Make your Building Site Safer with Specialist Insurance

Summary

If you work on different sites, with different equipment and contractors, it’s important that your insurance policy is kept up to date.

Make your Building Site Safer with Specialist Insurance

Everyone knows that building sites can be dangerous places. With the right safety precautions in place they can be made as safe as possible, but accidents can still happen. The nature of the construction industry means there’s a certain amount of risk with every job: heavy machinery driving around warehouses; cranes lifting awkward and heavy loads; and people working with dangerous equipment, mean that accidents are more likely to occur here than in other areas of the workplace. This means that warehouse insurance should be at the top of every construction firm’s list of priorities.

If insurance is one of your job responsibilities then it’s something you should pay very close attention to. If you think about it, the health and safety of the workers and any visitors that come onto the site are not just down to site security but also a result of the quality of your insurance. If there’s an unforeseen accident, the insurance company will have to deal with the claims and payouts so if the insurance isn’t there in the first place, the onus will be on you and your company.

If it’s time to get a new quote for your construction insurance, make sure you shop around and don’t just buy the first policy that appears to tick all the boxes. Look carefully at what’s included in the policy and think about using a company that specialises in your area of cover. For example, you’ll need full liability cover for your industry and you should also look out for comprehensive cover for your own equipment, as well as any hire-in equipment that might be used on site. Plus, think about the various contractors you use in the course of any one construction project. It’s important that you have insurance cover in place for them, as well. A specialist firm should be able to provide all these elements as part of your policy, so make sure you check this out before you commit your money.

It might also help to have flexible payment terms or different payment options to suit your business. For example, you might want to pay your premium in one installment, or you might prefer monthly payments, to spread out the amount during the financial year. Again, specialist providers will be well aware of the particular nature of the construction industry and are therefore more likely to offer more flexible payments options, to work with the specific needs of your business.

If you haven’t looked into your current insurance cover for a while then take some time out to check. It’s such an important part of the business that it shouldn’t be overlooked for any reason – in fact, it should be a priority. It will only take a few minutes of your time to ensure all your details and those of your business are up-to-date, and that your cover reflects the current nature of the work you do, the premises you operate from, and the staff you employ. It will be time very well spent.

Dealing with Workplace Bullying & Creating a Positive Workplace Culture

Experience of Workplace Bullying

Since leaving employment to run my own business, I have discovered the real benefits of being my own boss.

When in employment, I was confronted by three workplace bullies, in three separate organisations and job roles, all of which were my managers. At the time, it was very distressing; it shattered my confidence, and gave me a feeling of inadequacy. I felt I had to work twice as hard to achieve just a smidgeon of what was demanded because of the dysfunction in management.

In all three cases, jealousy and insecurity drove these managers to bully. I was deemed too popular, too considerate, too conscientious, and too competent; and over time, I had successfully built up some highly effective interpersonal and behavioural skills, so I was seen as a threat to these managers because my positive qualities inadvertently attracted unfavourable comparison with their own inadequacies.

Often or not Performance Appraisals were delayed or postponed; weekly team meetings began to dissipate; workloads increased; unreasonable demands were set; all sense of work control taken away; job roles altered and often replaced with menial tasks: and all executed with a complete lack of understanding or consultation. I felt unvalued, unsupported, undermined and miserable, in work-roles, I had once enjoyed and totally achieved in!

How Significant is the Problem?

Many businesses and organisations shockingly fall short of recognising that the behaviour and culture of leaders and managers directly affect the workplace environment. Too many employers are quite unaware of the gaps existing between an employee’s experience of the workplace, and the organisational culture in which the employer strives to create.

Many talented employees leave organisations because of bullying, but employers rarely recognise that this may be because of a deeper problem in the workplace. In fact workplace bullying not only causes significant damage to an employee, it also creates damage to the employer, resulting in significantly higher sickness rates; higher stress breakdowns; lower morale; higher employee turnover; and in some cases increased suicide attempts.

The highest enquiries to my business about dealing with workplace bullying are consistently from those in the public sector – Workers in the Charity or Not-for-Profit sector; Teachers and Lecturers; Local Government Workers; Nurses and Healthcare Workers – There is little help and support from trade union officials, and some company’s personnel is ineffective because some bullying managers have many friends in the HR department who may block grievance procedures before they even begin.

The National Bullying Helpline states “80% of managers know that bullying occurs in their workplace, and despite this, 37% say they have had no proper training”.  The Andrea Adams Consultancy developed a factsheet on Bullying Statistics, which states “43.5% of employers do not even have a policy to deal with workplace bulling, and 82.2% say that weakness in management is the prime reason for bullying.”

