Phone-based access control with no network at a UK student housing site

On paper the old setup was simple. Day to day it was hard to run. Students typed a code or tapped a fob, and site managers kept replacing lost fobs, with every replacement adding to running costs.

The building has no network infrastructure. JPR's Mike Gater said that meant a standalone system was always going to be a requirement, but with about 500 students on site, the client would benefit from more of the features of a centralized system. Solo does not need network infrastructure at the property, so the site could get those features without installing a network.

The phone does the network's job

When a student holds a phone with the right permission up to a Solo-controlled door, the phone talks to the Solo controller over Bluetooth Low Energy and tells it to open. One London Road has minimal Wi-Fi, so the phone uses its own mobile data to check that permission. With no connection at all, the credential stays stored on the phone for three to four hours, so the door still works while the phone is offline.

• Solo DoorTag
• Solo Controller
• Power supply
• Electronic lock
• Paxton Solo app

For operators on sites with patchy cellular coverage, the three-to-four-hour offline window is the figure to test.

Door subscription versus the fob drawer

Mike Gater, a department manager at JPR Fire, Security and Data, found Solo at Paxton's launch event, which Security Matters identifies as the Tech Tour. He then took it to the client. He called price the other big selling point after the no-network design. The upfront kit cost was accessible, he said, and even with the ongoing per-door subscription the client would save money compared with extending the old standalone system, because it had been replacing lost fobs in significant numbers.

The math has limits. The savings claim comes from the installer, and no source publishes kit prices, per-door fees or how many fobs the site lost each term. A property that rarely loses fobs, or that already has a working networked system, would be comparing different numbers. Gater framed the fit narrowly himself: at a site with no network, standalone was always going to be a requirement, and Solo gave a 500-student property the centralized features a standalone system lacks.

Cutover and common rooms

The switch also tightened control inside the building. Before, anyone who got through the front entrance could walk into the students' common rooms. Now, according to Security Matters, only students in residence with the appropriate access permissions can access the common room by presenting their phone to the Solo DoorTag.

For a housing manager, that log may matter as much as the fob savings.

An installer-first rollout

Paxton launched Solo with a pitch aimed squarely at installers. "Solo is not the first cloud-based access control system," CEO Adam Stroud said. His argument is that making fuller use of cloud and phone technology lets the installed equipment be much simpler, and that the system goes in without touching the customer's IT network.

Paxton says Solo is suited to residential settings such as short-term rentals and student dorms, healthcare environments including clinics and care homes, and gyms, lockers, bike storage facilities, gates, remote buildings and building sites where fixed data infrastructure is unavailable or impractical. For operators of sites like these, that could mean access control without running a data network to every door.

The next sites to watch

Homes for Students runs 235 properties across the U.K. and Ireland.