Yale Premium Alarm Hsa6400 Wirefree Alarm Kit

[onecare]

Having been in this game for quite aw I've come to relise that people want things as cheaply as possible and don't care if they have a **** poor system like the Yale ones . Until they get burgled and their insurer tell them what hey thought was a good system isn't worth a penny and they now must have a grade 3 system that's regularly maintained by an approved installer and the money they've wasted on their DIY kit and the extra in their premiums they might as well have done things properly in the first place .

I've been asked to maintain a Yale system on several occasions and I usually don't bother they are more hassle than they are worth.

Would rather fit a decent system and work with a customer who realises that you get what you pay for .

If you Diyers want to take the risk of having a Yale system protect your home, possessions and your family go ahead but as has been said by other don't come crying on here when it doesn't work and you now must spend the money on a professional system when you can't get insurance .

 

[JohnD]

it is cheap
True

the householder can easily install it himself in an hour or so
True

The 6400 ... can phone you and friends and neighbours with a recorded message in the event of an alarm
True

you can buy a more secure system for more money.
True

You don't deny any of these points.

 

[onecare]

The 6400 is CAPABLE of calling you in the event of an alarm . No garuntees that it will .

Atleast even with just a digi on a monitored system you would know if it wasn't working with PTESTS

 

[JohnD]

Lots of hard-wired professional systems are CAPABLE of calling you in the event of an alarm. No guarantees that they will.

So what is your point?

 

[onecare]

Does the Yale system moniter for line faults ? Or does it just look for the voltage ?

Is it capable of 24hr test dials ? To make sure the line I active and that in an event of a alarm condition it's going to be able to reach the customer ?

A digi knows if the arc doesn't answer the phone if the lie is down and it's more secure than a unit picking up the line , failing and relaying a message without knowing if it's being listened to at the other end .

Like I've said if you want to potentially risk your home and family on a cheap DIY panel go ahead .
Leaves the better customers for the professionals .

 

[JohnD]

You forgot to answer this:

Lots of hard-wired professional systems are CAPABLE of calling you in the event of an alarm. No guarantees that they will.

So what is your point?

you surely are not trying to give the false and misleading impression that all professional alarms are guaranteed to call out in the event of an alarm, are you? That would be dishonest.

You remind me of an alarm enthusiast who used to be on here but got kicked off for being abusive. You're not him, are you?

 

[onecare]

I'm not saying they are garuntee to report an alarm condition . I'm trying to make the point that a professionally monitored system and there for maintainted system would give a significantly better response and warning if there was a problem with the telephone line and or a faulty detector or contact .


Like I said a pro panel with digi Monitering know if it's talking to the arc and relaying the message correctly and can even transmit other problems . Where was the Yale type or speech diallers just pick up the line dial a a number and hope or the best without knowing if the line is active , if the person on the other en has even picked up the phone and I've seen it happen before !

It's not a method of signalling an alarm condition and I would not want thi as my old way of knowing if my house is being broken into or my family are in danger

 

[JohnD]

You'd agree with me about the Yale then

- it is cheap

- the householder can easily install it himself in an hour or so

- you can buy a more secure system for more money.

I can buy a new Yale for considerably less than the annual service charge for a professional monitored alarm

 

[onecare]

If you Diyers want to take the risk of having a Yale system protect your home, possessions and your family go ahead but as has been said by other don't come crying on here when it doesn't work and you now must spend the money on a professional system when you can't get insurance .

I said the Yale ones are Baysically cheap crap that I wouldn't touch with a barge pole to protect anything of value .
Yes they are cheap and you get what you pay for , you wouldn't use a peice of string to tie you shed doors shut when you've got the crown jewels inside .

I'd rather work for customer who want to pay for a good system and a good service than a one who thinks a DIY kit is all he needs ( until his insurer tells him other wise an he's wasted his own time and money trying to bodge something together )

 

[onecare]

Just had a look on tales website and they start at £240 for a basic system .
Annual maitence and Monitering is less than that .
Which would also include remote assistance and a insurance approved method of signalling .

 

[JohnD]

I see you have great difficulty in admitting that all this is true

- it is cheap

- the householder can easily install it himself in an hour or so

- you can buy a more secure system for more money.

 

[bernardgreen]

Why is point 1) an advantage? In a one way system constantly operating the sensors have NO NEED to know whether the system is armed or not...

They are not wasting battery power by still being active when not required. Meaning batteries are only used when they are required to be "on guard". Consider the ratio of time spent "on guard" and inactive and you will see how this will extend battery life even if more power is needed while "on guard".

