Yale Premium Alarm Hsa6400 Wirefree Alarm Kit

You seek to misquote what i have written, so in the words of the Dragons, i am out.

Like you say being straight up causes problems, thats what i am and that is why what i say is sometimes viewed as controversial.

Have a great day, i know i will.

alumni said:

That said. You might want to look a little deeper into both organisations. Lets just say that charity does appear to begin at home.

Click to expand...

You want to know the laughable truth -

I approached that organisation in early 2009 to join their approved trader scheme which worked like this.

You were vetted via a crb check and previous customer references then as a trader you paid 10% of your earnings through refered work back to CASAC.

I went into the Office with Neil Goldrup who was thrilled when I explained I could install Yale alarms for victims of burglaries who would struggle to pay the price of a traditional system.
His eyes lit up and he immediately asked how many I thought I could fit in a day.
Four came my reply his enthusiasm was tangible.
My application to join arrived in the post the next day and my existing customer referals came back glowing. http://www.fastalarms.co.uk/testimonial pdf.PDF
I was surely in...

But no..

All of a sudden things went quiet and my application was refused on spurious grounds as I had passed my crb and had no criminal record. In fact I am the holder of an enhanced crb as we speak.

No discussion was entered into. Nothing was up for negotiation.

Of course the next thing CASAC went round fitting Yale alarms themselves after ripping off my idea they also then proceeded to start ripping off victims of burglary by charging £200 more for an installation than I did.

The worst part of course is that victims of burglaries are directed straight to CASAC them being a 'charitable' organisation and all.

Yes Mr Goldrup has made a nice little earner for himself in a fashion that I consider corrupt and dishonest.

Sour grapes - of course should I report this organisation to the council and the charity commision.. who knows , CBA to be honest but someone needs to know.

repost

Hence my comment to altruism - and no, i wasn't having a pop.

Regards both companies, i was referring to both the companies they trade under.
I'm no accountant but the cynic in me suggests tax dodge.
Especially when charitable costs only amount to £450.

You might want to check their accounts - both sets.

While they do actually afford some security to homeowners they make a handsome profit doing so. In reality changing a eurocylinder as we all know is a five minute job anyone in a home could do and the problem could be avoided altogether if legislation forced new homebuilders to specify higher security eurocylinders.

The problem is not the work they do but how their business gains customers.

After reading the accounts though suddenly I am feeling firstly annoyed that an upsurge in their trading volume ties in with them installing Yale alarms after stealing my idea but then secondly I am quite happy and smug as obvious greed has started the downfall of the company.
Mr Goldup takes 42k a year in emoluments , hmm 20% tax threshold.
So is that all he earns? One wonders.

Its also interesting to note he chases money in within two weeks but keeps the people he owes money to waiting for nearly three months.

I wonder why the turnover fell off the cliff in 2011.

I know a previous Director left then I wonder what tale he could tell?

After delving the accounts and charity websites a bit more it seems that there is no longer a budget coming in from possibly Leeds City Council . . . this could explain the companies sudden acrual of liabilities... lol

Oh well everything comes to he who waits eh? Looks like the gravy train has stopped working for him. Would love to see the 2012 accounts..

This is not the place to air one's sour grapes.

mdf290 said:

If the alarm goes off if someone enters the home it is fit for purpose , it is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

What about when it doesn't go off when some one enters the home after the alarm was set. ? ?That could suggest it was not fit for purpose.

Two questions for you,

[1] How many seconds does a smash grab and run burglar need to remove a few items of value from a home ?.

[2] How long after a jamming signal begins does the jamming detection alarm operate ?

I ask after talking to the owner of a now defunct ( batteries removed ) wireless DIY alarm system who suffered a series of false alarms ( more accurately his neighbours suffered them ) before being advised to turn off the jamming detection alarm. ( this is something Yale also suggest ). Being an accountant he put two and two together and realised that his alarm could be jammed out of operation leaving his home un-protected. He now has a wired alarm system.

Ah, you're back with your vague interference stories, Bernard.

