company's audits.

We all recommend different systems. Again I will offer both if people want it.
Still the same over & over.

Self certification of course is not good enough, all the manufacturers should be subject to the same audits as installers have to be to conform to standards. I like to believe that they are all at the same standard here.

We do indeed recommend different systems, but i have or never will install a system and rely on someones router for notification.
If you believe that is good enough, then you do your thing and I will do mine.
At the end of the day, one of the most basic necessities of intruder alarm panels always and i am going way way back here, was that they would still work in the event of an electrical failure. Therefore i will rely on notification units housed securely in an alarm panel and connected to its sound power supply for notifications for my customers.

They can do what they want with their router, that is for their internet, not their security system.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Same stuff over and over. We have established routers are vulnerable to power cuts. We have established GSM s are vulnerable to jamming.
Both can be easily done once you as you know.
You have to be inside the house to unplug the router. Power can be turned off from outside. This requires physical tampering, jamming a GSM requires no physical tampering. Based on that yes GSM is as easy to jam as it is to switch off power.
We have established lots of back ups would be ideal, but not everyone wants to spend this sort of money on their security.
Some people are happy with no monitoring at all.
Everyone who walks in Harvey Norman's doesn't want the 70inch TV with UHD and Internet apps etc.
Each to their own. Let them take the advice and choose.
Have you anything new to add or are you just here to continue the same thing over and over.

You are happy enough so that if there is a power cut in a neighbourhood that all of your clients systems can no longer notify them that their alarms are gone off?
Meanwhile their next door neighbours who have those God awful HKC systems with those terrible HKC Comms units that they are foolishly paying for will be notified of alarm activations, not only that but they would have been notified of a power cut as well.
So they know exactly what is going on, your customers don't.

But once you are happy with that, well good for you.

It is basic stuff, basic.

Will this go on and on, if you want it too.

KoolKid

4 Separate posts and you are still on about the same thing we have already established. You seem to be confusing the lines between proper monitoring and apps/notifications.
Fully Monitored systems do not rely on a router either. Also if the router is simply unplugged as you suggest you will get a notification on the keypad and on the app within 5 minutes.
The situation with all comms attacked could happen on any property. How does your risk assessment help here.
Do you specify radio for every job as a third back up.?
Do you charge residential customers even higher amounts for faster polling?
If there is no radio and all other comms are down would you prefer to be notified in 5 minutes or 90 minutes.?? It's strange how you won't answer this directly.
Your take on the certification really is sounding silly now. A system is certified to En50131 and that certification stands unless there is a problem found with it that it doesn't conform.
Incedently is HKC systems fully certified by test house like Siemens Vanderbilt or just in conjunction with 3rd party testers.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

4 Separate posts and you are still on about the same thing we have already established. You seem to be confusing the lines between proper monitoring and apps/notifications.
Fully Monitored systems do not rely on a router either. Also if the router is simply unplugged as you suggest you will get a notification on the keypad and on the app within 5 minutes.
The situation with all comms attacked could happen on any property. How does your risk assessment help here.
Do you specify radio for every job as a third back up.?
Do you charge residential customers even higher amounts for faster polling?
If there is no radio and all other comms are down would you prefer to be notified in 5 minutes or 90 minutes.?? It's strange how you won't answer this directly.
Your take on the certification really is sounding silly now. A system is certified to En50131 and that certification stands unless there is a problem found with it that it doesn't conform.
Incedently is HKC systems fully certified by test house like Siemens Vanderbilt or just in conjunction with 3rd party testers.

Yes and there will be even more posts now, i suppose it is a bit like throwing mud at a wall, some might stick eventually as in if you were not so arrogant you could read what i have actually written.

I never confuse professional monitoring with farcical self notification and believe me i am glad that you are not doing professional monitoring via a router, just your confidence in them is such that it would not surprise me.

Do I have to break down what is in a risk assessment now as well to keep you happy ?
You know well what goes into them, if you feel it necessary we can continue that discussion in HSS and in private most importantly.
The system designed as per the risk assessment weighs up the threat as to the class of criminal is likely to target that property.
I hope you know all this, because all you are coming across as here is someone surprisingly enough as being a bit lax with regard to security, again this router thing is beyond me.

I am aware of how a comms failure notification works, why do you feel compelled to explain these things to me?
Sorry you actually wanted me to answer that preference in polling failure times, 5 minutes of course, even 2 minutes even better, that is kind of obvious don't you think?
What is your fascination with that 90 mins?

