When a theft takes place on a client's premises and losses occur, it's very often the security contractor that will make a claim to the insurer.
Indeed, it's also true to say that many of our beleagured security companies are increasingly being asked to accept even higher liabilities for losses in order to win contracts in the first instance.

And what's the long-term effect? Insurance premiums paid by service providers are rising disproportionately, in turn raising their cost base quite dramatically. The client will not see those costs. Not directly at any rate. That said, the contractor will be forced to increase its charge-out rate.

Then we are back to Square One. Clients only see the rising cost of their security provision, and not the rising cost of insurance. In turn, less security may be deployed on site, even more losses occur and insurance charges rise yet again.

As Securitas managing director David Cairns rightly states in this month's Guarding Watch (p69), good security should always go hand-in-hand with reduced insurance claims and – as a direct consequence – reduced premiums.

In order for that Utopia to be realised, though, drastic steps must be taken by the insurance community.

The insurers should be the main drivers in helping to raise standards in this industry. Rather than merely insisting that businesses conform to the most basic of measures – such as having a manned presence on site round-the-clock – insurers should look at service levels and specify more sophisticated requirements that qualify for discounted premiums.

Membership of the BSIA or IPSA, ISO accreditation and defined Service Level Agreements are all reasonable markers for their contractors.

Merely having a security presence on site is no longer sufficient for end users. It's the quality of service offered that counts in the real world. Over to you, Mr Insurer...