Workplace Culture

A positive workplace culture starts from the top; therefore, there should be an effective manager’s code in all workplaces, which sets out the standards and expectations of behaviour and development. This code should be geared towards helping leaders to focus on building a three-way partnership between themselves, the workforce and the organisation. It would be better for them to step out of their offices more and essentially connect with their workforce; as this would help to create more of an atmosphere of confidence and trust, where employees actively experience their leaders:

• effectively encouraging and supporting staff in their work;
• building and sustaining openness and communication;
• valuing their employees and improving quality;
• demonstrating appropriate and effective interactions;
• showing intellectual flexibility;
• understanding and participating in health and wellbeing activities;
• contributing in building a strong mental health policy where staff are able to ask for help without fear of shame, humiliation or judgement.

When this manager’s code is embedded, it brings together a workplace culture that consistently produces outstanding results, it helps to retain and attract the best talent, and it motivates and energises staff into positive action enabling them to adapt to changes more comfortably.

Managers have a responsibility to encourage staff to feel inspired by enabling them to use their strengths, and being committed to sharing and applying learning and knowledge. Being an effective manager is not just a learned quality, it is a real gift. It brings Management to a different level and enables staff to perform at their optimum; to healthily contribute and engage with their organisation; and to develop a strong sense of professional satisfaction and fulfilment.

You can acquire essential training, knowledge and skills in dealing with Workplace Bulling through The Wellbeing Team Ltd ® – Health and Wellbeing at Work.

Legislation – Quantity over Quality

Legislation Review – Do the Numbers Really Matter?

About ten years ago I recall having to draw up a register of health and safety legislation for a manufacturing site.  Despite it being quite a long list, the thing that struck me about it was how boring and generic most of the legislation sounded.  I recall the pre-6 pack, pre-COSHH days of the 1980s when there were scores of very specific and rather elderly bits of legislation, particularly for welfare arrangements in certain industries and this got me to thinking, is it really relevant how many bits of legislation there are, or is it better to concentrate on the intent behind the legislation – sort of “never mind the length, feel the width”?  Quality not quantity if you like to think of it that way.

With the recent publication of the Löfstedt Report – an independent review of health and safety legislation – the spotlight has once again been on how many pieces of legislation we now have on the statute book and the Department for Work and Pensions has seized on the idea that sweeping away 50% of this legislation will make a dramatic difference to small business.  I’m not so convinced.

When the Workplace (Health, Safety & Welfare) Regulations 1992 came in as part of the “6-pack”, they revoked a myriad of old Welfare Orders, most of which had been around since the early twentieth century and were intended for specific industries.  Let’s examine one of them – the gloriously named “Herring Curing (Norfolk and Suffolk) Welfare Order 1920”.  Apparently during the autumn herring season some one hundred years ago, the population of Great Yarmouth could be increased by around 10,000 people, many of whom were women working 12-15 hours a day out in the open on the quayside, gutting and packing up to 800,000 fish daily.  Sadly I cannot find a copy of the text of this venerable Order but I vaguely recall it had requirements like the provision of open fronted shelters (possibly with wooden seats) for the workers to take their breaks in.  It might have been this Order or another similar one that required the employers to provide wooden clogs for the workers – anyway you get the idea!

The 1992 Welfare Regulations swept away over 30 Orders like this one.  Did this revolutionise small business?  Did all those East Anglian herring curers (assuming there were any left!) say “thank goodness, now we can rip down all those wooden shelters we had to put up at huge expense and for goodness sake cancel next week’s clog order!”  Of course not, because this isn’t about the numbers of rules and regulations, it’s about the intent behind them.

So back to the present day then and the Government’s rather lop-sided focus on the amount of legislation we have.  They seem to have got stuck on this 50% reduction figure, most recently mentioned by the Minister for work and pensions Chris Grayling in DWP Parliamentary questions this week.  In contrast, Professor Löfstedt in his report suggested that the number of regulations might be reduced by about 35%.  How is this reduction – whatever figure it actually is – to be achieved then, since apparently it’s such a significant issue for business?

Firstly, Professor Löfstedt suggested that five (yes just five) piece of legislation could be done away with altogether as they were either no longer needed or were duplicated elsewhere.  All those small businesses using tower cranes or celluloid and cinematograph film can cheer right now.

Secondly, he suggested that some sector specific legislation could be combined and simplified.  Annex D to his report lists over 75 pieces of legislation that could be subject to this process.  The sectors and areas involved?  Mining, Explosives, Biocidal Products, Genetically Modified Organisms and Petroleum Spirit.  Not exactly earth-shaking for most small businesses is it?

Finally HSE has recently started a consultation on the removal of seven out-dated statutory instruments.  All good stuff but will revoking the 1971 Anthrax Prevention Order really have that much effect on small business?

Despite all this the Government continues to trumpet the 50% reduction figure as though it will in one fell swoop remove 50% of the health and safety “burden” on business.  Well it won’t.  Certainly Löfstedt has also recommended a review of “the core set of health & safety regulations” to see if consolidation would provide “clarity and savings for businesses”.  However he does point out that “Any consolidation would not reduce health and safety outcomes because there would be no change in the duties.”  So it’s not about removing the burden of legislation at all, it’s about helping business to understand what they have to do.  Why doesn’t the Government just say so instead of peddling meaningless figures?

Last week Professor Löfstedt himself commented that he was concerned his review could be mis-used and said that he had not called for a significant change in legal policy.  Meanwhile in the House of Commons, the Minister was saying “The Löfstedt report, —  recommends significant changes to our regulatory regime”.  Well they can’t both be right!  So looking back at the Löfstedt report itself, here’s what the Professor said in the foreword; “I have concluded that, in general, there is no case for radically altering current health and safety legislation. There is a view across the board that the existing regulatory requirements are broadly right.”  Seems pretty clear to me, so why does the Government persist in spinning the report’s recommendations to suit what they want them to say?

The truth is that it’s not the actual burden of health and safety that is the issue, but rather the perception of that burden, which is magnified and propagated by any number of silly stories about “elf’n’safety” that you can read in the popular press just about every day.  Sadly, people really do believe the tosh they read in the papers and see on the TV.  Work at Height Regulations?  Oh yeah, the ones that banned ladders, right?  Makes you want to weep sometimes doesn’t it?  No wonder David Cameron thinks he has to deal with a “health and safety monster”.

How do we go about tackling this problem?  In the end it’s down to those of us who work in the health and safety profession to keep on telling people that ladders aren’t banned, that children can play conkers and climb trees and that risk assessment really isn’t all that difficult if you put your mind to it.  We may not change the DWP’s viewpoint, or their obsession with figures, but we can help our clients and our employers to make their way through the so-called maze of health and safety red tape and come out on the other side with an actual understanding of how to manage and control their own risk.  Perhaps then we can get people to see that health & safety can be an enabler for better business and not just a burden to overcome.

Guest Blog provided by Heather Collins CMIOSH at  HC Safety Services – Practical H&S risk assessment for business

5 Workplace Hazards To Avoid This Christmas

The crispness in the air and the subtle jingle of bells around the community signal a festive time of year and what better way to celebrate the holidays than at the place you spend the most time. A little decorative flare, inspirational music, spirited lights and office parties are a few of the many ways to perk up the work space. In choosing to liven up at work use caution and safety to avoid the common hazards of carelessness that can occur around the holidays.

Common workplace mishaps coinciding with the holidays:

1) Unnecessary injury from falls and slips when hanging celebratory decorations or poor workspace lighting from using festive lights instead of normal overhead illuminations.

2) Fire and electrical problems from exposed wires, shortages or leaving lights on for extended periods of time. This also extends to use of an open flame decoration or improper care with Christmas trees.

3) Too much alcohol involved celebration after hours.

4) Placing decorations or tools carelessly in the path of traffic.

5) Acts of nature that spill into the workplace, including improper cleanup of melted ice from winter storms or contagious illness spreading amongst workers feeling pressure to prevent lost work time.

Employers and employees can take measures to ensure fellow colleagues and the workspace remains a safe and pleasant haven for conducting business while also portraying holiday cheer.

• Get permission to use, assemble or display any holiday items intended for decorating the office. Talking to the boss can help you figure out if your decorations meet safety standards.
• Hang decorations using appropriate tools, such as a ladder instead of the countertop or swivel chair. Ask a colleague to help stabilize the base of the ladder. Avoid placing decorations in spaces that are hard to reach or that require elaborate construction to reach. You can create a marvellous display without hurting yourself by falling or pulling a muscle.
• Use the appropriate workspace lighting during work hours. The newly hung lights might look amazing but are not appropriate for illuminating the office.
• Remain extremely conscious of fire safety: keep paper, plastic, rubber or flammable decorations away from hot surfaces, lights or heaters. Check all wires of electrical items to ensure they are properly encased and insulated. Avoid using open flame candles. It is against most health and safety regulations in businesses to have an open flame in the workspace. Keep a fire extinguisher on hand and ensure all co-workers know where and how to operate the extinguisher. Remember: Pull, Aim, Squeeze, Sweep, or P.A.S.S., if you must use the extinguisher.
• If drinking at the office party occurs, do so responsibly and with a sober designated driver.
• Pick up all straggling tools or decorations and remove them from the path of traffic.
• If you experience inclement weather that leaves ice on the shoes or soaks your wardrobe, do not leave these items dripping to dry around electric decorations. Use common sense when it comes to covering cough or sneezes like washing your hands and if at all possible take time off to heal.

