Top Stories Milwaukee

A city task force, created to examine complaints that door-to-door salesmen use high pressure and deceptive practices to peddle burglar alarms, is set to issue its final report. It’s expected to include a slew of new requirements intended to prevent unethical sales practices and faulty installation of security systems.

The Private Alarm Systems Task Force, composed of industry representatives and city officials, will meet for the last time on Tuesday to settle on its recommendations to the Common Council’s Public Safety Committee. The members plan to recommend that sales representatives working for alarm companies complete at least 14 hours of training – or be accompanied by another representative who has completed the training.

(photo by adrian palomo)

Alarm companies are currently licensed by the city but have no training requirements, and city officials say they’re hearing consumer complaints regarding sales representatives and installers. Officials have been slow to suspend or revoke companies’ licenses because they don’t want to cut off alarm system coverage for customers provided by these companies. The task force is recommending adding a new sanction – a temporary suspension of the company’s ability to sell more alarm systems in the city – as a strategy to cut back on deceptive sales practices and reports of false alarms.

One thing sales representatives would be required to inform customers: That their burglar alarm does not provide a direct link to Milwaukee police. In 2004, because the vast majority of burglar alarms police were responding to were false alarms, then Chief Nannette Hegerty introduced a policy (later adopted by the Common Council) that officers would only respond to “verified” alarms, ones double-checked by  a private first responder firm hired by the alarm company, the alarm customer or someone else.

According to a draft of the task force’s recommendations, some buyers of alarm systems in Milwaukee “complain that (sales representatives) do not understand that the police department will not respond to an alarm until the alarm has been verified by the alarm customer or a private first responder service.” Customers have also complained the contracts they sign are difficult to read and contain fees they weren’t expecting and can’t afford.

“If people sign up for these alarm systems, they have to understand the police are not coming (without verification of the alarm),” says Ald. Robert Puente, a former police captain and chairman of the task force.

One final issue the panel is expected to take up at its meeting on Tuesday is whether bank or retail employees should be able to verify an alarm for police, according to Puente. The task force will consider an exemption to the proposed security guard license requirement for first responders – one that would be applied, for example, as a bank is being robbed. An employee could verify to police the robbery is occurring.

The task force is also recommending increasing fines for repeat violators of the city ordinance prohibiting reports of unverified alarms. Such citations have been difficult in the past for police to serve on out-of-state companies. But at the task force’s meeting on Thursday, Andra Williams, captain of MPD’s communications division, said Chief Edward Flynn has agreed to allocate funding in the department’s 2011 budget to more aggressively pursue sanctions against such companies.

But Puente hopes the new regulations will cut back on citations for reporting unverified or false alarms.

Chris Utter, past president of the Wisconsin Electronic Service Association, served as the task force’s primary liaison to the alarm industry. He says the problems lie with large out-of-state alarm companies who have become commonplace in the industry in recent years. Many began selling alarm systems in Wisconsin about a year ago.

The task force also plans to recommend that the Common Council require sellers of alarm systems to register with the city License Division and provide photos of themselves. Recommendations also include creating a brochure representatives would be required to give to customers along with their new alarm system contract explaining the city’s alarm policies and their rights as consumers.

Many states are taking the lead in regulating alarm companies, but not Wisconsin. “We’re one of the few states left where there is no licensing,” Utter says. City officials are also considering requiring the first responders employed by alarm companies – either as employees of the companies themselves or of subcontractors they hire – to be licensed through state government as security guards.

Another licensing requirement heading down the pipe: Installers of alarm systems would need certification by the Electronic Security Association’s National Training School. Currently, installers need only be licensed in the city as electricians. “A small portion of unverified or false alarms appear to be the result of faulty installation,” says a draft of the task force’s report.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.