Leaderboard

Bit late to contribute but to add to this: I agree with what PeterJames has written. In addition in larger and integrated systems there is an additional step of "setting to work" In high security environments commissioning include empty building full set and each detector is activated. This needs considerable planning and some engineering interventions to avoid multiple activations as the tester moves around the protected areas to activate detection, especially perimeter line detection. It also needs the special simulation detection for equipment like acoustic glass break detection. Often it is necessary to isolate devices on the travel path to allow false activation free movement from the outer edges of each protected area to the centre. Commissioning also includes simulations of mask and fault conditions for each and every detector. In very high security systems I have seen simulations of spoof techniques to confirm the detectors selected function correctly under such an action. Each detector is tested, including any sequential verification arrangements and including parameters and names/locational information. Setting to work then comes in where each sub system of an integrated solution is interconnected and the cause and effect matrix configured and tested. This is often a full repeat of the commissioning of each sub system but with the cause and effect enabled. The sub systems should be fully tested first and only once they have passed the commissioning phase are they connected to the integration layer (or to each other). This means any problems with the integration are known not to be being inherited from the sub system in question. Cause and effect is about things like calling cameras to presets and calling cameras to monitors, access control lockdowns etc, measuring response times between the source/cause event and the final effect event. There's a lot of work to do it right and a lot of pre planning and client sign-off before it commences, often involving burning the candle at both ends Hope that adds to your understanding

It's not the middle if an insurer can reduce the payout they will. That's why loss adjusters exist. Unfortunately a lot of people assume they have insurance and assume in the never going to happen event that they need to claim they can. Then they look. We only look because of what we do

No offence taken But Not a comment of a great deal of assistance to the original poster It is a well documented issue - Thank you PeterJames for your post Speak to the ABI for more examples and for their general advise to their members on what constitutes "using all means available" It is a fact that if you leave a window open or unlocked or fail to lock your doors it is seen as thus and may affect any payout. I agree though that it is both policy specific and subject to the claim details and insurance claim assessors due diligence in asking about measures that could have created an insecurity that contributed to a loss As always with board brush statements on both sides, the reality is often somewhere in the middle.

I never really thought PACOM panels were all that, they just look and feel really cheap. We have played with a few in ex banks even arming/disarming them is a bit of a vote of no confidence It just means that jeff cant see it or comment LOL

Some wise words going on here Most (probably all) insurers that require an alarm to be fitted as a condition of insurance mandate the use of an NSI or SSAIB accredited installer and that it has a maintenance contract (and that it is serviced at a frequency in accordance with the requirements for the system type). I doubt any accredited installer would be happy to install the alarm and certify it without having a maintenance contract and not just because of the revenue stream associated with said maintenance contract. Some may but will caveat their quote against any liability if the alarm fails to operate having not been maintained. If the system requires signalling (insurance requirement) then the maintenance contract is mandatory and your URN is conditional on frequency and repeated maintenance. I don't believe the requirement for an alarms follows you - but your risk profile does and you are obliged to give full disclosure to any prospective insurer. That said some insurers may take a different view on risk than others so some may not require an alarm while others do. However you must disclose the same circumstances to all insurers equally Do be careful about having any security system (declared or not) and not using it. A bit like having a front door lock and not locking the door, if you have an alarm (regardless of requirement) and fail to use it the insurer could take the view that you have not used all means available to you to secure the premises and could reduce or refuse any claim in the event of a burglary. Jury's out on whether this would apply to Ring and similar products.

Intruder would be program, walk test, and check that items are installed to the specification and properly. If monitored, set up monitoring and test with ARC. Meter readings would be each circuit resistance, quiescent current consumption, battery current, current consumption in alarm, and calculate that the battery is an adequate size. Do the same with any PSU's. Check the bell voltage and that the holdoff is working (for longer than 10 seconds, in case the engineer has left the engineers link on the bell) charging current to the bell. If there is signalling equipment check its earthed, if it is separately housed, check any cabling between the CPU and the STU are mechanically protected, check the current readings as above. All meter readings should be done using a calibrated company multimeter. Note bell delay time (if applicable) Note Bell ring time Note entry time & exit time Number of Rearms Linefault monitoring Set the alarm fully and test entry exit is working as it should, set alarm fully and activate alarm system intruder and confirmed intruder, if there are panic buttons test them by pressing them while in day mode. Check with ARC that they recieved all signals in the order that they should have been sent. Handover should note any changes to the specification, all paperwork such as user manual certificates, and it should say that the customer has been shown how to use the alarm system and has a master code or fob, and that thy know how to add new users. I think I have covered everything for intruder. CCTV is a bit different NSI expects us to use a rotakin Fire is quite a bit more involved