Phillips Electronics

Re: ID# [redacted] In July of our customer requested that Phillips Electronics (PE) begin monitoring their existing alarm system To initiate service, PE went out to the premises, tested the system for proper operation, programed the system to report alarm conditions to the PE central station, and ran successful test signals through to the PE central station The customer did not choose to initiate a service policy or update the system We were contracted to monitor the existing system only and service would be provided on an as needed basis, billed at the time service is requestedIn PE performed such a service call at the premises, at the end of which test signals were successfully transmitted to the PE Central station On 7/8/an alarm signal was received from the premises and the appropriate actions were taken The customer’s system is an older system that does not have the ability to send periodic test signals to ensure a viable communication pathway between the customer’s premises and the PE Central station Since the average homeowner will average one alarm signal every 4-years, it is not unusual to have no activity from these older systems for extended periods of time Thus not receiving a signal from this customer for almost years was not unusual PE has made repeated efforts to inform our customers with older systems that upgrades are available but ultimately it is the customer’s choice On 5/7/2014, 1/13/and 2/18/the customer called the PE Central Station to inform them that the alarm had been accidentally activated but quickly turned off In each of these situations, no signals were received by the central station When a system is quickly turned off with the proper code, that automatically cancels the call in progress to the central station Thus not receiving a signal in these instances is not unusual On 4/22/the customer called the PE Central Station to inform them that the alarm had been accidentally activated The customer also reported that the on/off keypad was beeping at them and would not stop No signal was received by the central station The central station had the hour on-call technician call the customer and through conversation he relayed to the customer that the beeping noise from the on/off keypad was a warning that the system had a low backup battery and failed to communicate with the central station He recommended that the customer call the PE office and have service out to determine the cause of the failure to communicate On 4/24/the Phillips technician went to the premises and determined that the system was detecting the alarm condition and activating the on premises local noise but was not able to communicate the condition to the PE central station because the telephone line had been disconnected from the alarm control panel When the telephone lines are disconnected like this the PE central station has no way of knowing when the alarm trips, so there are no records we can check to see which systems have been set off We have no way of knowing when the phone line was disconnected We do know that the last time we were at the premises in and as recently as 7/7/it was connected and working properly One possibility is that [redacted] did disconnect the old provider’s lines from the alarm system but did not connect the new [redacted] lines in July of when the customer, unbeknownst to us, changed providersAt the customer’s request our technician powered the system down completely and left it non-operational Since the 4/24/service call PE has refunded the customer prepaid monitoring fees for 4/24/- 6/30/2015, and in appreciation for being a long term customer we offered to waive the installation charge to upgrade their alarm system and add a cellular communicator and offered six months free basic monitoring The total dollar value of these offers is There were no indications available to PE prior to 4/22/that there was a problem with the system When PE became aware of a problem on 4/22/2015, we responded quickly and in good faith and had a technician to the premises on 4/24/ Since then we have identified the problem and we offer to 1.) reconnect the telephone lines and continue using the existing system or 2.) update the system to one that does have periodic test signals and cellular communication and waive the installation fees and months of basic monitoring, although a new month contract is required The costs that PE incurred to be prepared to respond should the alarm send in a signal are not ones that can be recuperated Since PE could not reasonably have been expected to know there was a problem, the customer did not report any problem or submit a cancellation notice prior to 4/22/2015, and there is no hard evidence to pinpoint the date that the phone line was disconnected, PE does not agree that a refund for all service back to 7/7/is in order In support of our perspective the contract signed by the customer clearly states that PE utilizes a telephone line supplied by a utility company to transmit the alarm signal It goes on to say that if those telephone lines are down for any reason the alarm will not be able to communicate and that the telephone network is beyond the control and jurisdiction of PE Hopefully the offer we have made will be accepted as a mutually beneficial approach to resolve this issue Respectfully submitted, Casey P [redacted]

Complaint: ***I am rejecting this response.Sincerely,*** ***

Re:  ID#[redacted]
 
In July of 2005 our customer requested that Phillips Electronics (PE) begin monitoring their existing alarm system.  To initiate service, PE went out to the premises, tested the system for proper operation, programed the system to report alarm conditions to the PE...

central station, and ran successful test signals through to the PE central station. 
 
