What Protection Does A License Provide?

[Tom.Brooklyn2]

What protection does a consumer recieve from an alarm supplier or installer
who has a license versus one who doesn't have a licence? Who issues these
licenses and what does a company have to do to recieve one?

 

[Frank Olson]

What protection does a consumer recieve from an alarm supplier or installer
who has a license versus one who doesn't have a licence? Who issues these
licenses and what does a company have to do to recieve one?

In addition to the information Russ provided, most licensing agencies also
require the alarm companies under their jurisdiction carry insurance
liability and bonding for their employees. Indeed some jusidictions (like
Florida for instance) also require individuals attend ongoing industry
sponsored training.

Whether you choose to deal with a licensed company (over an unlicensed one)
is entirely up to you. In most instances, unlicensed companies will be
unable to pull an electrical permit. This may be (on the surface) not be
such a "big deal", but it could well turn into one when it comes to sell the
house...

Frank Olson
http://www.yoursecuritysource.com

 

[Norm Mugford]

I can't speak for any other State, but here in Florida we believe
in protecting the public from unskilled, unscrupulous,
felonious and financially unstable contractors.

Electrical, Alarm and low voltage Contractors in Florida are required
to be licensed. They must make application to the State. That application
must show experience, financial stability, arrest record and
the many other forms of information. If the applicant is approved
by the Board, the applicant must take a comprehensive written exam.
Once the applicant passes the test and proves they have proper amounts
of Liability Insurance and Worker's Comp coverage they are issued a
license in their particular field of work. The license holder must take
14 hours of Specific Continuing Education in order to renew
the license. Every salesperson and craftsman in the alarm field must
have a FASA (Fire Alarm System Agent) or BASA (Burglar Alarm
System Agent) card if they have been employed more than 90 days,
signed by the license holder. The agents also must attend continuing
education classes every two years, and get a Florida Department
of Law Enforcement background check to include fingerprints.

The Department is very active in enforcing the licensing laws for
all licensed professions in Florida and most local governments
will not knowingly issue permits to unlicensed companies. "Stop
Work" and "Cease & Desist" orders are used very effectively in
our State.

To hope that answers your question:

"What protection does a consumer receive from an alarm supplier or installer
who has a license versus one who doesn't have a license"?

I'd much rather have a State Licensed company that has proven
his experience, financial stability,clean arrest record and proper
insurance coverage's before I'd let them in my house or business.

Norm Mugford
Vice-Chairman
Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulations
Electrical Contractors Licensing Board

 

[--]

Its called business protection more than quality...

 

[Bob Worthy]

Tom,

Due to some technical difficulty, I am chiming late on this one. After
reading all of the other input, which is rather obvious in any trade, you
need to make a decision made on good common sense. You have read that a
license doesn't necessary relate to quality. That is true, however when was
the last time you seen a doctors GPA on the diploma hanging on their wall? I
will still take my chances with him rather than a doctor who's office is in
an apartment somewhere with no diploma on the wall. Secondly, no one
mentioned the possibility that your insurance company probably won't insure
your lose when they investigate and find that an unlicensed contractor
installed the alarm, if one is required in your local that is. Don't be
penny wise and dollar foolish. Just do your homework.

Bob4Secur

 

[Bob Worthy]

Norm, Congradulations on your new position. I am happy to see the Governor
re-appointed you to another term and the Board thought enough of your work
to elect you to this new position., "Chairman is waiting".

Bob4Secur

 

[Norm Mugford]

Mr. Worthy wrote:

"Congratulations on your new position. I am happy to see the Governor
re-appointed you to another term and the Board thought enough of your work
to elect you to this new position., "Chairman is waiting"."

Thanks for the vote of confidence Bob.

Norm

 

[Bob Worthy]

That is true, Bob. The only problem with the analogy is that our trade is
not exactly medical science. There are many places where no license is
required or offered.

You missed the point Robert. I was trying to point out that every trade,
regardless of licensing, has different levels of quality. Licensing is
regulating more than just technical (skill) ability and quality. I am sure
that there are unlicensed people out there that are very good tradesmen but
they can't balance a check book just as there are very good business people
that don't know which end of screwdriver to use. In general, the difference
is that a good tradesman doesn't necessarily even think that there is more
to the law (if applicable) than running a wire from point A to B but a good
business man knows he needs to hire that good tradesman to run that end of
the business if he isn't qualified himself. It is true in all trades. Back
to my analogy, even our medical indusrty is nothing more than big business
and. there are doctors that are better than others. I forgot that I need to
be careful using analogies.

 

[Frank Olson]

That's true. When I was getting started I had to hire a licensed tech not
only to comply with state law but to teach me the ropes.

"When you were getting started"...

1979??

I also spent
countless hours studying technical manuals, trade journals and code books.
I attended lots of manufacturers' seminars and trade shows. I've always
looked for people to work with me who had the same attitude about learning.
After 27 years in the trade I still feel like I'm only scratching the
surface and yet I've trained lots of techs and taught literally thousands of
DIYers.

