Subscribe to RSS - central station alarm monitoring

central station alarm monitoring

COPS Monitoring strengthens Southwestern presence

 - 
Wednesday, August 14, 2013

More than a year after opening its fifth central station in Dallas, COPS Monitoring continues to enhance its presence in the region. The Williamstown, N.J.-based wholesale monitoring is expanding support of the 8,000-square-foot facility by adding two new account executives, Julie Jordan and T.J. Cornwall. Jordan will manage East Texas and Louisiana, while Cornwall will cover West Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Nebraska.

While the account regions are obviously large, covering large swathes of urban and rural areas, the most important dealer markets are likely to be in the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area, along with some of the other major urban areas of Texas, including Houston, Austin and San Antonio.

David Smith, director of marketing and communication for COPS, said the new additions represent part of the company’s broader “hometown” strategy of providing a personable level of professional service.

“While we can’t be local to every alarm dealer, we do try to select strategic geographic regions to better serve our dealers and to strengthen the reliability of our network of central stations,” Smith said. “By operating regional central stations, we also have the ability to become more involved in local associations and with local dealers so we can better understand how we can help them overcome regional challenges and capitalize on opportunities.”

Because of the sheer sprawl of the Dallas-Fort Worth area (it’s the fourth most populous urban area in the U.S.), Cornwall will manage the Fort Worth dealers, while Jordan will work with Dallas-based accounts. 

Moon Security to enhance PERS division

The unit, dubbed Moon Medical Alert, will be launched within 'next month and a half'
 - 
08/14/2013

PASCO, Wash.—Moon Security Services, a full-service security company with accounts in several states in the Northwest, plans to ramp up its PERS division in the coming months, Mike Miller, vice president of the company, told Security Systems News.

The value of an IP address

 - 
Monday, August 5, 2013

As promised in my last blog, I’m going to touch on another service discussed in Ken Kirschenbaum’s new technology seminar, held last Friday, that could offer some significant benefits to monitoring companies.

The company, called Keep Your IP, is an IP forwarding service that allows dealers to retain their IP addresses, giving companies the ability to move from one central station to another without sacrificing the value they’ve built within their organization. Davin Roos, president of Keep Your IP, discussed several benefits of maintaining IP continuity. The crucial word? Control.

If, for instance, a dealer wants to partition some accounts, or even sell the entire organization, the fact of selling to a company that uses a different central station can devalue the sale, Roos explained. Having your own IP address (and, by extension, your own server) can help companies avoid incurring costs that result from the man hours required to make necessary changes. Roos added that the company is working with some of the major central stations to bundle packages that feature the service to dealers.

Some additional benefits for dealers include having the luxury to move central stations if a current one is under-performing, greater RMR consistency (especially during times of economic crisis), and the freedom to make changes after a central station switches their Internet service provider. 

Yesterday is gone, tomorrow is here: Notes from the webinar

 - 
Thursday, August 1, 2013

Earlier today I listened in on a technology webinar, hosted by Ken Kirschenbaum, an industry attorney, that featured several voices both in the industry and in intersecting fields. Many of the speakers are at the forefront of technological innovation as it pertains to the central station space, so naturally the discussion dealt primarily with how to stay competitive by leveraging new technology that can improve retention and carve out new sources of RMR.

A recurring theme of the talk, unsurprisingly, was the emergence of the cableco and telecom giants, and what the competitive implications are with respect to their entry.

In 10-minute intervals, panelists presented commentary on a range of products and services. Some were pretty compelling, not only from a novelty standpoint, but also because many of the products seem like they could have some allure for monitoring companies and their distributors.

One of the more non-traditional services was presented by John Hoffe, president and CEO of Linked24, a product suite with several applications for mobile devices. Designed for dealers, the service features a GPS locator which, depending on the mobile device, can report an updated location of a loved one every three minutes. But that may actually be the company’s least buzzworthy product.

Another offering from Linked24 is its “Safe Text” service, which monitors incoming and outgoing messages for anything untoward, such as “inappropriate language and acronyms,” according to the website. If it detects any one of more than 750 pre-selected words, the text is uploaded to a customer portal for review. It’s a helicopter parent’s dream, and, brave new world though it is, it’s tough to imagine this product won’t find a home somewhere. But we’ll have to wait and see if that home will be among the dealer networks of wholesale monitoring companies.  

That’s not all. There’s also an “Emergency Shake” product that allows a customer in dire straits to open a Linked24 application then shake or drop their phone, whereupon a camera is engaged to shoot a 10-second video clip. The administrator of the account is then automatically notified.

