PeterJames

Hi Reggie It also depends on the size of the install, some installs take a month We try and get 100% maintenance, you have to have maintenance if you want monitoring with Police response

Langard bell box

2013 this came out hasnt made a blind bit of difference theres always someone in the way http://metro.co.uk/2015/06/21/van-driver-handed-1000-fine-after-becoming-first-person-convicted-of-hogging-middle-lane-5256340/

Thats a better punchline

Hi and welcome We have a trade area full of nutcases with three nipples like you , if you would like to apply check out here http://www.thesecurityinstaller.co.uk/forum-trade-access.html

- I wasn't aware of that change, thanks for that Dick, although my comments on the Police not knowing the laws/ regulations was still valid as the conversation was about three years ago

I am not familiar with your panel so couldn't confirm if you can do that. But many panels on the market can be programmed that way so it is feasible

Its unfair for me to say anything to that Jan, that said I would treat anyone I terminated the same way, unless it was gross misconduct You cant tell me that you would let an employee that you have terminated work his notice? Your tighter than I thought!

Monitored alarms can be silent, but I think you may be getting confused with second alarm verification. This works as follows: Any detector activates alarm inc sounders (if permitted) it sends an non-confirmed intruder signal to the ARC, and the key-holder is called. Any second detector activates within a predefined period of time, the ARC is sent a second signal known as a confirmed intruder, the Arc will call the Police and advise the key-holder that the activation has been upgraded.

Lots of staff can be that bad, but if you terminate someone's employment its sensible for both parties not to give the employee an opportunity to pee in the fuel tank

I suppose it depends on the employee, I have let engineers go and paid their notice and I have let engineers work their notice. The last one was on garden leave and then paid notice on top, but I terminated his employment and I couldn't let him near any of my customers after that tbf

I see, that speed reading for you thanks Jan

They have to pay you your notice its the law

Hi and welcome. Why is my first question? surely the whole point of an audible alarm is to get the burglar out

You are getting paid, its summertime, go and sit on the beach for a few weeks (If you live near a beach) theres plenty I could find to do. I'm looking forward to my retirement

hi and welcome

Which bit is not gonna work?

Data Protection Act If the council asked if they could attach a sweeping machine to the back of your car would you say yes? We recently installed cameras to a council offices car park, and the chap working in one of the planning offices stopped our chaps from working because the council did not have planning permission for them.(Even though they were protecting his car amongst others) Most councils are hard work, not because they want to be, but because they are structured that way, they have to be sure that whatever is done doesn't cause anyone to complain, or fall off and hit someone on the head. They will only use contractors that pass certain criteria. On the plus side they generally don't about the cost of stuff, but they are never the fastest payers.

And you would be breaking the law to do so

Charlie lets look at some scenarios where audio would be an invasion of privacy. A couple walking down the street discussing the sex they have just had. People who they don't know that may overhear their discussion its not important, even you videoing and recording their conversation its not a problem because you don't know them. With CCTV its a different story the operator is likely to know the people. So what I hear you say, well what if that couple are married but not to each other, all of a sudden the CCTV operator knows something about two people that is none of the operators business. That information could have all sorts of consequences depending on the operators attitude. At worst there could be blackmailing or the information given to each of the couples partners. Again you could say well they should not have been up to no good, but they haven't broken any criminal laws, and the purpose of the CCTV is for capturing crimes. I cant think of hundreds of similar scenarios. The other problem you have is some CCTV operators are nice people some are not (Bit like the real world) if the recording of audio was fully allowed you wouldn't be able to say this person can record audio, but this one cant. So all those horrible people like racists and peados will be using audio recording to there own advantage

The law on privacy is rather vague, and much of what is set down applies not to individuals, but to organisations. For example, Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides general protection for the privacy of an individual’s home and family life, and their personal correspondence, and this obviously extends to recording what people say among themselves. In a similar spirit, the CCTV Code of Conduct (revised 2008) from the Information Commissioner’s Office recommends that operators generally shouldn’t record conversations: CCTV must not be used to record conversations between members of the public as this is highly intrusive and unlikely to be justified. You should choose a system without this facility if possible. If your system comes equipped with a sound recording facility then you should turn this off or disable it in some other way. There are limited circumstances in which audio recording may be justified, subject to sufficient safeguards. -

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ABACUS-ALARM-KEYPAD-/251954629461?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item3aa9aa8b55 Abacus were really good panels in their day, beware they get a bit forgetful as they get older though, they have a habit of forgetting user codes normally when theyre armed.

Well the Council could, or their contractor. Its unlikely they would give permission for anyone else to though

Chap has asked for advice he thinks that being a subby is easier and that he can pick and choose, that's unlikely to be the case, he thinks he will earn more, that's also unlikely unless he is happy not to pick and choose, and he thinks the tax man is gonna buy him a new set of tools. Its not negativity I am all for people moving up in the world, I don't think becoming a subby is necessarily a move upwards. Especially if you think you can pick and choose. Whereas a chat with the boss about where you want your career to go, there is a good chance he will respect the fact that you want to move up and find somewhere you can move up to (If he wants to keep you)

Cool