Why the comment about sensors sleeping?...

Because a sleeping sensor is not able to protect.

The two way system Bernard has pointed to relies on two signals getting through. One to activate the sensor and another to report

The sensor is activated when the alarm is set, if it does not reply to say it is active and in good working order then the alarm will not set without the user being made aware that there is a problem.

You admitted that a one way alarm can be set even though protected doors are open (or the sensor has failed or fallen off ) without the user being made aware. To trigger the alarm the door has to be shut and then opened. By checking the state of every sensor BEFORE allowing the alarm to be set that serious problem is avoided.

This is marketing making mugs of punters...

You mean selling to people whose lack of knowledge means they will accept the advice of people who appear to be well informed when in fact that "saleperson" or "advisor" is out to make a quick profit from the punter and does not have the basic knowledge to make an informed judgement on the suitablility of the equipment.

Sending supervisory at a lower transmitted power than that used for activation signals is a way to "test" that the signal strengths are more than adequate.

And if the sensor has a receiver it can hold off if the channel is busy. Of course the time it holds off for is restricted but it will know if the activation signal reached the panel. If it does not get an acknowledgement it will re-send the activation. It may say it is a repeat to inform the panel that signals are being lost.

 

[bernardgreen]

I see you have great difficulty in admitting that all this is true

- it is cheap

- the householder can easily install it himself in an hour or so

- you can buy a more secure system for more money.

John you admit that here, if you were selling these or installing them or in any other way making money from them would you make the same admissions to the punter you were "advising".

In fact it is possible you could by a better system ( two way rather any any one way ) for about the same cost. That could be either wired or wireless.

 

[mdf290]

Why is point 1) an advantage? In a one way system constantly operating the sensors have NO NEED to know whether the system is armed or not...

They are not wasting battery power by still being active when not required. Meaning batteries are only used when they are required to be "on guard". Consider the ratio of time spent "on guard" and inactive and you will see how this will extend battery life even if more power is needed while "on guard".

Why the comment about sensors sleeping?...

Because a sleeping sensor is not able to protect.

The two way system Bernard has pointed to relies on two signals getting through. One to activate the sensor and another to report

The sensor is activated when the alarm is set, if it does not reply to say it is active and in good working order then the alarm will not set without the user being made aware that there is a problem.

You admitted that a one way alarm can be set even though protected doors are open (or the sensor has failed or fallen off ) without the user being made aware. To trigger the alarm the door has to be shut and then opened. By checking the state of every sensor BEFORE allowing the alarm to be set that serious problem is avoided.

This is marketing making mugs of punters...

You mean selling to people whose lack of knowledge means they will accept the advice of people who appear to be well informed when in fact that "saleperson" or "advisor" is out to make a quick profit from the punter and does not have the basic knowledge to make an informed judgement on the suitablility of the equipment.

Sending supervisory at a lower transmitted power than that used for activation signals is a way to "test" that the signal strengths are more than adequate.

And if the sensor has a receiver it can hold off if the channel is busy. Of course the time it holds off for is restricted but it will know if the activation signal reached the panel. If it does not get an acknowledgement it will re-send the activation. It may say it is a repeat to inform the panel that signals are being lost.

You missed totaly the points I was making. Simply because it suited you to do so.
I cannot be bothered explaining how the English language works just so you can understand what I meant because even if I did you would ignore the point and go off at a tangent.

How can a system that relies on low power signals to tell the sensors to be active or not be any more reliable than a system that uses full power signals in the context of everything you have said before about inteference?

Yes the two way system will be aware of faults but my betting is because of the way it works it will simply be logging faults all the time.

You are wrong about the Yale systems being unaware of a sensor falling off just as you are wrong about the Yale system not reporting sensors that 'drop' out of the system.

Since you seem to be blissfully unaware of how the systems actually work you are not really best placed to comment on them.

The two way system you have pointed to has inherrent weaknesses that are being sold as advantages.

I believe a two way system is a good idea but it seems to exist to cover the backs of crap installers.

Why is sensor battery life even an issue they last for two years and cost 75p to replace. For me that is every reason to have the sensors continually reporting as adding the complication of the on and off status has only been done as a necessity because a 2way sensor uses more battery power than one that only transmits..

Like I said , a compromise is being sold as a feature that does not add any more security to the system only more complications.

 

[JohnD]

I see you have great difficulty in admitting that all this is true

- it is cheap

- the householder can easily install it himself in an hour or so

- you can buy a more secure system for more money.

John you admit that...

There's no "admit." It's all true. None of the anti-Yale nutters will admit that it's all true.

Do you admit that it's all true?