Risk UK

HOME

ON-LINE EDITIONS

EVENTS

RISK-UK NEWS
Alarm changes bring risks Through their technical body RISCAuthority, the UK's principal property insurers have identified a trend in the intruder alarm sector that gives rise to concern. Field engineers, surveyors and underwriters have reported that it has become quite common for an alarm system owner to receive a standard letter inviting them to replace their existing signalling system with a new system having a different performance. The rationale given for this change may be that the replacement is technically superior and/or more economical to operate. However insurers are finding that in many cases the replacement system proposed would in fact perform at a European Standard Grade inferior to the signalling system that was agreed with the underwriters when the insurance cover came into operation. This can be the case whether the existing, or replacement, system is single or dual path. The danger faced by policyholders is that if they actively or passively agree to a material change in the alarm equipment or its performance without notifying their insurer, their insurance protection can be jeopardised. The issue has been brought to the attention of trade and regulatory organisations and the British Security Industry Association (BSIA) has circulated its membership with the recommendation that before any change is made, full consultation takes place with the customer who should be urged to involve the insurer in the change being made. Mike Jay, convenor of the RSG commented: "Installers who fail to bring the impact on insurance to the attention of the customer in a fully effective way could be putting their customer's business at considerable risk. This risk to insurance cover exists whether a customer allows the installer or signalling system provider to install new equipment or alter the Grade setting of existing equipment - something that can readily be achieved with many signalling products installed in recent years. The implication in some of the letters to customers that the replacement is superior simply because it is a dual path can be misleading".

RISK-UK NEWS

Alarm changes bring risks

Through their technical body RISCAuthority, the UK's principal property insurers have identified a trend in the intruder alarm sector that gives rise to concern. Field engineers, surveyors and underwriters have reported that it has become quite common for an alarm system owner to receive a standard letter inviting them to replace their existing signalling system with a new system having a different performance. The rationale given for this change may be that the replacement is technically superior and/or more economical to operate.

However insurers are finding that in many cases the replacement system proposed would in fact perform at a European Standard Grade inferior to the signalling system that was agreed with the underwriters when the insurance cover came into operation. This can be the case whether the existing, or replacement, system is single or dual path.

The danger faced by policyholders is that if they actively or passively agree to a material change in the alarm equipment or its performance without notifying their insurer, their insurance protection can be jeopardised.

The issue has been brought to the attention of trade and regulatory organisations and the British Security Industry Association (BSIA) has circulated its membership with the recommendation that before any change is made, full consultation takes place with the customer who should be urged to involve the insurer in the change being made.

Mike Jay, convenor of the RSG commented: "Installers who fail to bring the impact on insurance to the attention of the customer in a fully effective way could be putting their customer's business at considerable risk. This risk to insurance cover exists whether a customer allows the installer or signalling system provider to install new equipment or alter the Grade setting of existing equipment - something that can readily be achieved with many signalling products installed in recent years. The implication in some of the letters to customers that the replacement is superior simply because it is a dual path can be misleading".

All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Content on this website, including materials available for download, are supplied solely for the private use of visitors to this site, and must not be redistributed by third party sites, or as part of any marketing or promotional material, without permission in writing from the publisher.

While every care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of material included in Risk UK (both the hardcopy publications and this website), the publishers cannot be held responsible for the accuracy of the information contained herein, or any consequence arising from it.

RISK UK CONTACTS
EDITOR:	ANDY CLUTTON TEL: 020 8295 8308
ADVERTISEMENT DIRECTOR:	PAUL AMURA TEL: 020 8295 8307
ADVERTISEMENT MANAGER:	WENDY THOMAS TEL: 020 8295 8305
PRODUCTION/DESIGN:	MATT JARVIS TEL: 020 8295 8304
ADMINISTRATION:	MARGARET HOLDEN TEL: 020 8295 1414
ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT:	TRACEY BEALE TEL: 020 8295 1414