HKC

[PeterJames]

12 hours ago, james.wilson said:

 

It looks like pins back to front but let's see

It doesnt explain why the Police were called in the first place, however, agreed it could be a plausible explanation

[Terry Hunter]

Thinking of a logical answer as I think we need one - there are 3 PIR's inside and a contact on the glass front door, the intruder went through the front door not opening the contact. Going by the image of the intruder he was fully clothed mask, head gear and thick coat, gloves etc. - the PIR's are set to medium sensitivity so I think possibly it wouldn't pick him up.

The site is on a high street/main road so I didn't want to put vibration sensors on the front door/windows but feel this is now a must as well as increasing the PIR sansitivity.

Any thoughts appreciated.

[norman]

Yeah, check your efficacy policy. 

[PeterJames]

33 minutes ago, Terry Hunter said:

Thinking of a logical answer as I think we need one -

What do you mean by we?

8 minutes ago, norman said:

Yeah, check your efficacy policy. 

QFA

 

[sixwheeledbeast]

You've not really expanded on the questions in the thread.

As above I'd be checking efficacy and looking at what was quoted on the spec.

If they are just PIR's then I would would be thinking poor system design for the risk on policed.

More likely to have checked the coverage in the days prior and avoided detection than any sort of blocking.

[al-yeti]

6 hours ago, Terry Hunter said:

Thinking of a logical answer as I think we need one - there are 3 PIR's inside and a contact on the glass front door, the intruder went through the front door not opening the contact. Going by the image of the intruder he was fully clothed mask, head gear and thick coat, gloves etc. - the PIR's are set to medium sensitivity so I think possibly it wouldn't pick him up.

The site is on a high street/main road so I didn't want to put vibration sensors on the front door/windows but feel this is now a must as well as increasing the PIR sansitivity.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Is it possible to answer previous questions?

 

I think you should get a day job if you think setting pirs to high sensitivity, all three? 

 

What pirs? 

What kind of door , broke a panel in a door at bottom uPVC?

[james.wilson]

Going back to the original point if it hkc signalling and as you claim hkc servers were down the panel would of retried. I've tested loss of comms etc and it does go through on WiFi reconnection. If your talking about detector sensitivity you now think it's a detector issue. 

I personally use hkc at home as well as work etc I've never had a failure to detect, failure to alarm or failure to report. Probably need to add a lot more info else it looks like your blaming kit with no evidence of it being at fault. Arc logs would be a good start then panel logs. Nothing identifiable. Comms type etc etc. As it is i can only summise that detector areas were not used. For all detectors to not detect then it wasn't armed

[james.wilson]

To add some detectors have a rep for not detecting when inactive for days but not all of them ie napco champs from years ago but only 1 and would be found on the service etc 

[MrHappy]

On 24/12/2023 at 12:52, Terry Hunter said:

Had a customer broken into last night

 

Single path via subscribers ISP ? (wifi jammer ?)

 

Commercial premises ( 3 pir + contact points to very small property)

 

Pirs fitted at suitable  height (not 14ft ceiling with the device under the coving)

 

All times & dates of on site log (as the door been booted in 1 minute after the system has set & radio sensors are asleep?)

 

All times & dates of ARC logs (have the coppers undid the thumb turn or yale on the front door & attachable fully set the system?)

 

Has the subscriber decorated their property like santa's groto & reduced the field of detection enough that  the alarm has failed to operate ? 

 

 

 

[Terry Hunter]

4 hours ago, james.wilson said:

Going back to the original point if it hkc signalling and as you claim hkc servers were down the panel would of retried. I've tested loss of comms etc and it does go through on WiFi reconnection. If your talking about detector sensitivity you now think it's a detector issue. 

I personally use hkc at home as well as work etc I've never had a failure to detect, failure to alarm or failure to report. Probably need to add a lot more info else it looks like your blaming kit with no evidence of it being at fault. Arc logs would be a good start then panel logs. Nothing identifiable. Comms type etc etc. As it is i can only summise that detector areas were not used. For all detectors to not detect then it wasn't armed

At the time there was no logic I could understand, the PIR's installed at correct heights no masking, plenty of additional detection to the rear perimeter. The front of the building is a resturant and bar area so coverage by 3 pirs (not crossing each other) is enough also as it's on a high street vibration on the windows was not an option.

I can only think looking at the images the guy was totally covered up limiting the amount of IR and as the beams were set on medium sensitivity I think was the issue. When the Police arrived (called by a neighbour) everything worked as it should as they went through the door as it was not unlocked.

HKC is very good Ihave hundreds out there, but I think for me it's an eye opener as to not get too complacement with the installation and tweek the system to be more sensitive.

For information the grading for Police was mainly for the PA and the intruder was not a priority, risk assesment and specification approved by insurers and logs of testing to monitoring station all ok.

At the time there was no logic I could understand, the PIR's installed at correct heights no masking, plenty of additional detection to the rear perimeter. The front of the building is a resturant and bar area so coverage by 3 pirs (not crossing each other) is enough also as it's on a high street vibration on the windows was not an option.

I can only think looking at the images the guy was totally covered up limiting the amount of IR and as the beams were set on medium sensitivity I think was the issue. When the Police arrived (called by a neighbour) everything worked as it should as they went through the door as it was not unlocked.

HKC is very good Ihave hundreds out there, but I think for me it's an eye opener as to not get too complacement with the installation and tweek the system to be more sensitive.

For information the grading for Police was mainly for the PA and the intruder was not a priority, risk assesment and specification approved by insurers and logs of testing to monitoring station all ok.