Hard wired 120v smoke detectors residential

[Trowbridge - Martin]

Dear forum, Many electricians are still putting low voltage remote security "alarms" as smoke detectors in residences even though the battery backup my run down or homeowner may not pay bill to alarm company.
These are ok as long as you have hardwired 120v interconnected smoke detectors as primary alarm. When did the 120v detectors come into code as primary alarm and was it NEC, NFPA, or Florida Building Code ? Please list code sections.
Thank you

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I believe the smoke detectors are part of the building code not the nec. Also the security/low voltage detectors still work as smoke detectors without paying the fee. The fee is to have the premise monitored and they will dispatch the fire department.

The 120v smoke detectors are not required at all in NC if the low voltage system is used.

 

[shepelec]

Same in MA.

In fact you can't have more than 12 (if I remember) line voltage devices. But you are not limited on LV devices.

 

[RICK NAPIER]

I looked at your Florida 2007 Residential code on line and it is similar to the 2006 IRC with the last line of article 313.1 "The household fire alarm system shall provide the same level of smoke detection and alarm as required by this section for smoke alarms in the event the fire alarm panel is removed or the system is not connected to a central station." This is what limits it to 110 volt battery backed smoke detectors since most low voltage systems have the batteries located in the alarm panel. The 2009 IRC changes this to require monitoring and the homeowner to own the alarm panel.

 

[macmikeman]

A lot of residential burg and fire systems sold in the last 20 years were leased systems with the installing company providing the financing for the system install thru companies like GE finance. Why I would know this is because I used that method plenty of times myself to sell them to homeowners. If the homeowner defaulted on lease payments or the monitoring payments then in the contract the installing company or the leasing company has full right of entry to recover the equipment from the premises. Goodbye alarm panel and smoke detectors. But I never had to use that option even once. That maybe has something to do with the local building codes wanting hardwire smokes.

 

[gadfly56]

A lot of residential burg and fire systems sold in the last 20 years were leased systems with the installing company providing the financing for the system install thru companies like GE finance. Why I would know this is because I used that method plenty of times myself to sell them to homeowners. If the homeowner defaulted on lease payments or the monitoring payments then in the contract the installing company or the leasing company has full right of entry to recover the equipment from the premises. Goodbye alarm panel and smoke detectors. But I never had to use that option even once. That maybe has something to do with the local building codes wanting hardwire smokes.

You might try repossesing an alarm panel once, but not twice if the homowner knows his stuff. By law in New Jersey, you can't reduce the level of fire protection in a premises without the written permission of the fire official, even if that level of protection isn't required by the building code. Once it's in, it stays in. Take the panel out without the FO's permission and you'll be explaining it to the judge. Bring bail money.

 

[macmikeman]

You might try repossesing an alarm panel once, but not twice if the homowner knows his stuff. By law in New Jersey, you can't reduce the level of fire protection in a premises without the written permission of the fire official, even if that level of protection isn't required by the building code. Once it's in, it stays in. Take the panel out without the FO's permission and you'll be explaining it to the judge. Bring bail money.

So tell me then, in NJ if a monitored alarm system has smokes and fire detection devices on it, and the customer stops paying the monthly monitoring fee, which by definition would be reducing the level of fire protection, since monitoring is enhanced protection, would that not also require bail money for the monitoring company that turns off the monitoring?


5 commas and a question mark. A new course record....

 

[MikeS]

So tell me then, in NJ if a monitored alarm system has smokes and fire detection devices on it, and the customer stops paying the monthly monitoring fee, which by definition would be reducing the level of fire protection, since monitoring is enhanced protection, would that not also require bail money for the monitoring company that turns off the monitoring?


5 commas and a question mark. A new course record....

The "ENHANCED" portion of the protection would be reduced; the monitoring company provides the service of calling you to ask if everything's ok and then calling fire or police if you don't respond. They also provide maintenance to the equipment at the HO's request.
If the monthly fees are not paid, the HO still has smoke fire notification within the house (per building code) but does not have the add-on features of the system.

