A few thoughts:
"are these claims, accurate and enforceable, as a vendor like Hikvision Bosch etc run their own algorithm."
That others run their own algorithims is not a defense nor an exclusion, under US patent law, where this is most likely to be litigated (if it comes to that). A company cannot claim that they invented something on their own after it has already been patented. It would still fall under the patent.
As for Hikvision and Bosch, they both have license agreements with OV that have been transferred to Avigilon (see Hik announcement here, see Bosch announcement here). That should help protect both of those companies. On the other hand, Avigilon owns many patents, including from others besides OV, plus the current licenses may not cover all OV patents. Either of these means it is possible that Avigilon could claim other patents are being infringed. We mention this because a contact who spoke with Avigilon's CEO told us that this was part of their plan.
As for the consultant, seems silly to me. If anyone is going to owe anything to anyone it will be the manufacturer to Avigilon, not the consultant nor the end user. The only exception would be for Avigilon to sue end users (like Hawk), which is certainly possible but was not done by OV nor would I expect Avigilon to do so (simply because its a nuclear option).
Finally, as for the Avigilon person who spoke with the consultant, a few thoughts. That's some seriously hardball sales tactics. We do have one previous reported instance - Is Avigilon Telling You That Competitor VMSes Violate Their Patents And Lawsuits Are Imminent? Finally, Avigilon (or at least an AVO rep) has said this is not their policy to sell on patent litigation / enforcement. However, it would seem some Avigilon employees are living up to their aggressive reputations.
As for the consultant, seems silly to me. If anyone is going to owe anything to anyone it will be the manufacturer to Avigilon, not the consultant nor the end user.
Actually he doesn't say owe.
He stated that Avigilon had informed him that they held the patent rights for video analytics and should he buy another product and use analytics he would have to pay licensing to Avigilon for the analytics.
Since as you say Hik and Bosch, (and many of the other manufacturers with a few exceptions) have agreements in place with OV, this could be interpreted to mean that you are paying Avigilon already when you buy product from Bosch, since a portion of it goes to the patent licensing fee.
This may be a clever, less threatening way of trumpeting their patent ownership, e.g. "Why pay for licensing fees, Buy Avigilon!"
Redirect to the OP on whether the consultant was implying that an end-user would actually be sued for buying Bosch.
"he doesn't say owe."
OP says the consultant said "he would have to pay licensing to Avigilon for the analytics." That's what I mean by owe.
"this could be interpreted to mean that you are paying Avigilon already"
Agreed, assuming Avigilon does not pursue existing manufacturers for patents not already covered, which should not be ruled out.
"many of the other manufacturers with a few exceptions"
Most manufacturers do not have agreements with Avigilon / OV, e.g., some of the bigger ones include Axis, Dahua, Genetec, Milestone, Samsung. Avigilon reports 19 licensees and since there are more than 38 manufacturers, that would mean most do not have agreements.