Let's see... You got licensed in 1983. You moved to Florida in 1999...
Even *if* you "apprenticed under this "licensed tech" you *say* you hired...
that's 20 years Robert... Where do you get 27?? Are you "applying your
modest markup" here as well??

By way of concrast...

Is that like "cement"??

... I know and I'm sure you do too that there are many in the
trade who haven't a clue how to use a Volt meter, let alone what NFPA72, ADA
and NEC require.

Hmmm... I don't think you know what NFPA 72 or NEC requires either (from
the frequent mistakes you make)...

There's one fellow from Canada (not just Olson; there's
another one) who posts all kinds of nonsense here and if you read the kind
of questions he asks when he's not posting flames it's obvious he has almost
no understanding at all. This character has been "in the trade" at least
several years.

Heh... What "nonsense" have I posted?? I only ask because I don't think
you can get much more ridiculous than this:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...=u5mdncKr2dSlBFDdRVn-hw%40giganews.com&rnum=1

You're talent for comedy is prodigious (as is your waistline)...

Frank Olson
http://www.yoursecuritysource.com

 

[Frank Olson]

You're talent for comedy is prodigious (as is your waistline)...

That should be "your" (as in "your talent for comedy...)

Don't get your fingers in a knot there Tom... )

 

[Aegis]

What protection does a consumer recieve from an alarm supplier or installer
who has a license versus one who doesn't have a licence? Who issues these
licenses and what does a company have to do to recieve one?

Protection? On the surface, none. In my state, Texas, it means the
individual has had a rudimentary background check performed on them by the
State of Texas and the FBI (for out-of-state information). It also means
that the individual, in order to maintain that license, has CEU's
(education/training credits) related to their field.

In a civil court, however, it may easily be found that the licensee should
be considered an 'expert' (as opposed to an 'uninformed consumer') in their
field which could increase their liability in suits related to what they
knew or SHOULD have known.

 

[Aegis]

Yikes, there are probably some attorneys that are salivating right now.
Imagine, the attorneys is sitting in his car trying to figure out if he should
chase the ambulance, go up to the guy with the neck brace, tail the ford
explorer with firestone tires, go into the store with the shiny waxed floor, or
follow the alarm techs vehicle to their next installation.

Seriously, you do bring up an interesting point. The expert label would be
brought into question in a court, but it does raise a potential issue.

Rob-

When I got my security and fire alarm licenses, they neglected to speak of
ANY legal issues. During CEU training, again, they neglect to speak of them.
When I got my real estate license, though... WOW! 90% of the hours (I've got
240 classroom hours now) are what you can't do, shouldn't do, and lawsuits
related to both.

The last class I had was Real Estate Law which is pretty much a typical law
course. Some pretty scary stuff in there, especially when the feds get
involved... Anyway, if the courts can hold that a real estate agent, due to
the fact that he is licensed and required to take courses to maintain that
license, is an 'expert', then it follows they can for virtually any other
license with similar requirements.

btw: http://www.nationalcenter.org/VictimDirectory00.html#C for info on good
laws gone bad (related to real estate... like YOUR land, even...)

 

[Norm Mugford]

Aegis wrote:

"In a civil court, however, it may easily be found that the licensee should
be considered an 'expert' (as opposed to an 'uninformed consumer') in their
field which could increase their liability in suits related to what they
knew or SHOULD have known".

Let me analyze that:

If Frank is licensed, he is considered an "expert".....(I thought you'd like
that Frank)
and since Mr. Bass is unlicensed, he's "uninformed" and
could increase liability related to what he knew or
should have known, such as selling monitoring without
a license and leading people to believe he does not need a license.

I have a stronger word for Mr. Bass than "uniformed", but it
is Friday. And I have experts I'd rather read posts from.

Norm Mugford

 

[Frank Olson]

Aegis wrote:

"In a civil court, however, it may easily be found that the licensee should
be considered an 'expert' (as opposed to an 'uninformed consumer') in their
field which could increase their liability in suits related to what they
knew or SHOULD have known".

Let me analyze that:

If Frank is licensed, he is considered an "expert".....(I thought you'd like
that Frank)
and since Mr. Bass is unlicensed, he's "uninformed" and
could increase liability related to what he knew or
should have known, such as selling monitoring without
a license and leading people to believe he does not need a license.

Heh... As much as I'd like to agree with you Norm, I can't. I've talked to
security professionals around the world (some work in jurisdictions in which
licensing is not required). I can't attest to their expertise (neither
could you), and I don't think you can simply say a license is any indicator
that the individual is an "expert" (besides which, Robert *was* licensed at
one time). In the lower mainland a few municipalities (Vancouver included)
require fire alarm technicians that perform annual testing on equipment to
be certified through ASTTBC. The certification in the opinion of the Surrey
Fire Marshal (and many others) is a joke. A lot of the "old hands" look on
it as a "money grab" (you have to pay to renew the certification on an
annual basis). I've personally seen many systems "pass" the annual test
when in fact they shouldn't. Most of the ASTTBC techs I've actually worked
with don't even know how to properly test the system battery (or calculate
the stand-by time based on the panel's current draw and battery size).
There's a procedure for testing fire extinguishers that actually requires
them to be *removed* from the wall bracket. I've actually seen a supposed
"tech" remove the old inspection tag and put on a new one with only a glance
to make sure the gauge is "in the green".

