Security Industry News >> EMERgency24 Inc.

False Alarm Fines, Dealer Fees Sought in Danvers, MA

Danvers, MA, police are urging an increase in fines to commercial and residential property owners who do not seem to know how to maintain or operate their security systems.

“The goal is to eliminate these (false alarms),” said Town Manager Wayne Marquis, noting the safety factor involved when police and fire personnel race to a scene that, in fact, has no need for any attention.

The bylaw would charge residential property owners $80 for each false alarm after the first two, which would be free. Residential customers had never been charged in the past.

Commercial property owners would be charged $120 for each call after the first two. This is up from $25 for the third through 11th call, $50 for the 12th through 19th and $100 for the 20th and more, the chief explained separately.

With just 27 residences in town accounting for all the three-and-more false alarms, a fine might correct the owners’ behavior, Police Chief Neil Ouellette indicated.

Businesses cost the police even more time and money than residents, he said, with one logging 90 false alarms, another 49, another 31, 24, 23, 21, etc. Police must check every window and door, which can be a considerable number, and it costs the town money. Even more important, the community loses the police time on patrol or attending to community policing initiatives.

There was one company that had a false alarm every day at 8 a.m. “because of operator error,” Chief Ouellette told selectmen.

The bylaw is similar to one passed in Lexington last year, the chief said. It would require companies and residential property owners to get a permit every year, so that police can have an up-to-date list of the people to call when the alarm is sounded, something not readily available now. The permit would cost the same as it does now, $10 for residents and $25 for commercial owners, but it would be charged annually rather than one time.

Selectman Chairman Mike Powers worried about residents fabricating a reason for the alarm so that they won’t have to pay the fine.

“I would hope that wouldn’t happen,” the chief replied, emphasizing again that the goal is to educate and eliminate the false alarms.

Resident Bill Bradstreet, a former policeman who understood the problem, he said, also noted that large businesses just pass the cost onto the consumers and don’t really care.

The bylaw would allow the police or fire department not to respond at all, the chief said, and another clause would exempt the town from liability in the event there is an actual incident that needs attention.

Resident Sandy Lane was concerned about those residents who subscribe to an alarm company service.

“If there is no audible alarm or if the alarm company doesn’t notify us,” there would be no fine, he said.

In fact, if the homeowner calls right away to notify police it is a mistake, police won’t respond, the chief said, although he wasn’t sure about fire department policy.

Lane answered that the fire department responds even if the homeowner calls it off.

After the meeting she indicated some chagrin about the annual permit fee, even though it would be charged to her alarm company.

“They’ll just pass it on to me,” she said, noting, too, that even though $10 isn’t much, “it’s another $10.”