This website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
This Website Uses Cookies
By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to our cookie policy. Learn More
This website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
SDMmag logo
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin youtube
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
SDMmag logo
  • Home
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Digital Editions
    • Archives
    • Monitoring Today
    • Professional Security Canada
  • Products
  • Newswire
  • Exclusives
    • SDM 100 Report
    • Top Systems Integrators Report
    • Annual Industry Forecast
    • State of the Market Series
    • Dealer of the Year
    • Systems Integrator of the Year
    • TMA Monitoring Center Excellence Awards
    • Blog
    • PSA Leadership Institute
  • Topics
    • Trends & Industry Issues
    • Video Solutions
    • Access Control & Identification
    • Smart Home
    • More SDM Topics
  • Columns
    • Editor's Angle
    • 5-Minute Tech Quiz
    • Security & the Law
    • Security Networkings
    • Digital Shuffle
    • Technology @ Work
    • Insider News & Business
    • Today's Systems Integrator
    • Marketing Madmen
    • Sales Stars
    • Smart Insights
  • Events
    • Industry Calendar
    • SDM 100 Gala @ ESX
    • Webinars
  • More
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
    • ISC West 2019
    • Photo Galleries
    • Newsletters
    • Classified Ads
    • SDM Store
    • White Papers
    • Sponsor Insights
    • More Resources
  • Directories
    • Buyers Guide
    • Take a Tour
    • Guide to Distributors
    • Guide to Central Stations & Monitoring
  • Contact
  • Advertise
Home » No Hoping for the Best in Kansas Case

No Hoping for the Best in Kansas Case

August 1, 2009
Lessing E. Gold
Reprints
No Comments

A recent case in the Kansas Court of Appeals served notice that simply installing a fire alarm system and then failing to take whatever reasonable steps are necessary to ensure that the system works properly from start to finish is not acceptable. In the case, the plaintiff, a skilled nursing facility and Medicare participant in the state of Kansas, was fined for noncompliance of a fire safety regulation. The question was whether the fine would be upheld.


The case began when a state inspector conducted a fire safety inspection and reported that the plaintiff’s fire alarm monitoring company was unable to reach the municipal fire department dispatch center for more than five minutes due to busy signals. As a consequence, the plaintiff was assessed a civil penalty of $2,000. An administrative law judge (ALJ) concluded that the skilled nursing facility had to do more than merely hook up its fire alarm system and hope for the best. As a Medicare participant, among other things, the nursing facility “must be designed, constructed, equipped and maintained to protect the health and safety of residents, personnel and the public,” according to the code 42 C.F.R. §483.70. With regard to fire safety, the code stated, “The facility must meet the applicable provisions of the 2000 edition of the Life Safety Code of the National Fire Protection Association” (NFPA). §9.6.4 of the Life Safety Code incorporates NFPA 72 regarding alarm systems used “to alert the municipal fire department . . . of fire or other emergency.” For facilities like the plaintiff that had chosen a central station alarm system, §5-2.6.1.1 of NFPA 72 provided that the central station must “immediately retransmit the alarm to the public fire service communications center.”


The state inspector concluded that because the alarm monitoring company was unable to reach the fire department dispatch center for more than five minutes due to the busy signal, the residents were subjected to unnecessary risk and therefore the plaintiff was not in substantial compliance with the code. Because the nursing facility’s residents were in immediate jeopardy, the inspector imposed a $2,000 civil penalty.


In the hearing before the administrative law judge, the judge held that the code could not be enforced as a regulation against the plaintiff. However, he concluded it was evidence of an industry standard in the area of fire alarms and therefore the plaintiff violated §42 C.F.R Section 483.70 because the fire alarm was not delivered to the fire department without unreasonable delay.


The plaintiff appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The plaintiff argued that under the code, the system and responsibility for fire department notification each terminate with successful enunciation of its fire alarm to an approved central station. The appellate court did not agree and referred to the decision of the board that had concluded, “It [the nursing facility] must take reasonable steps to insure that its alarm system and associated protocols operate to achieve their intended protective purpose in the circumstances for which they were designed.”