The only "positives" with respect to industry licensing and certification
(in BC at least) that I can see is that the company has to maintain the
required insurance and bonding and that security tradesmen are screened by
the RCMP and are required to sucessfully participate in an apprenticeship
that lasts three years before they can obtain a Technical Qualification
(TQ).

I have a stronger word for Mr. Bass than "uniformed", but it
is Friday. And I have experts I'd rather read posts from.

)

Frank Olson
http://www.yoursecuritysource.com

 

[Norm Mugford]

I knew you were a fellow Canadian, but I was not aware you
were from BC. I have a cousin that lives somewhere on Vancouver
Island. (makes me sound like Bass).

As a teenager I drove a motorcycle coast to coast. Took two
months and had a blast. That was in the mid sixties.....Yes! they had
motorcycles back then. (BSA 650). Drove from Montreal to P.E.I. then
took a boat to Newfoundland, came down thru Northwest Territories,
back thru Quebec and drove the Trans Canada Highway (Queens Way)
to Vancouver. And I did have a license.

Does that mean I've been "in the trade" for 40 years?

Norm Mugford

 

[Bob Worthy]

Security is so diverse, anyone would be hard pressed to believe anyone that
just blankly professed to be a "security expert". I can believe that someone
could claim to be a security expert in his/her particular field of security
and a license is a good piece of evidence that they are on their way to be
an expert. This along with alot of education, both in the field and in the
class room will get you there as long as you continuously apply all of your
new found knowledge. Keeping up with it is also mandatory. I have been
called as an expert witness on two different occassions and both times I had
to make it very clear, at the attorneys guidance, that I was an expert in
the case at hand and not necessarily in general. I don't claim to be either.
Again, the industry is to diverse.

Bob4Secur

 

[petem]

"Frank Olson" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le
message de
snip

Heh... As much as I'd like to agree with you Norm, I can't. I've talked to
security professionals around the world (some work in jurisdictions in which
licensing is not required). I can't attest to their expertise (neither
could you), and I don't think you can simply say a license is any indicator
that the individual is an "expert" (besides which, Robert *was* licensed at
one time). In the lower mainland a few municipalities (Vancouver included)
require fire alarm technicians that perform annual testing on equipment to
be certified through ASTTBC. The certification in the opinion of the Surrey
Fire Marshal (and many others) is a joke. A lot of the "old hands" look on
it as a "money grab" (you have to pay to renew the certification on an
annual basis). I've personally seen many systems "pass" the annual test
when in fact they shouldn't. Most of the ASTTBC techs I've actually worked
with don't even know how to properly test the system battery (or calculate
the stand-by time based on the panel's current draw and battery size).
There's a procedure for testing fire extinguishers that actually requires
them to be *removed* from the wall bracket. I've actually seen a supposed
"tech" remove the old inspection tag and put on a new one with only a glance
to make sure the gauge is "in the green".

I have seen worst..someone taking all the fire extinguishers from a building
to test them and leave nothing...
same for fire hose hydro test..going with the hose and leave nothing in the
cabinet..and come back weeks later to reinstal the hose

The only "positives" with respect to industry licensing and certification
(in BC at least) that I can see is that the company has to maintain the
required insurance and bonding and that security tradesmen are screened by
the RCMP and are required to sucessfully participate in an apprenticeship
that lasts three years before they can obtain a Technical Qualification
(TQ).

we have the same 3 year apprenticeship here in QC but if you dont monitor
alarm you dont need much bonding or insurance..
that make me sick...

 

[petem]

I knew you were a fellow Canadian, but I was not aware you
were from BC. I have a cousin that lives somewhere on Vancouver
Island. (makes me sound like Bass).

As a teenager I drove a motorcycle coast to coast. Took two
months and had a blast. That was in the mid sixties.....Yes! they had
motorcycles back then. (BSA 650). Drove from Montreal to P.E.I. then
took a boat to Newfoundland, came down thru Northwest Territories,
back thru Quebec and drove the Trans Canada Highway (Queens Way)
to Vancouver. And I did have a license.

Does that mean I've been "in the trade" for 40 years?

Norm Mugford

Are you from Montreal? since you started your trip from there?

 

[Norm Mugford]

Yes! I lived in Ville LaSalle

Are you from Montreal? since you started your trip from there?

 

[Aegis]

Heh... As much as I'd like to agree with you Norm, I can't. I've talked to
security professionals around the world (some work in jurisdictions in which
licensing is not required). I can't attest to their expertise (neither
could you), and I don't think you can simply say a license is any indicator
that the individual is an "expert" (besides which, Robert *was* licensed at
one time).

I never said the license makes you an expert. I said the LAW will likely
find that since you have a license you are an expert AS COMPARED to the
general public (i.e. the uninformed, or ignorant even, consumer).