I would appreciate advice from someone in the UK alarm industry. Due to several false alarms, the police are requesting that our existing redcare monitored office alarm system be upgrade to sequential verification.
I understand how it works and why it is required, but feel that our Alarm engineers are trying to boost the value of the sale by replacing our two pin number entry keypads with key fob controls, as the only method to disable the alarm. We currently enter a pin number, but understand that the regulations relating to sequential verification insist on keyfobs being used and not a pin number.
Not with you fully on this. Your security provider is fitting keyfobs instead of PIN entry alarm termination (disarming) ? If you lose a keyfob and someone picks it up, then they can go to your workplace and terminate the intruder alarm with it. (?) If, on the other hand, you forget your PIN. Tough ! You don't get in without causing an alarm activation.
Sequential Verification is intended as a protection from signalling a false alarm by only detector. This stops the system sending signals when or if a detector is faulty or has been inadvertently covered during the set period. Sequential Verification works by sending a signal to the monitoring centre telling of a possible intrusion, this signal is then held as active for a set period of time (normally 30 seconds) until a cancel is sent from the same detector. If the same detector signals again after the set time, then the signal is again held until a cancel is sent. The only action taken by the monitoring centre in such a case, is to contact a keyholder or the security provider to say that a detector is showing signal and may be faulty.
If the monitoring centre receives a signal which is then followed by a second within the set time (normally 30 seconds), from a separate detection system, then the alarm is set to active and the appropriate action will be taken, i.e. Police, Fire Brigade, etc. will called to attend the protected property. That's why I don't understand what you mean by they are removing user PIN identification for the alarm system to be terminated (disarmed). PIN numbers are set into the system to identify that the user is known and is authorised to set and unset the alarm. PIN's should also be set with a duress scheme where the user has the option of reversing two numbers on the code which will also unset the system, but then informs the receiving centre that a hijack (personal attack) is taking place and that an appropriate response should be dispatched.
The use of keyfobs to disarm a system is not very good practice and I personally do not follow the thinking of this type of use. A keyfob could be used in conjunction with a PIN to disarm or arm the system, but this too is not good practice as it would cause more false signalling if the user has not prepared properly for the sequence of events for this type of scheme. The current Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) policy sets out the sequence of events which should be in place to activate / de-activate a protection system.
It is now set to the scheme of, the user(s) upon entry to the property through the pre-set route, which would be the first signal received from the system, then disarms the intruder warning system, within the set time period, by the entry of a PIN code known only to that user, this is the second signal. This sequence then tells the receiving centre that an authorised user is on the premises and that no action should be taken on their part. If this sequence of events is broken in any way, then the receiving centre will dispatch the action laid out by the particular variation which has taken place. This sequence used in reverse also sends the two signals needed to tell the receiving centre that the alarm has been set and that the premises are now unoccupied. Not following this simple scheme is asking for more trouble and will not help prevent the signalling of false alarms.
But how do they know which workplace to go to? To comply with DD243 for police response, if the main door is open when the system is set and you don't have any "ACE" on the system (ie tags), then you will not get any police response only keyholder.
So I think you need to talk to your insurance company to see if they will except this!
Sequential Verification is when two different detectors are tripped within a
30/60 minute time period. so if a PIR is tripped in the hall way the alarm will send alarm signal to the ARC (monitoring centre) they will ring the keyholders, if another pir trips in a office within 30 minutes then the alarm will send a comfimed signal to the ARC and they will inform the police.
We don't write the rules, so before you make any decision you need to talk to your insurance company!!
If they steal the fob, or see you lose it, it can be quite easy to know where someone works... it seems very insecure to me.
Could you clarify exactly what you're saying here, I understood that as long as the final door closing completed the alarm setting there wasn't a problem.
If you just use a keypad with codes then confirmation has to be switched off if the final door is opened. So no police just keyholders. If you use tags on the keypad and the final door is opened, a confirmed signal can only be sent after the entry time is finished and two detectors are tripped off the entry route.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.