 

[hotwire1955]

You might try repossesing an alarm panel once, but not twice if the homowner knows his stuff. By law in New Jersey, you can't reduce the level of fire protection in a premises without the written permission of the fire official, even if that level of protection isn't required by the building code. Once it's in, it stays in. Take the panel out without the FO's permission and you'll be explaining it to the judge. Bring bail money.

what law might that be?

 

[Umlaut]

LV detectors can still be line-powered. In that case, the battery is only a backup. It's possible to build such systems that are UL-compliant.

 

[iwire]

I recommend contacting the local building or fire official that will be doing the inspection and find out what that area requires.

 

[curt swartz]

The typical leased systems that may be shut off if the bill is not paid do not meet the building code for smoke detection anyway. They will install a smoke detector on each floor but not in all areas required. There only purpose is to provide early notification to the fire department. If the alarm company contracts to install a complete fire system to comply with the building code I'm sure they will not shut the system down. The free/leased are the cheapest and quickest systems they can install and get your monthly payments. If you want a more elaborate fire system they are going to charge you upfront the full price for installation. If you decided to terminate your contract they will have already been paid in full so have no reason to shut you down.

Any jurisdiction that will not allow alarm system smokes obviously doesn't have large homes. I have wired many homes that require more than 12 smokes so a fire alarm system is the only way to comply.

 

[RICK NAPIER]

In NJ it is from the Uniformed Construction Code chapter 6 the rehab code and in the catagories of repair, renovation, alteration and reconstruction you will find the following section : "Existing fire alarm, automatic sprinkler, standpipe, smoke control and emergency power systems shall not be removed without replacement and shall be maintained in operating condition." This is enforced by the Fire Subcode Official and not the Fire Official. In NJ there is a difference.
You can apply for a vaiation in locations where more than 12 smoke detectors are required and not simply desired. And no you don't get jailed but you can get a $2000 a week fine for violating the rehab code..​

 

[gadfly56]

So tell me then, in NJ if a monitored alarm system has smokes and fire detection devices on it, and the customer stops paying the monthly monitoring fee, which by definition would be reducing the level of fire protection, since monitoring is enhanced protection, would that not also require bail money for the monitoring company that turns off the monitoring?


5 commas and a question mark. A new course record....

You win the Kewpie doll!! This is exactly the scenario a retired member of the DCA who is now a consultant reviewed with us at an association meeting (can't remember which group now) not long ago. He basically said our only recourse was to enlist the fire official who could fine the customer for reducing the level of fire protection at his premises, said fine being >> than the monitoring contract and thus force compliance with the monitoring agreement. We all got a chuckle out of that. Apparently, however, that remains the state's official position.

 

[gadfly56]

In NJ it is from the Uniformed Construction Code chapter 6 the rehab code and in the catagories of repair, renovation, alteration and reconstruction you will find the following section : "Existing fire alarm, automatic sprinkler, standpipe, smoke control and emergency power systems shall not be removed without replacement and shall be maintained in operating condition." This is enforced by the Fire Subcode Official and not the Fire Official. In NJ there is a difference.
You can apply for a vaiation in locations where more than 12 smoke detectors are required and not simply desired. And no you don't get jailed but you can get a $2000 a week fine for violating the rehab code..​

Rick, thanks for the assist. I had thought that enforcement included police-type powers, thanks for enlightening me.

By the way, I see you are one busy fella; Berlin, Moorestown, Somerdale and Turnersville!

 

[RICK NAPIER]

Turnersville is not mine but Delanco is. I have a wife with enough ambition for 4 strong men but all she has is me.

 

[gadfly56]

Turnersville is not mine but Delanco is. I have a wife with enough ambition for 4 strong men but all she has is me.

Your municipalities need to update their respective listings with the state. Ed Schaefer, Ed Nickel, and Tom Banyacski are listed for Delanco, and you're still in for Turnersville. This is as of 08/12/10 per the state.

 

[RICK NAPIER]

I know every so often I call them up to correct the list.