Some of these offerings may come across as a bit intense from a personal privacy position, but there’s no question some have the potential to thwart an unforeseen problem, particularly the phone shake feature. And, with the mobile surge in full swing, it’s not unrealistic to imagine dealers giving strong consideration to products of this ilk to help boost their RMR.

It dawned on me just now that I’ve alluded to one speaker thus far, despite the fact there were several more who offered insight and product commentary that were more than worthy of mention. In my next blog or two, I’ll be sure to highlight the most resonant points offered by some of the other knowledgeable panelists. Stay tuned...

Contract chat: exculpatory and limitation of liability clauses

 - 
Wednesday, July 31, 2013

A few weeks ago, in response to a Georgia appellate court decision upholding a verdict against Monitronics in a multi-million dollar case, Ken Kirschenbaum, an industry attorney, posed a simple question on his email newsletter to subscribers: "Why should an alarm contract be drafted so that judges find so much confusion?" 

It's a fair question. There was little consensus among the appellate court judges, and some of the judges who concurred with the original verdict cited different reasons for doing so. While the case is not yet settled (it may yet move to a higher court), the implication seems to be that the exculpatory and limitation of liability provisions in the contract were not established in a manner that could provide adequate protection.

This is an issue that stands to remain relevant for central station alarm monitoring companies everywhere. The case, too, is a big enough deal that Kirschenbaum himself updated some of his standard form contracts to make the protective provisions more enforceable, and account for some of the worst case scenarios which surfaced in the Veasley v. Monitronics case.

From Kirschenbaum’s newsletter:

“Why did I make the changes even though the Monitronics case is likely to be appealed and hopefully reversed? Because the same issues raised in Monitronics have been and will continue to be addressed in courts all over the country. Courts are looking for ways to impose duties on the alarm companies and avoid contract enforcement.”

Part of what makes the Monitronics case so legally murky, and even intimidating from a contractual standpoint, is that the end result, as Kirschenbaum points out, was personal injury. What’s more, the injury was caused by service rather than equipment negligence, the court determined.

Kirschenbaum’s piece is worth a read in its entirety because it discusses the sheer breadth of considerations that have to be made when designing a contract with clear and enforceable protections. You can subscribe to his newsletter here.

Missouri city the latest to outsource false alarm services

 - 
Wednesday, July 17, 2013

The trend of municipalities outsourcing false alarm collection services continues, and as in past instances, the most recent agreement involves Irving, Texas-based PMAM, a global IT firm with four U.S. offices and an office in Mumbai. Their slogan is “Around the World, Around the Clock,” so you can see why their false alarm tracking and billing services might appeal to cities hoping to nip the problem in the bud. 

According to an article from KSMU (Ozarks Public Radio) in Springfield, Mo., the police department in that city is the latest to do away with its in-house handling of false alarms, opting to transfer those duties to PMAM. Springfield Police Department dispatchers receive as many as 400 false alarm calls a month, the article noted.

Like any outsourcing move, the new arrangement saves resources, authorities say. In addition to being a drag on budgets, false alarms also stretch law enforcement in potentially harmful ways, sometimes preventing or delaying response to critical calls.

The advantage of outsourcing false alarm services to a company like PMAM is that, ideally, the IT giant has the capabilities to identify a false alarm, home in on the cause (an installation flaw or dated system is often the culprit), and then teach people how to avert future false dispatches, and the fines that eventually accompany them.

According to the article, the Springfield Police Department has received roughly 2,100 false alarm calls thus far in 2013. The city’s ordinance levies a civil penalty fee, between $15 and $50, for those who have at least four false alarms. The charges escalate with each additional violation, according to the article.

False alarms are both a fiscal and logistical drain on towns and cities. But some of the things that might mitigate false dispatches, including system upgrades and more regular maintenance, are not always at the forefront of many customers’ minds.

It seems that until there’s more public awareness of the problem, and more measured steps to cripple the problem at its roots, municipal bodies are going to continue seeking out IT behemoths like PMAM for false alarm damage control.     

Valenteen returns to The Protection Bureau

Despite a serious ailment and medical procedure, Wanda Valenteen’s comeback to The Protection Bureau is complete
 - 
07/17/2013

EXTON, Pa.—She’s back. A few things might have changed during Wanda Valenteen’s two-year hiatus from the monitoring world, but the evolution of the industry, no matter how difficult to stay abreast of, is nothing compared to her experiences away from the professional sphere.

Pages