+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4

    Default California BSIS question, the difference of PPO and PSE is kind of misleading.

    Hello All, and moderator if this question is posted under the wrong thread please move to correct at your liberty.


    Ok, so I'm preparing to apply for my California PPO via BSIS, and I decided on looking up a few different random california companies when I encountered Proprietary Security Employer (PSE), id never heard of this. So i begin to research PSE and based on what I found out at first glance, I thought dang I should be applying for this, as most of my details do not require an armed agent, but then it indicates requires guard to in be in distinctive uniform identifying the individual as a security officer. There is some other discussion of PSO which is specific training.


    Most, if not all of my work will be as personal protection (no uniform obviously, suit is uniform)estate protection (again, no uniform, formal attire) and estate event security (no uniform, suit as uniform)and some other random details as they arise, but uniformed guard duty work will not be performed.

    Does anyone have any personal experience with PSE? My final thought is the PSE will not work for me, and i will need to do the PPO. Any thoughts or ideas.

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    65

    Default

    If you are going to provide contract security services to another party, you need a PPO. A PSE will only apply for “in-house” security work. You will also need a PPO if your “in-house” security department wants to carry weapons.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Thank you sir, it seems rather restrictive. PPO License appears to be the most logical.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts