Regs around use of Timed Setting

[howartp]

Hi.

My church has a Texecom Premier 48 (the old, non-elite series). Currently the alarm is set via a latchkey zone that is an external 24hr time clock.

I want to change it to use Control Timers and the "Time Arm Disable" attribute on latchkey zones (and other related features), but our install/maintenance company (who haven't used Texecom for 6 years) say it's neither physically possible to set with timers, nor permissible within BS Regulations.

The alarm is NOT police or ARC monitored; it has a dialler that rings myself and others.

Can anyone confirm the situation about using control timers to set alarms, to insurance but not police-monitored standards?

I should say we are embarking on a building extension, so the alarm will be extended and thus need to meet current regs whatever they are - we can't get away with legacy regs.

Many thanks.

Peter

 

[Handymanjo]

You should ask your insurance company if that is an acceptable method ?
If you do not comply with your grade of system then your insurance will be void.
When a system is installed to a specific standard and grade that should meet your insurance requirements.If they say you could change the setting/ un setting method ALWAYS get it in writing before you make any changers.

 

[sparkymarka]

Agree with jo , then there's no way the insurance can wriggle out !

 

[howartp]

Thanks both.

I'd already looked at what our policy says - which is nothing - but I've since found some guidance booklets which go with the policy, that cover individual areas such as security alarms.

It seems we need to change to keytag setting which is going to be fun.

Peter

 

[M1Chanical]

Whats wrong with standard and trusted method of using a prox fob or user code?

 

[howartp]

Whats wrong with standard and trusted method of using a prox fob or user code?

We have 50-odd (or even 50 odd!) users to keep track of, and we don't currently have Wintex access to do so - though I'm pleading to get such access.

There's no way a single code will remain secure given how often they share keys with each other as it is, so it will need to be individual tags that are registered against the person so we know precisely who has got which tag if it needs removing.

Also the panel will only take 50 user codes including Master, so it will be a decision to make whether we upgrade the panel, give some trusted users a shared code, or reduce keyholder count.

Peter

 

[secureiam]

If your system isn't monitored, the insurance company may ask if its installed to a standard or NSI or SSAIB certified and maintained.

The insurance company is key as to what you NEED TO DO, or should I say (ALLOWED TO DO).

So rather than guess get it from the insurance in black and white first, which is what the other guys are saying.

The alarm installation/ maintenance company should be able to tell you what it is currently certified to?

 

[howartp]

It's installed and maintained by a UKAS company, which is what the Insurers require.

Currently, as mentioned, it is set/unset by timeclock - I wasn't involved when it was installed ~20 years ago so when the panel was replaced ~7 years ago we just upgraded it in place without consulting the insurance.

Now we have done, we will of course comply when we do the upgrade work next year.

Peter

 

[secureiam]

The time clock activates the latch key.
So in theory you could use the an output with the control timers going to the latch key instead of the clock that currently does the job.

without knowing the panel and version and testing it I couldn't be certain what is possible, as for the regs not sure how the time clock currently used complies whereas a control timer wouldn't.

You are swapping a clock for the panels clock in effect.

Using control timers and an output/relay to use the latch key would be different from time arming the system using the control timers.