ComplaintsforAdvanced Alarms

• Initial Complaint

  03/03/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  On FEB28, I received two notifications on the control panel at my home stating (1) the battery powering my keyfob was low and (2) something to the effect that the communication had not been completed. I was curious because I had replaced the battery on FEB22 and had never seen the second message previously. I contacted Advance Alarms the next morning (MAR01). Their representative told me the company had recently switched from a 3G cell tower to a 5G tower and that my security system would need to be upgraded. She told me the cell signal would not have been going through since the switch and that someone from the service department would contact me. On the morning of MAR02, I received a call from the service department. He explained that AT&T had stopped their 3G service and that all 3G wireless systems would need to be replaced. (AT&T no longer supports 3G as of FEB22.) He informed me the cost to me would either be (1) $150 outright or (2) a $45 charge and agreeing to a 3-month contract. (I am not currently under contract with Advance Alarms.) When I asked, he responded they had been aware of this change was coming since 2019. I asked if my home was currently being monitored. He responded that he did not know, that it might still be. (I checked my alarm system following the call by allowing the alarm to go off. I did not receive a call from the monitoring service). He informed me customers had been notified via fliers and email. I told him I had received no advance notice (I utilize paperless billing and pay my monthly charge via the payment site). He told me he didn't want to argue and asked what I wanted to do. I agreed to service on 03/22. Advance Alarms did not do their due diligence to provide advance notice of the change to their customers. I received no notice and had to pursue this information myself. I request a billing adjustment/refund for the two months affected by the change. I request the new 5G system be installed at no charge to me.

  Business response

  03/31/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/03/04) */ Respectfully, Advance Alarms disagrees with the customer's stance in many regards. To exclude the owner from any liability of knowledge of what is installed in their residence and that it is the alarm company's sole responsibility to inform the customer that a device which they own will be obsolete is unrealistic and improper. The consumer has as much obligation as the provider as far as the knowledge of what equipment is installed in their residence. That said, Advance Alarms does not expect the customer to know every nuance or how a device operates; rather knowing that they are communicating via cellularly is sufficient. During the install process. the customer was presented with a proposal with a list of devices, devices listed not only by description but by part number that were to be installed. That proposal was agreed to and signed by the customer. The cellular sunset received national news coverage during the highly publicised compatibility issues and the FAA. The customer had every opportunity and means to verify if their system would be impacted. Furthermore, Advance Alarms respectfully disagrees with the customer that it is the responsibility of Advance Alarms to provide the new hardware at no charge. The obsolescence of the cellular device was due to a global decommissioning of a technology provided by others, not precipitated by Advance Alarms. To have that expectation is unrealistic, and would imply that cell phone companies, such as Apple, or computer operating system companies, like Windows, had an obligation to their users to provide updated hardware and software at said company's expense when the customer engages in a one time transaction. Being that there is no precedent of that happening, the expectation that Advance Alarms should do so now is improper. Finally, Advance Alarms will happily give a credit for monitoring fees paid during the down time. However, the cellular unit will not be changed at the expense of Advance Alarms. Advance Alarms continues its offer; the customer may purchase the device at $150 or the customer may sign on with Advance Alarms for a 3 year term at their present monthly rate and pay $45. The customer is not under any contract currently, and if the customer would like to cancel services with Advance Alarms, there will be no monetary penalties. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/03/07) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) This customer has attached a copy of the Advance Alarms Service Agreement signed by this customer and a representative of the company on 05AUG2016. In that document there is no mention of part numbers, obsolescence of the apparatus providing cellular communication for the purpose of monitoring this customer's home. There is no mention of the provider supplying wireless connectivity. This customer now knows the wireless provider contracted by the company is*****, but that information was only recently provided by the company and only when this customer contacted the company upon noticing a communication failure on his control panel. The company's assertion that this customer should have been aware of how*****'s sunset of its 3G connectivity would affect his personal security system doesn't make sense. At present, there are other national cellular provider ********, ******* that currently support 3G service. Until this customer's personal contact with the company, he was not aware the cellular service provider was***** and thus had no foresight that his monitoring system would no longer be functioning following the sunset of their 3G support. Furthermore, during a call with a representative of the company, upon this customer's query as to how the company had attempted to contact their customer to inform them as to what would need to be done prior to the sunset of*****'s 3G support, he was informed that fliers and emails had been sent to their customers. As stated in this customer's original complaint, this customer participates in paperless billing, consequently any fliers included in mailed invoices would not have reached him. This customer also searched his email account for any emails sent by the company; none were found. This customer checks the spam folder for his email account daily before deleting emails found there. Again, none had previously been found. This customer has no doubt the company has his correct email address because the company's representative with whom he spoke on 02MAR actually spelled out this customer's email address with no prompting. The company therefore had at least two means of communicating the change with this customer telephone and email. This customer has visited the company's website on exactly two occasions once, when researching security companies in 2016 prior to choosing the company for his security monitoring, and for the second time, earlier today. There has been no reason to access the site at any other time. Today, this customer found a blog post dated 11JUL2019 that discussed the upcoming sunset of 3G support by***** and ******* (with no more current updates). In that post, the company states the following "If you've received a call from our monitoring center about testing your alarm, your system may already be affected". As stated earlier, this customer received no contact from the company regarding his security system. That particular blog post is the only information provided by the company as to the effect of wireless providers' sunset of 3G support. To be clear, this customer would have had no issue with paying the $150 fee for upgrading his wireless hardware IF he had been advised before his discovery that his home was no longer being monitored and his having to actively having to contact the company to understand why. This customer believes the company has one job to provide a security system that actually monitors their customers' properties and that job included informing their customers of any situation that would preclude the company's ability to provide that monitoring. This customer does not believe the company took that responsibility seriously in his situation and is more than likely hearing the same concern from other customers as well. The company's assertion that the customer's belief "that it is the alarm company's sole responsibility to inform the customer that a device which they own will be obsolete is unrealistic and improper" reinforces the fact that it cares very little about its customers. In conclusion, this customer has been a customer of the company since 2016 and has never had any issues with the service provided. This customer had paid every invoice on time. This customer does not accept the company's response in regard to the wireless upgrade. This customer accepts the company's offer to refund service charges for the months of February and March. This customer does not request the company provide all of its customers with the wireless upgrade free of charge. This customer only requests the free upgrade for himself. The company left this customer without monitoring service unknown with no warning. If the customer hadn't pursued further information on his own, he would still have no idea and the absence of monitoring continues. This customer believes the company should accept its error in not communicating sufficiently, and as an act of goodwill on its part, should provide his cellular upgrade at no charge. If other customers do not make this same request, it is not concern to this customer. This customer does not currently wish to cancel his service because, as he previously stated, he has had no issues with the company. However, this customer does believe that the company's current attitude toward his situation and its not honoring their contract with him to provide exactly what they exist to provide a sense of security has caused him to reevaluate his satisfaction with the company. Consumer Response /* (2000, 16, 2022/03/17) */ The issue has been resolved.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