This article is part of our topic on second homes.
A notification on your phone does not mean that an intervention has been arranged. For a second home, identify who receives the alert, who checks the information and who can act on site. The contract and instructions should explain what happens if nobody answers.
Good arrangements account for absences, differing availability and actual access to the property. They also protect the trusted contact: that person’s role should not expose them to confrontation.
Four roles that should not be confused
Detection reports an event. Verification examines available information to better understand it. Escalation means notifying the appropriate person. Intervention is action on site, with its own provider and conditions.
| Role | What it may cover | What not to assume |
|---|---|---|
| Owner | Receive an alert, review information and follow agreed instructions. | Permanent availability or quick access to the house. |
| Trusted contact | Confirm an expected visit, facilitate authorised access or relay information. | An obligation to attend or confront someone. |
| Remote monitoring centre | Handle agreed events during contracted service hours. | Physical intervention automatically included. |
| Response provider | Attend under the conditions of the assignment. | A universal arrival time or a replacement for the authorities. |
The prevention measures described by Swiss Crime Prevention remain important beforehand. Alert arrangements complement secure entrances and habits; they do not replace them.
Write instructions before the first alert
A short instruction sheet is better than scattered messages. Make it accessible to authorised people, keep it current and limit it to necessary information. Avoid distributing access credentials or sensitive property details widely.
- Identify the property and affected area unambiguously.
- Describe the events covered: detection, lost connectivity, low battery and technical faults.
- Name the primary recipient and agreed backup.
- Specify service hours and the procedure when there is no answer.
- Identify the actual response provider and conditions for calling them out.
- Define who closes the event and informs the other people.
Detection of a presence does not by itself establish an offence. Instructions should distinguish an authorised visit, an ambiguous event and a situation requiring an appropriate response. In immediate danger, contacting the relevant emergency services takes priority over collecting more images.
What a remote-monitoring contract should make clear
Ask which events are received, what information the operator can access and what services are triggered. A camera compatible with an app is not necessarily integrated with the chosen monitoring centre. Have the complete setup checked using your accounts and configuration.
The quote should distinguish continuous receipt, any committed processing time and attendance on site. These timings do not start at the same point. “24/7” describes stated service availability; it does not establish an arrival time.
If a company provides the response, verify its identity and applicable authorisations. In Geneva, the official list of private security companies is one check. Do not assume the camera integrator is also the company providing guarding or intervention.
Compare these points in our security quotes guide. Call-out conditions, usage-based response fees and false-alert handling should remain visible.
An alert-handling instruction sheet
The template below prepares the discussion. Timings and contact details must be completed with the people concerned; no commitment is assumed. Store the completed sheet securely and share only the relevant part with each person.
Download the response instruction sheet (CSV)| Situation | Question to resolve |
|---|---|
| The owner’s phone is unavailable | Which agreed backup receives the next message, and through which channel? |
| A cleaner is present | Who confirms the visit, and how is protection kept from remaining disabled? |
| The system loses connectivity | Who arranges diagnosis, and what temporary check is planned? |
| A supplier needs site access | Who authorises access, and how is necessary information managed? |
| The event is over | Who records the outcome and restores normal settings? |
Test no response, not just the notification
Arrange an announced exercise with the provider. A test alert is transmitted; the primary recipient deliberately follows the agreed “unavailable” scenario. Verify that the backup receives the next communication and has understandable instructions. Do not unexpectedly trigger a real intervention.
Record times, information received and decisions. If a message appears only in an app the backup does not check, the fallback is not operational. If the centre is waiting for an authorisation that has never been defined, there is a procedural gap even if the cameras work perfectly.
Repeat the test after changing a phone, contact, supplier or contract. Give loss of communication a separate scenario: it may not produce the same notifications as detection.
Fictional example: the owner is travelling
An alert arrives from a property while its owner cannot answer. With prepared arrangements, the service follows agreed instructions, reviews information it is authorised to access and contacts the planned backup. An expected visit can be confirmed; a concerning situation follows a different procedure.
With incomplete arrangements, everyone assumes someone else saw the message. A neighbour may feel obliged to go out and check. The sheet is intended to prevent that ambiguity without assigning a private individual the role of a security guard.
Finally, incorporate these arrangements into the overall preparation of your second home. The goal is an understandable, tested decision process whose limits everyone knows.
Frequently asked questions
Who calls the police after an alert?
The procedure depends on the situation and agreed instructions. Identify the roles of the owner, monitoring centre and provider. A technical notification does not automatically trigger police attendance.
Should a neighbour enter the house?
That should not be their task when checking a suspicious presence. A trusted contact can facilitate authorised arrangements but should not be sent to confront someone.
Does remote monitoring guarantee a quick intervention?
Only the contract specifies the provider’s services and commitments. Distinguish receipt, verification, dispatch and actual arrival.
Should all contacts share the same camera account?
Where the system allows it, assign access appropriate to each role. People need the relevant information without automatically receiving full administrator rights.
Sources and method
The role matrix, worksheet and scenario are original editorial tools. They are neither professional intervention instructions nor a promise of service by My Robot Guard. Sources consulted on 23 October 2026.
- Swiss Crime Prevention — BurglaryPrevention measures and the role of specialist advice.
- Canton of Geneva — Private security companiesVerification of the actual provider and authorisations applicable in Geneva.