Case Studies

Quality

We could fill several pages covering in fine detail the procedures followed by our Company to ensure the Customer is provided with the quality installation promised. Instead we have attached several photographs demonstrating a before and after installation.

This particular site was installed by a medium sized national Company fully NACOSS inspected, though probably not on this particular site as can be seen from the photographs, and the winner of several awards. It was one of a number of sites for which D J Byers Ltd was awarded the Preventative Maintenance Contract but had not been checked by our Company prior to commencement of the Maintenance period.

On being awarded the contract, all sites were visited and were all requiring improvement but this particular site had been recently completed. The majority of sites on which we are invited to provide Preventative Maintenance Contracts are not installed to this poor standard of control equipment. However, elements of what you see in this photograph are prevalent on most sites visited where we are invited by the Customer to continue maintenance on a CCTV System installed by a competitor Company.

The most worrying aspect is the disregard for 230 volt supplies. It is not unusual to find CCTV Systems which having cost the Customer over £20,000 do not comply with electrical regulations. This may involve control equipment contained in a metal cabinet which has not been correctly earthed, extending mains cables to pass through unprotected metal holes and on a number of occasions 230 volt supply cables simply taped together in an underground duct!

On the above our Company was not paid for re-installation of the control equipment. However, as a matter of principal we were not prepared to leave such a poor standard of installation on a site maintained by our Company. The control equipment was completely re-installed at our cost to the standard shown on the photograph below which, not surprisingly immediately removed a number of re-occurring problems that had been causing false alarms at the Remote Video Receiving Centre and for operation on site.

Case Study 1

The very first production linked system installed by our Company, many years ago now was at a new site where the Customer had just invested in an external CCTV System with our Company.

The factory, consisting of many production lines was incurring considerable losses on a weekly basis due to incorrect operation of the new linked, though they did not have the evidence available to prove the problem. Following installation of the CCTV System, linked to a Digital Video Recorder, the evidence was obtained within the first week at a location they had not previously considered critical. The manufacturer of the production link was supplied the evidence which until then they had attributed on Operator error.

Case Study 2

On one site where cameras had been installed within the Warehouse an incident happened with a Forklift truck which the driver claimed had suffered brake failure prior to running into racking on which expensive breakable items were stored. The brakes on the forklift truck were tested and no fault could be identified. Security suggested checking the camera in that area. They found that the driver had accelerated down the main aisle leaving several rubber tyre 'doughnuts' on the floor and having lost control collided with the racking. When the evidence was presented to the driver his complaint of 'unsafe servicing' of the Forklift truck was withdrawn following which the Company dispensed with his services!

The opposite is also not unusual. Employees who maintain that they have not been responsible for a certain incident can find their claims endorsed by the recordings of the CCTV System. In food production areas monitoring of the product can often be crucial in retain important Customers by the assurance that industry specific protocols are observed.