But I bet you still aren't willing to estimate the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your houes, are you? Which of course is the only question that actually matters.

Let's assume, for the purpose of the exercise, that the house is an ordinary domestic house, built in an ordinary street full of other domestic houses, and is not built under the aerial of a BBC transmitter, neither is it built next to an electricity power station.

Alternatively, tell me, how often, in the last year, did you plip the wireless unlocker of your car, when it was parked outside your house, and find that the car did not unlock?

bernardgreen said:

mdf290 said:

If the alarm goes off if someone enters the home it is fit for purpose , it is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

What about when it doesn't go off when some one enters the home after the alarm was set. ? ?That could suggest it was not fit for purpose.

Two questions for you,

[1] How many seconds does a smash grab and run burglar need to remove a few items of value from a home ?.

[2] How long after a jamming signal begins does the jamming detection alarm operate ?

I ask after talking to the owner of a now defunct ( batteries removed ) wireless DIY alarm system who suffered a series of false alarms ( more accurately his neighbours suffered them ) before being advised to turn off the jamming detection alarm. ( this is something Yale also suggest ). Being an accountant he put two and two together and realised that his alarm could be jammed out of operation leaving his home un-protected. He now has a wired alarm system.

Click to expand...

This is not the place to air sour grapes Bernard

Please do not dismiss the 'back door' problem, the good old Yale sets with the door OPEN. Ideal for a sneak thief walking along the back passageway looking over fences.

Please do not dismiss the "idiot leaving doors or windows open" problem, whether you are at home or not. If you are at home you will probably not have set the alarm anyway.

Whether you have an alarm fitted or not, this encourages burglary. Most windows do not have a sensor on them anyway.

For people who have this habit, the brand of alarm is not at all the cause of their problem.

bernardgreen said:

mdf290 said:

If the alarm goes off if someone enters the home it is fit for purpose , it is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

What about when it doesn't go off when some one enters the home after the alarm was set. ? ?That could suggest it was not fit for purpose.

Two questions for you,

[1] How many seconds does a smash grab and run burglar need to remove a few items of value from a home ?.

[2] How long after a jamming signal begins does the jamming detection alarm operate ?

Click to expand...

Your anecdotal accountant does realise like you do that a smash grab and run burglary will not be stopped by a wired alarm either does he not.

You have now thrown into the pot the smash grab and run scenario as if it is something a Yale could not deal with when in fact there is not an alarm in the country that could help in a smash grab and run scenario. So why did you even ask that question.

JohnD said:

Please do not dismiss the "idiot leaving doors or windows open" problem, whether you are at home or not. If you are at home you will probably not have set the alarm anyway.

Whether you have an alarm fitted or not, this encourages burglary. Most windows do not have a sensor on them anyway.

For people who have this habit, the brand of alarm is not at all the cause of their problem.

Click to expand...

I see you are back to your usual twisting of words to confuse the issue when you know you have no answer to a point that has been made

Can't you read and understand the English language, after all you seem to think you are Mr Perfect.

Don't you get this bit? >>
IT IS POSSIBLE TO SET A YALE ALARM WITH A PROTECTED DOOR OPEN.

So, going out or going to bed it is possible to set the alarm with the door open and be none the wiser.

People do set their alarm systems at night, it's not an unusual thing to do.

I'm not talking about windows but an OUTSIDE DOOR, the back door as mentioned in previous posts.

Europlex said:

Please do not dismiss the 'back door' problem, the good old Yale sets with the door OPEN. Ideal for a sneak thief walking along the back passageway looking over fences.

Click to expand...

It would not be an issue in any Yale alarm I fit because the back door is only the second line of defence the rooms also have a pir anyway.

I have mentioned this before that only a fool would rely on a single door contact to protect any room that also has any windows..

So you point is well..pointless..

Europlex anyone doing a risk assesment would NOT rely purely upon a door contact anyway... see the previous post.

Are you saying it is common practice within the security industry to protect say a kitchen at the rear of the house with a door contact only even though the room has window access aswell?