But then i would rather get an actual alarm activation alert rather than some comms failure, why? Because it is a failure you are offering, my systems do not rely on routers so I can relay actual activation's to my clients.
My clients would be aware of what is going, where as those who due to your advice who are relying on their broadband for notifications will get a failure for a multitude of reasons, could be as simple as Eir working on a cabinet in their neighbourhood, then they are worrying unnecessarily. But then you do pay for what you get.

I know as well how certification works, shame that this self notification through routers is tolerated under it though.

Yes HKC does indeed get their equipment tested by 3rd parties for compliance.

Another box ticked.

KoolKid

You really have got into tunnelling vision here that you can't see beyond what is a feature of an alarm system. You call me arrogant and yet you are claiming to able to foresee whether a property could be attacked at the phone, lines and a GSM jammer etc.??
Still won't answer the question....... If all comms are attacked on a property and the only notification you are getting is total comms fail would you prefer that notification after 5 minutes or 90 minutes. If you are suggesting that you have domestic customers on higher polling alerts using HKC perhaps you might share what commercial rates you recommend for residential properties.
If HKC are on 3 party certification how long is it since that came in? They were certainly self certified in the past. Were all your jobs OK then?
I'm sure they were. After all every installation an installer does is self certified isn't it?
We don't call the EQA out to look at every job we do before we write that cert. But yet that certification is accepted by all the insurance company's as fit for purpose and the Guards for monitoring response etc.
If there was to be a problem with it it would show up in an inspection surly.
Now how do we get you by this block you have on basic self monitord systems???
Again if a customer wants no monitoring whatsoever that system is still fine and up to EN 50 131 Grade 1.
Is a system like that acceptable to you as a grade 1 system even though you might have recommend monitoring, GSM back up and radio etc?

kub

Give me a while and I will be back and will respond from the PC.
With numbered points, small words and I might even put them in capital letters so that you can read and hopefully actually understand what I am trying to put across

KoolKid

The questions you are avoiding are fairly straightforward in fairness.Sarcasm and attitudes don't really do anything for the debate.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

You really have got into tunnelling vision here that you can't see beyond what is a feature of an alarm system. You call me arrogant and yet you are claiming to able to foresee whether a property could be attacked at the phone, lines and a GSM jammer etc.??

Tunnel vision...:rolleyes:, a feature of an alarm system in my book is part guard, the ability of a customer to change their own code, that kind of stuff.
Interesting you used the word alarm, that could be the difference here between what we are both on about, see i do security systems perhaps you on do alarms.
Well it was you who brought up this ' property could be attacked ' stuff.
You tell me so, would you put in the same system to the same spec to a home of a couple who work in a none cash business to the home of a couple who own a cash business and could bring cash home with them at night?
Lets weigh that one up now, which one of those systems do you think should be spec'ed better?

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Still won't answer the question....... If all comms are attacked on a property and the only notification you are getting is total comms fail would you prefer that notification after 5 minutes or 90 minutes. If you are suggesting that you have domestic customers on higher polling alerts using HKC perhaps you might share what commercial rates you recommend for residential properties.

See this is where i think you are having difficulty reading what i have wrote, as a matter of fact I DID ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

IF YOU READ MY POST FROM 21:03 LAST NIGHT ( 4 / 5 / 17 ), PERHAPS SLOWLY YOU WILL SEE THE FOLLOWING;

Sorry you actually wanted me to answer that preference in polling failure times, 5 minutes of course, even 2 minutes even better, that is kind of obvious don't you think?
What is your fascination with that 90 mins?

NOW JUST TO AVOID ANY CONFUSION HERE, I CUT AND PASTED THAT BIT OUT.

IF YOU CANNOT STILL READ OR UNDERSTAND IT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND I WILL REWRITE THAT FOR YOU.

Now i am not that dreaded HKC that obviously rattles you so much, I do not set their rates, best you speak with them about such things as what they charge for their stuff.
But in regard to polling times that i have set up with HKC systems, they are for high risk individuals and are a lot less than this 90 minutes you keep on about.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

If HKC are on 3 party certification how long is it since that came in? They were certainly self certified in the past. Were all your jobs OK then?
I'm sure they were. After all every installation an installer does is self certified isn't it?

I am afraid i do not know the answer to that, but as you will be asking GSD that question then i will do the same with HKC and will be back to you on that.
Well any installation that i filled in a EN 50131 cert for, which was subsequently checked by an auditor was perfect.
The thing about the manufacturers is they are all competing and are in manufacturing, i don't manufacture things so i cannot comment about that, but i would like to know that each of them are doing what they do to best of their ability.