Protection One, Protection One Refuses to Cancel Contract Even Though They Admit They Can Not Monitor my Alarm System Lawrence Kansas

Well, Stephanie Winkler with Protection One Executive Customer Relations did finally contact me. She was very sincere and tried to be helpful. She offered to refund my money on the remaining portion of the contract which was a genuine offer of goodwill.

Of course, as things go she was not able to acknowledge the real problem. It is understandable in her position. It was unlikely that she is has sufficient information to accurately address all situations.

My main point in all of this was the appearance that the presentation of a single option which required the replacement of my current system in conjunction with a contract extension without consideration of other potential options was not the best way to resolve the situation.

Protection One's assumption all along was that my alarm system was obsolete, something was broken, and that replacement parts for the system were no longer made. However, on 2-10-09 a competitor came to my house with the correct codes and reprogrammed a few things that Protection One had changed in their programming efforts and the system worked! Now that it is proven that the alarm system is operational, requires no replacement parts, and is not hindered by its age, the validity of the statements made by Protection One appear questionable.

It is regrettable that Protection One's approach to the problem appeared to be either misdirected by the limitations of their technical staff or it was an attempt to secure additional business without addressing the concerns of the customer resulted in my business going to a competitor. The evaluation of all the options rather than presenting a single solution with out documentation to support their claims resulted in the loss of my business.

I have to give credit to Stephanie Winkler and her professionalism in addressing my concerns. However, overall it should not have been this hard to address a simple issue or for Protection One to show some flexibility in developing reasonable resolutions to problems as they arise. Yes, replacement of the system was an option that would have resolved the issue but it was clearly not the only option available. It is still my opinion that Protection One's failure to address this problem quickly and with the best interest of their customers in mind is an indication of a systemic problem within the company.

Dear Mr. Blizzard,

I appreciate your thanks as mentioned in your first paragraph (of your email) and it is my hope that you relay this information through the website www.badbusinessbureau.com .

As previously explained, we are unable to service your system due to its age, this is not due to codes that were or were not obtained by Protection One. Your system is obsolete and they no longer make replacement parts for your system. There is no documentation which states that codes were ever the service concern, other than your allegations.

It is the customer's responsibility to ensure that the alarm system is serviced regularly. In this case, in order to service your alarm system, a new, updated system must be put in place. It is my hope that you understand that our prices for a new alarm system are competitive and within industry standards. If you agree to pay for the costs of this repair/upgrade in full, there is no obligation to sign a new contract with Protection One.

This stipulation of a new contract was offered only in the event you receive the brand new up to date system at no cost to you. For Protection One to absorb the total cost of the installation, we must have some type of assurance that you are not intending to take the free system then not continue to utilize our security services. It is my hope that you and anyone who might read your complaint are very understanding of this.

As mentioned in my email to you, we will cancel your account with no further obligation. Please feel free to share any information regarding this.

It is my hope that the public looks at both sides of this story. Please feel free to contact me if there is anything further you wish to discuss.

Respectfully,

Stephanie Winkler

Sorry in my rage at the issue the e-mail should bve read:

It was listed as stephaniewinkler@protec"it"onone.com instead of stephaniewinkler@Protec"ti"onOne.com

I received a copy of Protection One's response to the compliant I filed with the Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs. As expected, the information provided to the Division of Consumer Affairs was not entirely factually accurate.

Among the statements were after numerous attempts to service the system, which in fact totaled two attempts.

Protection One also made the statement of it was determined that his current alarm system was not able to provide the support to address his current service concerns; therefore, Protection One was unable to properly service his alarm system was factually incorrect. The actual fact is that Protection One failed to obtain the codes to access the programming features of my system when Protection One took over the contract. With out the codes, the tech could not access the system. Never once did the tech gain access to the programming features which would allow him to diagnose any problem.

If fact, the tech did state on November 26, 2008, that it appeared that my system was seizing the line, dialing the number, and was sending information as documented by the digital signals that could be heard on the phone line. However, there was some reason that Protection One was not getting the information. This information was of course, not included in the Protection One response to the Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs.

Almost laughable was the statement of as a gesture of customer goodwill on behalf of Protection One, we offered to upgrade his existing system at no cost to him; however, due to the amount of cost to the company in offering this option, we mandated the stipulation that he would need to sign a new three year commitment to show his good faith in this resolution.

Why would I pay to replace something that based on the techs statements is not broken, and by all observable indicators seems to be functioning? Essentially, Protection One is asking me to pay for their failure to complete due diligence in obtaining all of the information required to operate and service my system from the previous company in accordance with the conditions of the contract. When no other potential solutions were evaluated, it certainly appears that Protection One is only interested in offering solutions that will be to their advantage. In my opinion, that cannot be considered a gesture of customer goodwill on behalf of Protection One.

All the indications point to the fact that my system is functioning as intended, it is able to provide the required support, and clearly the only fully documented problem is that Protection One does not posses the access codes required to gain entrance to the programming features allowing diagnoses of any potential problems with my system. Given this fact, I do not consider the offer to install a new system when it was never proven that a problem exists with my current system, a viable option.

Of course, they did offer to cancel my contract for $100 or the remaining amount of my obligation, which ever was larger. Wow It takes a lot of balls to say to your customer pay us for the service we are not providing and then we will not charge you any more for not providing service.

Based on the contact information provided in the Protection One response I submitted this information via e-mail to the ever elusive Stephanie Winkler Executive Customer Relations on 1-30-09. As expected no response was received.

I noticed that Stephanie did not even provide her correct e-mail address her correspondence with the Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs.

It was listed as stephaniewinkler@Protec"ti"onOne.com instead of stephaniewinkler@protec"it"onone.com. Could be a typo but you would think that the Executive Customer Relations person would get their own e-mail address correct.

12-16-08
Well I will say that someone from the elusive Executive Customer Relations did call me twice at my home phone even though I gave them my cell number so they could be sure and reach me. As you would expect my return calls were answered by a machine and no return calls were made as a result of me leaving messages. As expected, still no details on the alleged free system.