ADT personal alert device computers and video games
1 report to CPSC, the latest made Apr 5, 2012. A report isn’t a recall.
Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CPSC’s own search is on saferproducts.gov.
At a glance
From SaferProducts.gov, released Oct 25, 2026.
- 1report to CPSC
- Apr 5, 2012the latest report was made
- Apr 5, 2012the earliest
- 0with the company’s comments
- Brand
- ADT personal alert device
- Maker
- ADT Security Services, Inc.Makers, importers or sellers, as the reports name them
- Product
- Computers and video gamesComputers, their equipment and electronic gamesCPSC’s product type: Computers (Equipment and Electronic Games) (code 557), in Electronics: Computers, Monitors, Projectors
By month
The numbers, as a table
| Month | Reports |
|---|---|
| April 2012 | 1 |
How badly anyone was hurt
- No one hurt 1 CPSC: Incident, No Injury
As each report says it, in short words; CPSC’s own words are under each.
The reports, as CPSC published them
Reports people made to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. CPSC publishes each one after sending it to the company named, and doesn’t guarantee they’re accurate. A report isn’t a recall.
Each report is the words of the person who made it, as CPSC published them. The company’s comments, where CPSC published any, are set apart as the company’s own.
CPSC, SaferProducts.gov public database export. Released Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily.
-
No one hurt Made Apr 5, 2012, sent to the company Apr 12, 2012, published by CPSC Apr 26, 2012
The product, in the report: Personal alert device
This incident happened on Monday April 2 2012. Some background: my mother is semi-invalid and almost completely homebound. She has congestive heart failure and foot trouble. as a result, she has a hard time getting around. I am her daughter and I live with her.
Mom has a home security service provided by ADT. She has a personal emergency button that she wears around her neck when she is home alone. If she falls or has some similar problem, she should be able to push this button and emergency help is notified and should come to help her.
In the afternoon, my mother went out into our back yard and sat on a lawn chair. One of the back legs of the chair sank into soft ground. She kept herself from falling backward by catching hold of the backyard grill.
She pushed the ADT personal alert button. It did not work. She sat in the back yard for at least a half hour, holding herself up against the grill and calling and waving for help. Finally a neighbor, who was out for a walk, heard her, came into the yard and helped her get out of the chair.
Mom called ADT about the unresponsive personal alert button. They made sympathetic sounds, but told her this was essentially her fault, that she was supposed to call them on a regular basis to make sure the device is working.
The button is sealed, so we can’t change a battery in it. There is no light or other indicator on it to tell users that it is failing or has stopped working.
When a device fails in manufacturing, production just shuts down. When this kind of device fails in the field, a person, like my mother, may die of a heart attack. This was the first time she really needed to use it, and when she did, it was defective and ADT’s system failed. She could have died as a result. She’s had that particular device for, I would estimate, 5 years. They have since sent her a new one after this happened. It is significant that they required my mother to send the defective one back to them before they would give her a new one. Obviously the company does not want defective equipment in the field where their incompetence can be investigated with it.
my point is, ADT should not place the onus on the customer to keep calling ADT to make sure their device is working. Because it is a life-saving device, they should learn what the operative life span of these things are, then send customers new ones proactively when these things approach the end of their operative life, instead of requiring customers to do their due diligence for them and continually call ADT “to see if the device is still working”.
There could be hundreds of these non-responsive devices currently in use by ADT’s clients, who are fragile and unwell. What percentage of these devices are in use but are not working? That is why I am calling you to report this. By the way, I used to do product failure investigations for CPSC in the Chicago area back in the 1980’s. I was a “commissioned officer”, as they called it. This incident really bugs me, and I think the training I got from your organization sort of kicked in when this happened to my mother.
- Bought from
- ADT Securty Services
- Bought
- Mar 30, 2007, about then
- Where
- Moline, Illinois: Home/
Apartment/ Condominium - Who was involved
- Age 84, Female
- The reporter’s relation to them
- My Parent
- As this report names them
- Brand ADT personal alert device, made or sold by ADT Security Services, Inc.
- How badly, in CPSC’s words
- Incident, No Injury
CPSC’s disclaimer
Disclaimer: CPSC does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of the Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database on SaferProducts.gov, particularly with respect to information submitted by people outside of CPSC.
Word for word, from the disclaimer in CPSC’s export.
Sources
Sources
-
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, SaferProducts.gov public database export.
Released Oct 25, 2026 and checked Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily. Public domain (U.S. Government work). CPSC asks to be credited, and that no endorsement be implied.
Reports of harm are from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), on SaferProducts.gov. CPSC does not endorse Hearth Record.