The customer did not choose to initiate a service policy or update the system.  We were contracted to monitor the existing system only and service would be provided on an as needed basis, billed at the time service is requested. In 2008 PE performed such a service call at the premises, at the end of which test signals were successfully transmitted to the PE Central station.
 
On 7/8/2012 an alarm signal was received from the premises and the appropriate actions were taken. 
 
The customer’s system is an older system that does not have the ability to send periodic 
test signals to ensure a viable communication pathway between the customer’s premises and the PE Central station.  Since the average homeowner will average one alarm signal every 4-5 years, it is not unusual to have no activity from these older systems for extended periods of time.  Thus not receiving a signal from this customer for almost 3 years was not unusual.  PE has made repeated efforts to inform our customers with older systems that upgrades are available but ultimately it is the customer’s choice.
 
On 5/7/2014, 1/13/2015 and 2/18/2015 the customer called the PE Central Station to inform them that the alarm had been accidentally activated but quickly turned off.  In each of these situations, no signals were received by the central station.  When a system is quickly turned off with the proper code, that automatically cancels the call in progress to the central station.  Thus not receiving a signal in these instances is not unusual.
 
On 4/22/2015 the customer called the PE Central Station to inform them that the alarm had been accidentally activated.  The customer also reported that the on/off keypad was beeping at them and would not stop.  No signal was received by the central station.  The central station had the 24 hour on-call technician call the customer and through conversation he relayed to the customer that the beeping noise from the on/off keypad was a warning that the system had a low backup battery and failed to communicate with the central station.  He recommended that the customer call the PE office and have service out to determine the cause of the failure to communicate.
 
On 4/24/15 the Phillips technician went to the premises and determined that the system was detecting the alarm condition and activating the on premises local noise but was not able to communicate the condition to the PE central station because the telephone line had been disconnected from the alarm control panel.  When the telephone lines are disconnected like this the PE central station has no way of knowing when the alarm trips, so there are no records we can check to see which systems have been set off.  We have no way of knowing when the phone line was disconnected.  We do know that the last time we were at the premises in 2008 and as recently as 7/7/2012 it was connected and working properly.  One possibility is that [redacted] did disconnect the old provider’s lines from the alarm system but did not connect the new [redacted] lines in July of 2012 when the customer, unbeknownst to us, changed providers. At the customer’s request our technician powered the system down completely and left it non-operational.
 
Since the 4/24/2015 service call PE has refunded the customer prepaid monitoring fees for 4/24/2015 - 6/30/2015, and in appreciation for being a long term customer we offered to waive the installation charge to upgrade their alarm system and add a cellular communicator and offered six months free basic monitoring.  The total dollar value of these offers is 457.70. 
 
There were no indications available to PE prior to 4/22/2015 that there was a problem with the system.  When PE became aware of a problem on 4/22/2015, we responded quickly and in good faith and had a technician to the premises on 4/24/2015.  Since then we have identified the problem and we offer to 1.) reconnect the telephone lines and continue using the existing system or 2.) update the system to one that does have periodic test signals and cellular communication and waive the installation fees and 6 months of basic monitoring, although a new 36 month contract is required. 
 
The costs that PE incurred to be prepared to respond should the alarm send in a signal are not ones that can be recuperated.  Since PE could not reasonably have been expected to know there was a problem, the customer did not report any problem or submit a cancellation notice prior to 4/22/2015, and there is no hard evidence to pinpoint the date that the phone line was disconnected, PE does not agree that a refund for all service back to 7/7/2012 is in order.
 
In support of our perspective the contract signed by the customer clearly states that PE utilizes a telephone line supplied by a utility company to transmit the alarm signal.  It goes on to say that if those telephone lines are down for any reason the alarm will not be able to communicate and that the telephone network is beyond the control and jurisdiction of PE.
 
Hopefully the offer we have made will be accepted as a mutually beneficial approach to resolve this issue.
 
Respectfully submitted,
 
Casey P[redacted]