The record indicated that the plaintiff provided telephone numbers for its alarm monitoring company to contact. The first number was to the city’s emergency dispatch center (which plaintiff never investigated to determine whether it had a dedicated emergency telephone line); the second number was the plaintiff’s former administrator, who the alarm company learned was deceased; and the third number was that of the current administrator who did not answer. The court held that given that there must be a station at the facility that is always staffed, so this number should have been supplied to the alarm company instead.


In dealing with plaintiff’s argument that the National Fire Alarm Code did not have the force and effect of a regulation, so the delay could not serve as a basis for a violation, the court stated that even if the Code did not have the force and effect of a regulation, the ALJ recognized that it could be relevant for other purposes such as evidencing industry standards. The court agreed that the delay was not reasonable, and therefore affirmed the ALJ’s decision.


Subscribe to SDM Magazine

Recent Articles by Lessing Gold

Is Alarm Company Responsible for Plaintiff’s Flood Damage?

Can Insurance Company Recoup in Fire Sprinkler Case?

Does Monitoring Contract With Tenants Entitle Building Insurance Provider to Reimbursement?

Prominent Liability Clause Protects an Alarm Company That Failed to Respond

Burglar Alarm Responding Sheriff Causes Traffic Accident — Was he Liable?

Les-gold-dscf0001

Lessing E. Gold of Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp is counsel to the California Alarm Association and a contributing legal columnist. He can be reached at sdm@bnpmedia.com.

You must login or register in order to post a comment.

Report Abusive Comment

Subscribe For Free!
  • Print & Digital Edition Subscriptions
  • SDM eNewsletter & Other eNews Alerts
  • Online Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content What Is Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the SDM audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep.

Close
Featureimage_900x550__ovl0jlkbbj__
Sponsored By
Schneider Electric

New Digital Load Management System Drives Productivity and Enables New Business Models

Motor starter selection and configuration has always been a labor-intensive task. To address this challenge, machine builders and system integrators must adopt new technologies that simplify motor starter selection, installation, configuration and maintenance.

Popular Stories

Dealer of the Year(2019)

SDM 2019 Dealer of the Year: CPI Security of Charlotte, NC

STANLEY

STANLEY Security Partners With Indianapolis Colts to Honor Local ‘Security Champion’

GettyImages-1087183206

Whatever Happened to the Prediction of a Mass Extinction of Security Dealers?

Aiphone

Go Above & Beyond for Effective Emergency Communication/Notification

ADT Commercial

ADT Commercial Purchases Critical Systems of Georgia

SDM 2019 Top Systems Integrators Report

Events

January 1, 2030

Webinar Sponsorship Information

For webinar sponsorship information, visit www.bnpevents.com/webinars or email webinars@bnpmedia.com.

View All Submit An Event

Poll

Hiring Women in Security

Has your company made any efforts in the past year to specifically hire and/or promote women in managerial/executive positions? (Please select the best answer.)
View Results Poll Archive

Products

Contemporary Security Management, 4th Edition

Contemporary Security Management, 4th Edition

 Contemporary Security Management, 3rd Edition teaches security professionals how to operate an efficient security department and how to integrate smoothly with other groups inside and outside their own organizations. 

See More Products

SDM Magazine

_FC_SDM1219 cover 144x192

2019 December

Check out SDM Magazine’s December 2019 issue, featuring "CPI’s Key to Success Is Controlling ‘the Experience’ in-House", "Monitoring Services: The Cutting Edge", and much more.

Check back throughout the month for new content!

View More Create Account
  • Resources
    • List Rental
    • Online Exclusives
    • Industry Innovations
    • Partners
    • Privacy Policy
    • Survey And Sample
  • Want More
    • Subscribe
    • Connect

Copyright ©2019. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing