news & views - Oct 2004

 Please click here for PDF

Leading the way
News in brief
Dealing with travellers
Are you playing with fire?
Two sides to the pricing equation
Powers to handle anti-social behaviour
Tools to combat arson
Retaining records
Inspecting domestic lifting appliances
Zurich Municipal appoints National Fraud Controller
Coping with stress at school
Safeguarding our heritage
Subsiding buildings, rising claims
Questions & Answers
Reading the small print

As the end of the year approaches, arson within schools continues to be a subject hitting the headlines, causing increasing concern to both public services and insurers alike. With an estimated twenty schools a week being destroyed or damaged by arson attacks, Zurich Municipal continues to increase momentum behind the campaign to tackle this issue. Following on from the success of our Arson Combated Together (ACT) initiative, Zurich Municipal is working in partnership with fire brigades to launch the ACT Fire Brigade Tool Kit. This will provide fire brigades with the resources and materials to implement the ACT programme in schools within their local communities. Our article looks at the strategy behind the ACT initiative, as well as highlighting the benefits of taking an innovative and creative approach to tackling a key problem area such as arson.

Another high profile issue continuing to plague public service organisations is the increase in stress-related claims within the education sector. Despite progress being made to tackle and mitigate claims of this nature, it is clear that there are still key issues to be addressed in order to prevent the volume of stress-related claims spiralling out of control. This edition of News & Views focuses on the importance of developing long-term solutions to this issue, ensuring that the root cause of the problem is identified and resolved through the implementation of a robust and effective risk management programme.

Meanwhile, public services continue to come under increasing scrutiny to demonstrate the effective implementation of Government policies and legislation. Operating within a fast moving and continually evolving society, this is a challenging and, at times, daunting task to achieve. Within Zurich Municipal we remain committed to supporting our customers in this area, using the experience and insight we have gained in public services to ensure that the implications of new and existing legislation are communicated in a clear and timely fashion. In this edition of News & Views we address the increasing frequency of prosecutions under the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations, using two recent case studies to demonstrate the consequences of failing to adhere to this legislation. Our article then moves on to consider the key activities in which public service organisations should be engaged, to ensure that compliance with the regulations is achieved.

Finally, I am pleased to introduce the new ‘Question & Answers’ section, which has been added as a result of the recent feedback that you provided on our publications.I look forward to hearing your comments on this feature, in addition to reading the questions or issues that you would like us to address.

back to top

Fire and Rescue Services Bill
Early this year, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published the Fire and Rescue Services Bill - the first substantial legislation aimed at modernising the Fire Service in 50 years.

"The Bill will help shift the focus towards a more preventative and risk-based approach," said Fire and Rescue Service Minister, Nick Raynsford. "Our aim is to create a service that saves more lives and reduces unnecessary injuries through effective prevention work."

The Bill will place the Fire and Rescue National Framework on a statutory footing. Published in July, the Framework clarifies the shared strategies between the Government and local Fire and Rescue Authorities. These feature a suite of modernising measures, including replacing outdated national fire cover standards with Integrated Risk Management Plans, delivering mass decontamination units throughout the country, and establishing regional management boards.

The National Framework will also be central to assessing and improving the performance of Fire and Rescue Authorities. Working with other stakeholders, an Audit Commission will develop and implement new assessments that satisfy the Framework’s policies.

While the Bill will strive to deliver a modern and efficient service by emphasising prevention work and creating duties for promoting fire safety, it also aims to enhance rescue measures in other areas, such as road accidents, environmental disasters and terrorist threats.

LACORS and HSE state their intent
The Health & Safety Executive (HSE) and Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) have unveiled a Statement of Intent setting out their joint commitment to improving how the HSE and local government work together to improve health and safety at work.

Copies of the statement are available at www.hse.gov.uk/lau and www.lacors.gov.uk

ALARM welcomes fraud law proposal
ALARM, the National Forum for Risk Management in the Public Sector, has welcomed a Government proposal to reform the law to make fraud a common-law offence.

Under the Government’s new proposals, those believed to have committed fraudulent actions (including dishonesty, making false representations or abusing a position of trust) will be punished accordingly by the courts.

Currently, those committing fraudulent acts are usually charged with deception under the Theft Act or for conspiracy to defraud, and successful convictions have proved difficult to secure.

ALARM believes that introducing a specific offence of fraud will lead to more people being prosecuted, which in turn will strongly deter people from trying to obtain money fraudulently from public services organisations.

For more information contact ALARM on 01395 223399 or visit www.alarm-uk.com

Updated guidance on portable electrical equipment
The HSE has updated its popular guide ‘Maintaining portable and transportable electrical equipment’. The new version contains updated advice, with new sections on cables and the repair and replacement of equipment.

It recommends a maintenance strategy based on a straightforward, inexpensive system of visual inspections that can be undertaken by an appointed employee. In addition the guide recommends that a person with appropriate skill and technical knowledge should test equipment periodically.

Neil Gove, HSE Electrical Specialist Inspector, said: "Nearly a quarter of all reportable electrical accidents involve portable or transportable equipment. The vast majority of these accidents result in electric shock. If you use such equipment in your workplace, this guide can help you to maintain it in a safe condition and prevent such accidents from occurring."

You can order copies of the guide from HSE Books on 01787 881165.

Deaths in the workplace rise
Health & Safety Executive statistics have revealed a 4% increase in workplace deaths from 2003 to 2004, following a previous rise of 8%. Falls from height remain a major cause of fatal injuries, accounting for 29% of deaths, and the number of workers struck by moving vehicles rose from 39 to 44. Nine percent of all fatalities occurred when 21 people drowned while harvesting cockles at Morecambe Bay in February.

Trade unions are calling on the Government to introduce a new offence of ‘corporate killing’ while increasing powers for local authorities and the Health and Safety Commission to enforce safety.

New site on Freedom of Information Act
The Government has launched a new website to help public authorities prepare for the Freedom of Information Act, which comes into force on 1 January 2005.

You can find the website at www.foi.gov.uk

New HSE website area for waste management
The HSE has added an area to its website on health and safety in the waste management and recycling industries. It explains what the HSE is doing to tackle the key issues and includes a wide range of information about health and safety in this area.

You can find the new website area at www.hse.gov.uk/waste/index.htm

back to top

For local councils throughout the country, the issue of travellers’ sites near residential areas can create a host of dilemmas. News & Views examines the ways you can help prevent matters taking a turn for the worse.

In today’s cultural climate, finding ways to manage the social impact of travellers arriving within a community is a sensitive and emotive issue. With hundreds of sites around the country, incidents such as burglaries, fires, littering and noise pollution can often adversely affect life for local residents. However, the councils charged with the task of dealing with these matters face a complex conundrum. Because, while they have the power to evict problem traveller communities from sites, many realise that in doing so they succeed only in moving the problem elsewhere.

As Max Godfree, Claims Controller, from Zurich Municipal explains, this quandary should not excuse councils from taking any action at all. "Quite understandably and correctly, councils fear that by obtaining a court order for eviction, they simply move the problem down the road," he says. "Unfortunately, a risk management problem also arises should residents make a claim for damages against the council. The council has a legal duty as occupier of the traveller site to take reasonable measures to deal with nuisances created by travellers."

While Zurich Municipal has likely stemmed a rising tide of claims by disputing these cases, Max feels councils have lost recent court appearances because they failed to present enough evidence of trying to alleviate problems: "It doesn’t matter if you’re dealing with a licensed or unlicensed traveller site: the responsibilities remain."

So what can local councils do to help reduce the threat of legal action? "First and foremost, it’s vital that you do as much as you can to try and solve the problem," Max explains. "You must also document everything. From taking and making phone calls to visiting the site and sending letters, record and date every activity. This increases the chances of the judge appreciating that the council has done everything it could be reasonably expected to do."

For more information, email info@zurichmunicipal.com

• On receiving a complaint, write and send letters to the site, outlining the issues and requesting they cease the antisocial activity.
• If the incidents continue, send representatives to the site to discuss the issues.
• Document and date all activities – such as letters, visits, telephone calls – relating to the travellers and complaints. If the case goes to court, it will require you to present documentary evidence.
• Appoint workers to clear up litter from the site and surrounding areas.
• Visit or write to local residents advising them of ways to improve their home security.
• Consider appointing a resident Travellers Liaison Officer (TLO) to act as an intermediary between the council and travellers.
• Before the travellers arrive, improve the site’s layout if you can – for example, by ensuring there are no dead-ends and erecting high fencing at the perimeter.
• If you are thinking about a possible eviction, consider the possibility that you may receive a claim if the eviction doesn’t proceed.

back to top

"Since 1997, the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations have demanded that all premises with employees must have a fire risk assessment," begins David. "Without it, organisations could be legally liable to prosecution."

A recent court case, which saw a former headteacher and a council pleading guilty to fire safety breaches, illustrates David’s point perfectly. In July 2002, a suspected arsonist set fire to wooden worktops at Moorside High School in Swinton. The smoke then spread to a full first-floor classroom while a teacher promptly put out the fire. Although no one was seriously hurt, 35 pupils and one teacher were treated for smoke inhalation.

The former headteacher appeared before Bolton Crown Court in July, where she admitted breaching fire safety through not ensuring an emergency escape route was clear. The council also admitted failing to implement a sufficient fire risk assessment, and both were prosecuted under the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997 and Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

The increasing risks
"Sadly, the risk of arson is increasing," confirms David. "That’s why it’s more vital than ever that organisations perform a proper fire assessment of their premises." Unfortunately, as David explains, it seems many fire assessments are woefully inadequate: "While some organisations are practical and organised, others don’t understand or appreciate the implications and importance of undertaking fire risk assessments."

David believes schools in particular should make fire protection a matter of utmost importance.

"Schools have the responsibility of looking after young people. Due to this simple and obvious fact, they must be especially careful. However all premises with workforces must realise the risk," he says.

Facing substantial fines
During July this year, the courts also fined a hotel operator in Bolton £400,000 after they admitted breaching fire safety regulations on the night a blaze killed an elderly couple. The breaches involved storing combustible items, such as stacked beds and a mattress, against a wall. When the fire broke out, the couple attempted to crawl to safety from the third floor of the hotel. Tragically, however, both were later found dead in the corridor.

Last year, an ex-employee of the hotel received a life sentence for setting fire to the stacked bedding. On summing up the case against the hotel, the judge said, "The fire health and safety in respect of bed storage was ineffective and inadequate. Other people were fortunate to escape in time with their lives."

Under the regulations, it is a criminal offence to fail to or inadequately undertake the risk assessments. So not only is there a risk of a fine, but also the threat of a custodial sentence.

Conducting the risk assessment
When it comes to conducting a risk assessment, what must you do? Here’s an overview of your responsibilities:

• Identify sources of ignition and reduce the risk of fire occurring, for example, from heaters, boilers, smoking rooms and arson (consider improving security).
• Identify combustible materials including stock, storage, gases, foams and waste. These can help spread smoke and fire.
• Identify people at risk. Can they be warned and escape easily?
• Identify features that could spread fire such as ducts, flues, doors, openings and roof voids.
• Take steps to reduce the potential of fire spreading.
• Monitor heat sources or combustible materials appearing in your premises during maintenance or refurbishment.
• Are your fire detection and fire fighting systems adequate for the risk and are they maintained?

The evidence is clear. It’s never been more important for organisations throughout the country to put fire protection at the top of their agendas. "There is no alternative but to perform proper risk assessments," concludes David. "In short, the risks of potential legal action and loss of life through failing to act are simply too great."

For more information and details of Zurich Municipal’s fire safety workshops and courses, please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

How to comply
To ensure you comply with the Fire Precaution (Workplace) Regulations, you must perform the following six duties:

1. Assess fire risks.

2. Check that fire can be detected within a reasonable time and that people can be warned.

3. Ensure people can leave the building safely.

4. Provide reasonable fire-fighting equipment.

5. Check people know what to do if there is a fire.

6. Check and maintain fire safety equipment.

• You can perform these checks as part of your health and safety risk assessment.
• If you have more than five employees, you must record the risk assessment.
• Inform all staff of your risk assessment findings.
• If there are other occupants in your premises, ensure you co-ordinate your fire precaution arrangements with theirs.
• Review your risk assessment from time to time, particularly if your workplace or working practices change significantly.

back to top

It’s been a tough few years for public service organisations as they cope with substantial price increases and market volatility within the insurance sector. But, asks Guy Munnoch, Zurich Municipal’s Managing Director, is there a sense of confidence and stability emerging?

The condition of the insurance market combined with the impact of two years of substantial rate increases has caused natural concern within public service bodies. Organisations find it difficult to anticipate where prices are likely to increase and are forced to find funding from their margins against a backcloth of ever increasing demands on limited resources.

The insurance market has experienced an exceptionally torrid time. Tumbling stocks, tough legislation, capital adequacy, spiralling claims costs and a runaway compensation culture have all contributed to the pressures on the insurance industry. Often, when a sector battles with unprecedented pressures, it emerges stronger and more confident as a consequence. General insurers have done just that. They have risen to the challenges of the last couple of years by focusing on the basics – ruthless cost control, stringent claims management and, most important of all, a focus on the fundamentals of sound underwriting. The result is the emergence of a sector that is far stronger, more stable and with renewed confidence in its ability to absorb volatility in the future. Public service organisations have experienced significant rate increases over the last two years and whilst some may find it hard to believe, these have been substantially lower than other industry sectors. Zurich Municipal has maintained its commitment to the public services and has managed to dampen the market cycle, certainly in comparison to the private sector, as far as possible.

But as public service insurers bring a heightened level of stability back into play, it is important to remember that there are two sides to the equation. The overarching key to minimising premium increases is the embedding of sound risk management practices within each public service organisation to balance the underwriter’s evaluation of risk and exposure. This is truer now than ever before.

In recent years, public service bodies have become far more proactive to the implementation of effective risk management programmes and, as a result, the quality of risk has improved. But there is still some way to go. Each risk is underwritten individually and pricing relates to the risk posed, its loss history and potential for loss. Risks that carry a poor track record will attract higher than average price increases; risks that are managed effectively will win the day. Accountability clearly rests on both sides of the risk transfer equation.

So what lies ahead of the public services in 2005?
A combination of stabilising market conditions and a proactive approach to risk management will lead to heightened prospects for all public service organisations. The economic foundations for realistic and sustainable pricing within inflationary or single figure increases will be the reward for effective and robust risk management. Whilst we will need to continue to react to individual risk portfolios, there is a new sense of confidence across the insurance sector and a real belief that the public services will see the impact of a market recovery with realistic and sustainable premiums in place.

For more information please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

What can local authorities, Registered Social Landlords and Housing Action Trusts do to reduce anti-social behaviour? Siobhan hardy of Forbes Solicitors explains the latest options.

By 30 December 2004, Relevant Landlords (local authorities, Registered Social Landlords and Housing Action Trusts) have to publish a statement of their policies and procedures for tackling anti-social behaviour. So what powers are available?

The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 builds on existing legislation and extends and tidies up existing provisions. It gives Relevant Landlords a number of options.

Apply for an injunction against a person
If someone has acted in a way which is capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any other person and which directly or indirectly affects the management functions of the Relevant Landlord, they can apply to the County Court for an injunction against that person. The person affected by the antisocial behaviour must be someone who:

• has a right to occupy property owned or managed by the Relevant Landlord, or
• has a right to occupy other housing in the neighbourhood, or
• is engaged in lawful activity in the neighbourhood, or is employed in connection with the management functions of the Relevant Landlord.

This revises injunctions previously available under section 152 of the Housing Act 1996. It should remove some anomalies, for example where former local authority tenants were not protected after exercising their right to buy their homes.

Apply for an injunction against unlawful use of premises and unlawful use of premises

In certain circumstances the Court can also exclude a person from premises or a specified area and attach a power of arrest.

Apply for a ‘Demotion Order’
This order terminates tenancy and replaces it with a less secure ‘Demoted Tenancy’ if the Court is satisfied that the tenant or a person residing in or visiting the premises has engaged in anti-social behaviour.

To find out more please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

Zurich Municipal has launched a new initiative to combat deliberate fire setting in schools. The Arson Combated Together (ACT) Fire Brigade Tool Kit will give brigades a unique and comprehensive resource.

Zurich Municipal developed the ACT initiative, which comprises a specially commissioned play and education programme, to teach children about the dangers of arson attacks. Following a successful pilot in Nottingham in 2000 (after which there was almost a 20% decrease in property losses from malicious property damage) ACT was launched in Scotland in 2003.

As a result of this proven success, Zurich Municipal has now developed a tool kit for fire brigades so the programme can be rolled out nationally. The free kit will be available in Spring 2005 to enable fire brigades to implement the programme with schools in their local community.

The ACT Fire Brigade Tool Kit, which is supported by the Arson Prevention Bureau (APB), the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA), the ODPM-led Arson Control Forum and the National Community Fire Safety Centre (part of ODPM), contains a range of resources, each of which can be used on their own or in combination. The tool kit includes:

• fire brigade guidance notes
• teachers’ resource pack
• copy of play script with drama procedure
• story cassette
• cassette notes
• CD Rom, with leaflet and press release templates

All packaged in a safe storage container.

According to Larry Stokes, Underwriting Manager at Zurich Municipal and Chair of the Arson Prevention Bureau’s Schools Working Group: "Every week 20 schools are destroyed or damaged by arson with the cost of school fires hitting a record high of £96.6 million in 2002. Fire brigades are the ideal partners to roll the programme out across the UK, as they have in-depth knowledge and practical experience of arson in schools. They also have local knowledge about the communities in which they work and the new tool kit will provide them with readily available, high quality material to run a successful fire prevention programme."

The ACT Fire Brigade Tool Kit has been created by safety experts with assistance from fire brigades and other arson-related organisations. Arson is a complex, serious crime with widespread effects. This new tool kit will help fire brigades and schools to encourage pupils to think about the many implications of arson. It fits in with many curriculum topics including peer pressure, relationships, consequences and responsibility, how to be ‘risk aware’ and be good citizens. Post-pilot research also illustrated that students had heightened awareness of the risks of arson and had developed their knowledge of risk assessments. This led to a significant decrease in property losses from schools in the pilot area compared to a control study.

Analysis of the ACT pilot scheme showed students had a greater understanding of the main issues relating to arson and potential solutions. They also demonstrated a clear change in attitude. Before taking part in ACT, less than 30% believed it was everyone’s responsibility to prevent school arson attacks. This rose to 60% after the session.

If you’d like more information, please email helen.ladd@uk.zurich.com

back to top

The loss of important records can cause major problems for public service organisations and insurers. Which is why following retention guidance is vital to avoid potential liability.

The work of a public service organisation inevitably means huge amounts of documentation and record keeping. But failure to manage this documentation correctly – either destroying it prematurely or losing it – can cause major problems whenever insurance claims arise. In fact, it can often mean organisations are forced into accepting liability for claims that they could otherwise have avoided.

This is precisely why having a comprehensive record-retention process in place is so important. In many cases, there are statutory periods that certain records must be kept for, while in others, common sense is what’s important. The guidance notes included below show some (but certainly not all) of the recommended retention times for important records in key areas.

• Corporate plans, strategy plans, business plans, annual reports

• Policies, procedures, organisation charts, education plans, community safety plans

• Annual reports, financial statements, operating statements

• Children’s home registers

• Residential care files, adoption files, privately fostered children’s files

• Child protection register, Schedule 1 offenders’ list

• Adults’ home registers, admission registers, discharge registers

• Diaries, rotas, daily logs, secure unit records

• Conveyancing files

• Signed tenancy agreements, sealed tenancy agreements

• Approvals as drivers, authorisations for vehicles, maintenance reports, log books

• Insurance policies, correspondence, claims records

• Equipment inspection records

• Health and safety monitoring results

• Property asbestos files

• Risk assessment

• Employment registers, personnel files, salary master records

• Sick leave, personal leave and special leave records, attendance books

• Occupational health and safety training records

• Health questionnaires, medical clearance, occupational health recommendations

• Reports on maintaining and repairing roads, streets, bridges, bridle paths, rights of way and tunnels

As explained, this list is far from exhaustive, and if you want to find out more about record-retention guidance or your legal responsibilities, you can visit The Records Management Society of Great Britain at www.rms-gb.org.uk or contact Zurich Municipal by emailing info@zurichmunicipal.com.

back to top

In the workplace, a host of regulations exist aimed At protecting employees and the public from faulty lifting equipment. But, as Zurich’s Cameron Sinclair explains, the rules can just as easily apply in domestic environments.

Under the Health and Safety at Work Act, employers have a duty to keep employees out of harm’s way. Indeed, such rules as the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER), based on a European Union directive, and strict obligations specified by the Health & Safety Commission and Health & Safety Executive exist to make employers’ duties clear. What’s more, specific legislation such as the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER) are more prescriptive, stipulating what the maximum period between lifting equipment inspections in the workplace should be – generally six months for items that lift people.

"This can also apply in domestic environments where employees, such as paid carers and nurses, handle the equipment," begins Cameron. "However, the employer can perform an assessment and examine the equipment at different frequencies. It may even transpire that they should inspect more frequently. But should they not perform so detailed an assessment, it’s good practice to follow LOLER’s six-month rule."

So what would happen if an accident occurs and the employer hasn’t followed LOLER’s guidelines or abided by its own assessed inspection frequency? "First, an enforcing agency such as the police or environmental health office will investigate," he says. "From there, should they identify negligence, they may prosecute under the Health and Safety at Work Act. For example, if an elderly lady were to fall from a faulty stairlift installed by a local authority, the court might rightly claim that an inspection would have identified the defect. They would also correctly assume that the authority could and should have done more to protect this vulnerable person."

As Cameron explains, when it comes to protecting people all inspections are a statutory duty, "The Health and Safety at Work Act demands that employers look after people whether they are employees or not. While the courts probably won’t prosecute under LOLER for failing to inspect adequately, they may not hesitate to invoke the Health and Safety at Work Act."

For more information and to find out how Zurich’s expert inspection team can safeguard your organisation, please speak to your Business Team Consultant or email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

Steve Jackson has been appointed National Fraud Controller at Zurich Municipal. He will work with customers to reduce and manage fraud.

Zurich Municipal has created the role of National Fraud Controller to bring together the regional measures it is already undertaking and to capitalise on existing fraud management partnerships.

A former Traffic Patrol Officer for Lancashire Constabulary and Special Investigator for Capita Insurance Services and Cunningham Lindsey, Steve Jackson brings a wealth of experience and qualifications to the post. He will use this expertise to look for new ways to tackle the issue of claims fraud through assessing existing knowledge and identifying areas of best practice.

"Fraud is a serious issue," said Steve. "It is theft and we’re all paying for it. When a public sector organisation is forced to foot the bill of a fraudulent claim, money is being diverted away from vital front-line services and the reality is the whole community is affected."

Steve will also be encouraging genuine claimants to deal directly with Zurich Municipal rather than going through ‘claims farmers’, which slow down the process. The benefit of this approach will be a faster and more streamlined claims process for the general public. Steve said: "Genuine claimants sometimes get a rough ride so we need to ensure that we are concentrating on the legitimate claims but stamping out public sector fraud."

For more information, please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

According to Zurich Municipal claims in schools and colleges are rising. So what can you do to combat the psychological and fiscal dangers to your organisation?

Zurich Municipal’s figures for 2003 show that the number of teachers claiming for stress rose compared to 2002. This is contrary to the trend for stress claims made against the public sector in general, which have been declining over the past five years. And it could be that the claims figures do not show the whole problem as they obviously do not take into account those teachers who have not filed a claim or simply left the profession.

As Alan Hunter, Zurich Municipal Technical Claims Manager, explains, efforts often focus on providing a ‘quick-fix’ solution and not examining the root cause of the problems. "The public sector has been tackling the issue of stress-related claims and is making serious inroads," he begins. "However, the problem remains, as workload pressures increase. It is not enough for schools to simply have a policy on dealing with stress. Unless the procedures actually work, local education authorities stand little chance of successfully defending claims in court.

"Schools are facing a wide variety of liability issues and stress is just one of them. Problems such as failure to educate, and trips and slips also hit the school purse, but school arson is still the most costly danger."

The main causes of psychological injuries suffered by teachers were excessive workloads, disruptive or violent students and interpersonal conflicts. The law states that employers are responsible for their employees’ stress if the problem is ‘reasonably foreseeable’ depending on the employer’s knowledge of their staff. Employers are only in breach of their duty if they fail to take necessary steps to prevent harm to their staff. Following a complaint, if a school cannot prove it took these steps, it will prove difficult to defend any claim.

The measures you should put in place include:

• Perform a risk assessment specifically addressing the issue of stress.
• Be vigilant and actively monitor potentially stressful situations.
• Do not assume you know which staff members are stressed. Often those complaining the loudest are not suffering. Provide pro-active monitoring if a teacher has a known vulnerability, such as a previous absence through stress.
• Examine your organisation closely – does it foster an environment where employees can voice their concerns? Do you have an effective grievance procedure?
• Immediately investigative any employee complaints on stress in the workplace. Clearly document all steps to investigate and deal with the complaints.
• Deal with all complaints thoroughly before they have a chance to escalate.
• Introduce effective behaviour management and student support programmes to deal with violent, disruptive and aggressive students.

For more information, please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

Zurich Municipal has put together recommendations to help owners of listed buildings to manage their increased fire risks.

According to estimates by Zurich Municipal one listed building a week is being damaged or destroyed by fire, with poor maintenance, old electrical systems, contractors and arson being common causes. To add to the problem, heritage buildings are prone to rapid fire spread, particularly in hot, dry weather.

When a fire in an historic building takes hold, the building is more susceptible to extensive damage, particularly if it’s in a remote location. Heightened fire risks in historic buildings include exposed timber floor structures, walls lined internally with combustible materials, thatched roofs and hidden voids in floors, walls and open roofs. This can be made worse by panelling, hanging wall tapestries and murals (often painted using a mixture of oil paint and sawdust, applied in layers and several inches thick). There are also safety issues surrounding the fact that visitors are often unfamiliar with the building and will need managing and evacuating in the event of a fire.

One customer, the National Trust, recently suffered a fire in the thatched roof of a 15th-century Inn Grade 2 listed building, despite an excellent risk management record. This highlights the difficulties associated with old structures, as thatch repels water, and to extinguish fires it’s often necessary to remove the whole roof, making the cost of the fire much higher.

The costs associated with the repair of buildings damaged or destroyed by fire are higher than more modern buildings because specialist cleaning equipment and craftsmen are usually required to restore the original features of the building. Typical solutions, such as sprinklers, are not usually an option as they are too expensive to install unless they are part of a larger renovation project.

Graham Page, Loss Control Manager at Zurich Municipal, commented: "Our country’s legacy is in danger. Most of the time it is possible for the owners as well as the general public to take simple steps to protect these buildings and avoid or minimise fire damage. As long as we understand that older buildings have their own unique set of potential problems we can take steps to safeguard our heritage for the future."

Prevention is better than cure, and with this in mind Zurich Municipal has compiled a list of recommendations to help the owners of listed buildings to protect them from fire or damage relating to fire:

• Complete fire risk assessments to identify, control or eliminate potential fire risks.
• Educate staff and visitors about the potential dangers of fire.
• Ensure formal procedures are in place and that staff know what to do if fire breaks out.
• Provide salvage equipment in the event of a fire, so that valuable items can be safely removed or protected from further damage.
• Compartmentalise the building wherever possible – through repair, remedial work and closing voids, and providing fire-resisting doors (both new and through upgrading existing doors).
• Ban temporary heaters, especially those with exposed elements.
• Prohibit smoking or only allow it in designated areas with provisions in place.
• Install extensive fire detection systems, linked to the fire service.
• Strictly control or prohibit candles and open fires.
• Strictly control and monitor contractors.

If you’d like more information about how to minimise fire risks in listed buildings please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top

With more severe and frequent heatwaves predicted over the next century, ALARM is warning of the implications for subsidence claims.

ALARM – The National Forum for Risk Management in the Public Sector – is warning organisations to take extra measures to deal with the risk of subsidence over the next few years, as a rise in claims could leave them facing massive additional bills.

The climate has been changing for some time, and according to ALARM more extreme weather conditions are expected to become the norm in the UK by the year 2100. ALARM cites the growing evidence of such extremes with UK temperatures hitting a record 100 degrees Fahrenheit for the first time last year, and exceptional rainfall seen this summer.

Subsidence occurs as a result of shrinkable clay contracting as it dries out. Excessive dry periods therefore increase the risk of subsidence, and the associated risk of damage to buildings, considerably.

According to ALARM, research in other countries which have been experiencing such weather conditions for some time shows major subsidence implications, suggesting that the UK will more than likely follow suit with the future weather predictions.

With properties that are council-owned, the damage and detriment that is an inevitable part of subsidence will fall on the shoulders of the councils. Council-owned properties are often not included in council insurance arrangements for subsidence, and the costs of this therefore tend to fall on the budgets of housing and other services affected.

ALARM are also warning of the impact extreme weather will have on councils’ arboricultural responsibilities, as the trees that line roads and pavements have the potential to create subsidence problems for third-party property owners. This could mean a potentially massive increase in claims and further implications such as increased premiums for insurance cover.

By recognising this risk now, before the extreme weather increases, ALARM believes that measures can be taken to eradicate the potential for damage and subsequent claims. ALARM Chairman Carolyn Halpin said: "The dangers of subsidence should not be under-estimated and as extreme weather conditions become more frequent, so the importance of robust risk management policies to minimise budget demands and claims increases.

"By recognising the benefits of planning for such climate changes and for instance, reviewing arboricultural policies and being aware of the potential of ground movements, councils should not be caught unawares."

For more information please contact the ALARM administration office on 01395 223399 or visit their website at www.alarm-uk.com

back to top

In the first of a new regular feature in news & views, our experts answer your questions on a wide variety of subjects.

Q. What’s the difference between officials’ indemnity and professional indemnity?

A. Basically they’re similar products in that they cover claims from third parties for financial loss (as opposed to property damage or personal injury) caused by the negligence of the insured.

Zurich Municipal policies (unlike those of commercial insurers) are designed to give wide cover for professional risks. However, the officials’ indemnity policy excludes errors or omissions in any advice, design or specification that’s given, unless:

• the insured has a statutory duty (as opposed to a power) to perform the activity
• the advice is given free of charge, not under a contract and by employees who are qualified to give it.

Where one of the above doesn’t apply then the insured needs to take out professional negligence cover.

Q. I am regularly asked for the amount of cover needed at theatre productions/fêtes/circuses. Is there a guide, which could be supplied ie. dependent on number of people at event/type of event/police attendance, etc?

A. We would normally suggest purchasing a minimum of £5m of public liability insurance and our general guidelines are as follows:

• Zurich Municipal provides public liability cover to protect you against legal liability incurred by you as a result of your own business/activities.
• Zurich Municipal’s cover does not extend to protect parties other than the organisation in respect of those parties’ own activities. However, should a claim be made against the organisation arising from the others’ activities then the organisation’s cover would respond to a genuine legal liability against you on a ‘contingent’ basis.

It therefore follows that any event organiser that you permit to use your land, premises or facilities must sign an appropriate indemnity in the organisation’s favour. An indemnity is of little use if it is not backed up by insurance. We therefore urge our customers to check that adequate public liability insurance on the part of the event organiser is in place before permission is granted.

There may well be specific requirements on certain events that you may wish to impose, eg. you may wish to see a copy of the risk assessment completed by the event organiser.

Where you are vetting circuses the £5m public liability limit may not be sufficient bearing in mind the diversity of the event and the numbers held in close proximity.

Q. Contractors are routinely asked to produce insurance. In the event of them sub-contracting and the sub-contractor not having insurance, who would be liable?

A. This question can be defined in the following terms: if the organisation uses contractors who in turn use a sub-contractor, is it the responsibility of the organisation to ascertain whether the correct insurance is in place at every level or does it become the responsibility of the contractor when he chooses to sub-contract?

Organisation and contractor
In order to simplify the issue we should firstly examine the relationship between the two original parties, ie. the organisation and the contractor. The basic principle, as per the case of Bottomley v. Todmorden Cricket Club CA [2003], can be defined as follows: where a person engages an independent contractor to carry out work, he is not liable for the negligence of that independent contractor provided reasonable care was exercised in the engagement of a reasonably competent contractor.

The case of Gwilliam v. West Herts. Hospital NHS Trust CA [2003] confirmed that part of that duty to take reasonable care includes a duty to check that public liability insurance is in place. It was further held in this case that it was reasonable to enquire whether a policy existed but not necessary to go so far as to check the terms.

Organisation, contractor and sub-contractor
The effect of the introduction of a third party in the shape of a sub-contractor can be seen in the case of Ferguson v. Welsh HL [1987] where a council had engaged a competent contractor to carry out demolition works on one of their sites. Unknown to the council the contractor sub-contracted the works to a firm who carried out the work in a thoroughly dangerous manner. Mr Ferguson was employed by said sub-contractors and sustained injuries when part of a building collapsed. In this case there was a contractual provision between the council and the contractor which prevented sub-contracting. The council were therefore found to have a watertight defence. It was posited however that, "the council might be liable in negligence to the employee of an unauthorised sub-contractor if it did not take reasonable care to ensure that potentially dangerous work on its land was performed by reasonably competent, reasonably safe contractors."

It is therefore essential that steps are taken to ascertain that the work is to be carried out by a competent contractor. A feature of this check must be to enquire whether or not public liability insurance is in place. A failure to do so may result in the chain of responsibility extending back to the original contracting party.

So: Where sub-contracting is expressly prohibited and the contractor makes unauthorised use of a sub, the organisation is unlikely to be found liable. But where the use of a sub is authorised, or indeed not even touched upon in the contract, it is likely that the organisation may have to shoulder some of the blame. An influencing factor here will be the degree of danger involved. The more dangerous the work, the greater the degree of supervision that the Court will expect.

Q. Do scanned documents stand up in Court?

A. As per CPR 31.4 a document is ‘anything in which information of any description isrecorded.’ Copy in relation to a document ‘means anything onto which information recorded in the document has been copied, by whatever means and whether directly or indirectly.’ It is this latter definition which would seem to provide the answer to the above question. In short, in civil litigation, there are no prior requirements which must be met before a document (which would include a digital image) can be admitted in evidence.

A Government paper published in 1998 has suggested that in the light of ever-improving methods of copying and reproducing, greater steps should be taken to authenticate documents, but as yet no formal rules have been put in place.

Q. When does a depression become a trip on the highway?

A. The principles for deciding whether a highway authority is liable for injuries sustained by someone who has stepped in to a depression are no different to any other highway defect.

The test is whether it was reasonably foreseeable that the defect presented a danger to the public.

This all depends on the facts of the individual case and is for the judge to decide. The courts have not given binding decisions setting out the types and dimensions of defects where liability will attach.

As a rule of thumb, defects of more than one inch in depth are likely to be considered unsafe, although it could be argued that a depression is not as dangerous as a ‘trip’ and would need to be deeper than one inch to present a hazard. The same would apply if the defect was in the carriageway rather than the pavement, but not if the defect is situated at a recognised crossing point for pedestrians.

Q. What are the problems associated with property and liability risks under Public Finance Initiative (PFI) schemes?

A. The issues surrounding PFI revolve around risk transfer from local authorities or other public bodies to Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) and the risk aversion of lenders. This means that insurances tend to be on the widest cover basis and ground-up, with a number of joint insured. As a result the insurance market is very restricted. Also brokers controlling the placement of insurances would normally wish to arrange the contracts on an all-embracing basis with combined contract works and operational insurance and there are very few insurers that can, or are prepared to offer this breadth of cover, of whom Zurich Public Private Solutions (ZPPS) are one. In terms of risk transfer there are potential grey areas on the liability side as to whether a claim can be attached to the Local Education Authority (LEA), for their overall strategic role or whether the claim would fall upon the SPV in their operational role. On property there are issues in some contracts where the division of responsibility for malicious acts, during school hours, or out-of-hours fall on the LEA or the SPV, and in some contracts the term malicious damage includes malicious fires. How causation in these circumstances will ever be proved will be problematic, and could involve the use of expensive forensic experts.

Initial output specs for the PFI contracts tended to be very limited in their scope and as a result resilience of some buildings left much to be desired. The message, particularly involving the potential for using fire sprinklers to enhance a risk engineered approach to some designs are beginning to be utilised, and LEAs have an opportunity to influence this aspect.

Q. Our insurance section was recently audited by the Audit Commission and one of their main concerns was how do we know that a claim is genuine or fraudulent and what methods we had in place to deal with such claims. The very limited check we have in place, before forwarding on to the claims handlers, was not acceptable to them. Question – How do Zurich Municipal, as an insurer, tackle such claims and at what stage do you recognise the claims to be fraudulent? What can a Local Authority do to stop these claims?

A. What is required is a documented policy on fraud that encompasses activity required at the various stages in the process, prevention, detection and prosecution. There are a number of common fraud triggers and handlers can be trained to identify these. Most of the identification process comes with experience but these skills can be learned. Detection would cover issues like joint inspections for highways claims and cross-checking claimants for previous claims. Handlers can be trained in cognitive interviewing techniques that make detection much more likely.

Zurich Municipal would be happy to discuss offering help and training to meet the Audit Commission’s requirements.

If you have a question you’d like our experts to answer, please email info@zurichmunicipal.com. We’ll obviously respond to you as quickly as we can, but we’ll also print the most frequently asked ones in News & Views.

back to top

"When it comes to dealing with contracts, it’s vital you ensure you’re happy with the wording before you sign." So says Roger Lloyd, Loss Control Consultant for Zurich municipal. News & Views gets the expert view on ensuring there are no hidden risks lurking in your contracts.

Whatever the size, shape and nature of your organisation, contracts are likely to abound, particularly if you are involved in assigning contractors. However as Roger explains, they are unfortunately an often-overlooked piece in the project jigsaw. "During my contract risk awareness training sessions, I’m usually instructing people who are unaware what constitutes a risky contract," he begins. "That’s understandable; it’s a specialist area. Which is why it’s essential you pass all contracts to a risk manager or contract expert to check the details."

Safety checks
Indeed, Roger recommends assessing contractors’ suitability even before contracts are drawn up: "An organisation, for example, has a duty to ensure a contractor operates within the health and safety rules. It’s well worth asking other authorities whether they have had dealings with the company, and if so, whether they were satisfied with them. You should also check their safety record with the Health and Safety Executive, and set out your safety requirements in the original tender document."

Another major potential stumbling block is the insurance liabilities of your organisation and the contractor. "Make sure the contractor’s insurance dovetails with yours," Roger confirms. "For instance, if the contractor and authority both have large insurance excesses, there are potentially huge amounts of money at risk. Furthermore, if a small contractor firm has large insurance excesses, it’s a good idea to check their financial situation. Very often in the case of one-man outfits, insurance is set against personal property. So if the contractor causes damage, there’s a risk you may not receive full redress."

Roger has a further warning for those that haven’t fully checked their contracts. "If an accident occurs due to the fault of a contractor and a person claims against your organisation, you will rightly approach the contractor to pay. But if the contractor refuses all liability, you will have an obligation to settle the claim. So make sure the contract is appropriately worded to ensure the contractor deals with claims."

Monitoring performance
That’s only half of the story. Because even after you’ve negotiated new terms and settled on a contract that satisfies everyone, you must still monitor your contractor’s activities. "The Health and Safety Executive demand that you fully monitor your contractors throughout the project," he says. "So visit them regularly on site and check everything’s proceeding to your satisfaction. It’s also important to document your visits and dealings with the contractor."

Roger appreciates that assessing contract risk can be a confusing and complicated business. Fortunately, help is at hand. "Our help, advice and training packages are designed to guide clients through all the potential contract pitfalls. But the one golden rule people should follow without fail is to get a contract checked by an expert sooner rather than later."

A bridge too far?
When a developer planned to build a bridge through a railway embankment, Network Rail’s contract stated that they would agree to the work – provided Surrey County Council accepted responsibility for all costs, claims, damages, losses and expenses, liabilities or proceedings of whatever kind regardless of however arising. Concerned by the wording, the council passed the contract to its risk management department, who advised the clauses were unacceptable. Following protracted negotiations, Network Rail agreed to amend the wording, and the contract now restricts the council’s liability to losses resulting from their negligence alone.

Taking the blame
A cricket club invited contractors to their premises to perform a firework display. When someone was injured, they discovered the contractors were not insured. Consequently, the Court of Appeal held the club liable for failing to ensure the contractors had adequate public liability cover.

• Set out your health and safety requirements in the original tender document.
• Check the contractor’s suitability with other organisations and the Health & Safety Executive.
• Immediately pass the contract to a risk manager or contract expert for assessment.
• Assess the insurance liabilities of your organisation and the contractor. If both parties have large excesses, high sums of money may be at risk.
• If dealing with small contractor firms, investigate their financial status to ascertain whether they would be able to pay a possible claim.
• During a project, visit the contractor regularly to check their health and safety compliance.
• Document all your visits and dealings with contractors.

For more information or advice, please email info@zurichmunicipal.com

back to top