drvnbysound
Senior Member
Based on your OP, and the responses received, here's what I'd recommend and consider.
Do you know what police department is responsible for covering your area? Give them a visit, meet with someone and ask the question... if your house was being broken into and you called to report it, would someone respond? What's the approximate response time?
Do those answers satisfy you?
Sure, the above scenarios were presented where you could be out of service range, on a plane, etc. Yes, those things happen. How often? Consider that a year consists of 525,600 minutes. How much of that time will you be out of coverage? Is that something you are willing to risk? Is anyone else going to receive the self-monitoring messages? Maybe you travel for work, but your significant other could also receive and respond to the message. It's all about risk management and what conditions and scenarios you are willing to risk. There is no 100% solution.
Is there a reason to limit your system to self monitoring? I'll stand up here and say that I've been doing it for the past few years. There are also 5 police officers from various departments that live on my street, and a couple more on the street over. I feel that the likelyhood that someone is going to break into my home is low. However, my wife's car door was opened in the spring and her wallet was taken - 1) her door should have never been unlocked and 2) her wallet should have never been in there. Recently, there was a 19-yr old kid, arrested, because he thought it would be fun to slash the tires of 15 different cars. So, I'm not saying that things don't happen here... they do. But I've been willing to accept the risk and self monitor. Why? I didn't want to pay for monitoring because I figured, like most insurance, you hope you never have to use it, and it's a waste of money. Also, like insurance, when something goes wrong, you wish you had it. Back to the money thing... I've contacted my home owners insurance company and asked about discounts for having the alarm and it being monitored. Basically, I found that it will either be a wash (cost of monitoring vs. insurance savings) or I may even come away with some money. Based on that, we've decided that it would be a benefit for us to have the monitoring when it's actually not going to cost anything extra.
So, what's the risk you are willing to accept? I assure you that we, collectively, won't hesitate to recommend products and solutions to fit your needs.
Do you know what police department is responsible for covering your area? Give them a visit, meet with someone and ask the question... if your house was being broken into and you called to report it, would someone respond? What's the approximate response time?
Do those answers satisfy you?
Sure, the above scenarios were presented where you could be out of service range, on a plane, etc. Yes, those things happen. How often? Consider that a year consists of 525,600 minutes. How much of that time will you be out of coverage? Is that something you are willing to risk? Is anyone else going to receive the self-monitoring messages? Maybe you travel for work, but your significant other could also receive and respond to the message. It's all about risk management and what conditions and scenarios you are willing to risk. There is no 100% solution.
Is there a reason to limit your system to self monitoring? I'll stand up here and say that I've been doing it for the past few years. There are also 5 police officers from various departments that live on my street, and a couple more on the street over. I feel that the likelyhood that someone is going to break into my home is low. However, my wife's car door was opened in the spring and her wallet was taken - 1) her door should have never been unlocked and 2) her wallet should have never been in there. Recently, there was a 19-yr old kid, arrested, because he thought it would be fun to slash the tires of 15 different cars. So, I'm not saying that things don't happen here... they do. But I've been willing to accept the risk and self monitor. Why? I didn't want to pay for monitoring because I figured, like most insurance, you hope you never have to use it, and it's a waste of money. Also, like insurance, when something goes wrong, you wish you had it. Back to the money thing... I've contacted my home owners insurance company and asked about discounts for having the alarm and it being monitored. Basically, I found that it will either be a wash (cost of monitoring vs. insurance savings) or I may even come away with some money. Based on that, we've decided that it would be a benefit for us to have the monitoring when it's actually not going to cost anything extra.
So, what's the risk you are willing to accept? I assure you that we, collectively, won't hesitate to recommend products and solutions to fit your needs.
