Since a recent WHQ visit we have been told in no uncertain terms to permanently disconnect our alarm as we did not have it authorised, otherwise the building could not be used.
Alarm has been in place for eight years, WHQ has known about it all that time and we usually gat a heads up that a contractor is due, please leave the alarm off. Other contractors have been given the code, and managed.
Has anyone else had problems with alarms and WHQ/RFCA estates?
Sounds like complete stupidity from a WHQ. If you have a break in they will complain that the Squadron is unusable until RFCA actually do something to repair damage.
So petty stupidity and officialdom then. Do wonder what the local police would say, can you get them down for a visit to talk to cadets and offer advice regarding avoidence of becoming a victim of crime, criminality and security?
I would reply sayingā¦
This was discussed 8 years ago at the time of the break in that due to the break in to get your contents insurance, various companies had demanded that an alarm be fitted as it is an unmanned building. Failure to do so will result in the building being uninsured. It was approved at the time of fitting. There for we will need to proceed by either
A) RFCA supplying and installing a new alarm system
B) RFCA adopting the existing alarm installation
C) all the insurance contents be covered by wing if they are stolen.
Can you please advise how you wish to proceed, until such time as this is resolved we have no way of ensuring our obligations to meet the insurance criteria so the alarm will be left on. A copy of the code has been supplied to wing previously if
You need another copy I will supply it along with an āidiotsā guide on how to set and under the system.
Kindest regards
Send that to wing, copy in the wingco, wso and also prep the civcomm. If they get arsy get the
Civ chairman to write to the wing and regional chairman.
I suppose I have some sympathy with the RFCA here. If I was a landlord and one of my tenants installed a mains connected hard wired alarm in my building and didnāt ask first, Iād be annoyed too.
I donāt know if thatās the case here, but thatās what Iād be thinking. That said, as long as itās safe and working I wouldnāt then get them to remove it.
A few points a. Is it because it wasnāt on of RFCAs preferred contractors āfriendsā who put the system in b. What are the actual objections c. As a landlord having someone else paying to protect the property sounds a good thing.
It is (wasā¦) Wireless. Minimally invasive. Most sensors stuck with sticky foam pads.
The network we have installed is way more invasive. Holes in walls, trunking on the ceiling, sockets in almost every room.
The worst thing we did as an organisation was start collecting pcs, paying for broadband, and fitting networks. If there was a collective āno we arenāt doing it, please provide itā things would be a lot different now. The admin grant should now be Ā£1000 per year for IT. Off topic. Sorry
If RFCA was the landlord I would agree but they are not,
The people in the buildings parent organisation are The land lord, RFCA are only a glorified facilities management agency.
Thatās where the issues come from people
Think the buildings are RFCA and their word is final. Under the law itās the ATC,RAF, Army and so on who are the last word.