Provident vs. Alarmforce on CKNW

 

Yesterday morning on CKNW, Bill Good did an hour long show on alarm systems. The show was in response to the recent news that the City of Surrey will no longer provide response to burglar alarms between the hours of 7:00am and 7:00pm Initially, the guests on the show were a private investigator as well as the National Sales Manager for Alarmforce. I was the first caller into the show and explained how we provide immediate response and do not waste any time trying to verify an alarm. I also took the Alarmforce rep’s comments to task regarding whether or not an alarm acts as a deterrent (they do not). I was then asked to stick around on the show and became a late addition to the ‘panel’ that lasted until 10:00am. Here is a link to the entire hour of the show… (I get into the show at about the 24 minute mark) The representative from Alarmforce tried to suggest that their two-way voice system was in some way superior to other systems. Besides being categorically untrue, his comments missed the entire point of the show… that the police will not respond to any alarm signal until verified. I explained that any alarm company could install a two-way voice system. In fact, many of the systems that we install are two-way voice capable, we just don’t use the ‘feature’ because I do not believe it offers any real value. I suggested on the show that if a crook broke into a home with an Alarmforce “alarm” and simply did not answer when asked to identify themselves, noone is really any further ahead in terms of being able to confirm to the police that an alarm is in fact real.

Alarmforce got into trouble from Advertising Standards Canada (pg. 12) a couple years ago for misleading advertising when they suggested in their radio ads that “the police are on the way” (they have since modified the ad… but only slightly)… given the news in Surrey, and the way Police response already works in Vancouver, their advertisements are, in my opinion, still very misleading.

With false alarm rates at approximately 98% in virtually every city in North America, it is a complete waste of tax payers money to have the Police responding to private alarms. To combat the false alarm problem, many cities (before instituting a complete non-response policy) have come up with by-laws to restrict when an alarm company can request Police dispatch. In Vancouver, we have the False Alarm Reduction Program which requires that any alarm company that wants to request the Police to respond to an alarm must first get ahold of an emergency contact (provided by the premises owner).

Under this system, when a home is burglarized the first thing that happens is that the alarm company will call the premises to check if the alarm was false. If no answer, they must then reach an emergency contact who will agree to go to the premises. Only then are the Police notified. Obviously, by then the burglars are likely long gone and a quick police response really does not matter anymore. The net result is that all alarms are treated as false until proven otherwise… of course, by the time you have proven otherwise the crime is long over. So why bother?

(For all Provident clients, we assume that every alarm is real and we will immediately dispatch one of our guards. If you have caused a false alarm, it is your responsibility to call us to let us know that everything is ok. Provided that you call us before we arrive at your door, there is no charge. But we are definately assuming that every alarm is an actual burglary in progress.)

Last year, 5% of all calls to the Vancouver Police were to respond to alarms. Wouldn’t we all be better off if the Police just stopped responding to these calls where they have a virtually 0% chance of offering any value and instead redeploy that 5% into things that really do make a difference in our communities?

Click here to be notfied every time this blog gets updated.

 

Posted March 21st, 2006 by mjagger in Media | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

 

6 Responses to “Provident vs. Alarmforce on CKNW”

Eggs Says:
November 9th, 2007 at 4:24 am

I have heard the two way voice in someone’s home(don’t recall which company it was) but it did scare the heck out of me. If I was a thief, of course I would not respond. But I would certainly not want to stick around very long either. It fathoms me as to why even get an alarm system if its going to take 5 minutes for a “guard” to show up who then would have to call the police if it was a break-in anyway!!! By the time anyone gets there, the thief is long gone with all the good stuff. I don’t care if it is the police or a guard that comes, alarms don’t work. Why pay out $20/month for a service that is nothing more than a cash grab. that’s my $.02!!

mjagger Says:
November 9th, 2007 at 3:39 pm

Eggs: An alarm, in and of itself, is not very useful. It certainly is not a deterrent. Two-way voice is irrelevant. In order to increase security, you need an alarm and immediate response service… but most importantly, you must ‘five minute proof’ your most important possessions. As I have explained in a number of other posts on this blog, it is this combination of tactics that adds value… an alarm for a home where all of the valuables are in plain sight, or just easy to access, isn’t going to offer value.
I’m having trouble pasting the actual links into this comment… but use the search bar to find the following posts that address the issues you raised:

1) A Typical Residential Burglary; and
2) Five minute proofing

Eggs Says:
November 9th, 2007 at 7:02 pm

I do see value in an immediate response but I think an immediate response from the police would be the best reponse. Unfortunately that’s not going to happen anytime soon. But one thing I did like about the two way voice was the fact that they could hear what was going on within seconds and let authories know if I was in trouble. I am certainly not defending two way voice(I am still undecided) but it does “sound” like a better system. I even noticed that the Edmonton Police website shows that they endorse two way voice as a better way to monitor. Why would any police group endorse any monitoring practice as a better way to monitor? Do they respond differently if they hear what is going on? There is just too many differing opinions out there to decide which company is the best. My insurance company insists I have an alarm system but everybody has such differing opinions. All they want to know is that it is monitored. They don’t care if it is one company or the next. But to me, if I have to pay for it, I want the one that will have fastest reponse on the market. I am still skeptical!!!

Neale Says:
July 29th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

I think one of the most important things that’s being left out here is “Value”. I sell alarm systems here in Calgary. 90% of my clients would never call me if they didn’t have FAMILY to protect. Most younger people (men especially) would never call me to have an alarm installed to protect their stuff. Stuff is stuff. It’s all about protecting their investment.
Quoted from mjagger “An alarm, in and of itself, is not very useful. It certainly is not a deterrent. Two-way voice is irrelevant.” I would most certainly agree with the two way voice, but to say that an alarm is not a deterrent seems a bit unfair to say. An alarm does more than make noise. It wakes up the occupants, the neighbours, and it takes away the “Stealth” operation which in turn makes the situation unfavourable to the thief.
To refer to what Eggs said about $20/month. Considering that you can get up to 20% off of your home insurance PLUS write it off towards income tax you could not only make up for the $20/mo but save a little as well. For THAT price who could afford NOT to have an alarm installed for a little more peace at night.

The most important thing to remember here is that alarms are a means of protecting your home, property and most importantly your family by making the scenario unpleasant for the crook. It doesn’t stop the crook from entering the home but he probably wouldn’t want to stick around for too long to see what’s going to happen.

Bob Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:32 am

It seems to me the only value of an alarm system is if it keeps the burglar from entering in the first place. Scaring him away, after he is in, may help to a certain extent but the residents are still in danger from harm caused by the burglar. Stuff does not need protection, people do. What alarm system, if any, exists out there to be of some help in keeping the bad guys out?

Tino Says:
May 24th, 2009 at 9:36 pm

Alarm system in my opion gives us a better scense of security , even if a burglar is never caught, sleep better at night,And even more important its a must to have the carbon monoxide and fire alarms monitored. This has already paid dividends.

Leave a Reply