Have fun during the holidays. Enjoy your workspace and your co-workers but use good common sense to prevent unnecessary hazards on the job. Sensible decisions, reviewing compliance regulations, having a pre-holiday pep talk and heeding the tips can help your office have a festive, tragedy-free holiday season.

This post has been provided by a guest Blogger

The Green Deal – What can we expect?

The ‘Green Deal’ is the governments attempt to get the construction industry back on it’s feet, relieve the unemployment figures, and create a new industry micro-cosm in associated manufacturing, administration and implementation. All of this as a by-product of the Uk’s unswerving commitment to the world to reduce it’s carbon emissions by 80% by the year 2050.

There are few people who can accurately look 40 years ahead, so I guess we are stuck with trying to do as much as we can, as far in advance as we can. In the hope that it all might just come together at about the right time. To the government’s credit they are not hanging around, and the Green Deal has got to be a committed and positive move in the right direction.

Will it work?

The Green Deal is wrapped up as part of the governments ‘Energy Bill’, which is described as being “designed to provide for a step change in the provision of energy efficiency measures to homes and businesses, and make improvements to our framework to enable and secure, low-carbon energy supplies and fair competition in the energy markets.” There, so now you know.

One of the forerunners to the Green Deal was, still is, and will continue to be the “Feed in Tariff” (FiT). Now if governments were ever prone to admitting fiscal errors this would be high upon the list. They started a scheme in July 2009 allowing businesses and private individuals to apply to be paid to generate renewable energy – Primarily electricity from Photo voltaics and wind turbines. But the offer was too good! Not only can you use the electricity generated by your renewable installation, but the government will also pay you to do so. How fantastic is that? – It was the payment level though that was too high. Very, very attractive. But too high, and unsustainable.

So they are lowering the rate by just over 50%. Down from 43.3p per Kwh to 21p, with a proposal to implement starting 8 December 2011. This of course is contrary to the previous rumours that it might be 1 April 2012. – What fools we were to believe that! This strategy only applies to energy production via photo-voltaics. The argument being that the FiT has been so successful in bringing down the cost of PV installations (reported at up to 30%) that the original projected figures are now too high, and need to be reigned in. Yeah right. The bottom line is it’s not going to be as lucrative as it used to be. But the government is still hoping the attraction will be there.

So the FiT reduction is just a glitch in the Green Deal matrix. The move to empower an industry with everything it needs to reduce the country’s carbon footprints marches relentlessly onward, like some android army under the Generalship of the Secretary of state of energy and climate change, Chris Huhne.

So what is General Huhne promising?

He might say he’s promising nothing, but he’s looking to achieve an affordable, manageable, sustainable and effective solution to ease the consumption of energy within the UK. – Good answer. It might not be his, but nonetheless, a good answer.

How will this be achieved?

The principles of the Green Deal are now fairly well known. The starting premise is that the UK housing and general building stock is now so old, and so poor at efficiently managing energy consumption that it is responsible for around 25% of the Uk’s carbon emissions. The Green Deal will allow the affordable retrofit and upgrade of our buildings to become more energy efficient, and reduce overall carbon emissions as a consequence. So that’s it in a nutshell. Not too difficult at all.

How will the Green Deal be rolled out?

The claim is that the manner in which the proposals have been drafted mean that the implementation will not be on a one size fits all basis. The scheme has built in flexibility that will give “businesses and consumers the opportunity to make the energy efficiency improvements that best suit their situation.” Seems viable on the face of it. It is the words “their situation” that will be the governing factor. For there will be a formula to be applied to each property. You may have heard of this as ‘The Golden Rule’. The golden rule states that the financial savings realised as a result of any energy saving measures must be greater than or at least equal to the capital cost of installation.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) promotes the golden rule as protection to the building owner, or occupier. The capital cost of the work will be borne by the energy provider for that property. The theory being that the new energy efficient installation will reduce the energy used by that building, and therefore the associated energy bill cost pro-rata. This creates an opportunity for the energy provider to recover the cost of the installation, over time, by making a charge to the consumer of a maximum of the difference between their monthly bill cost before the measures and the projected reduced cost afterwards. So the consumer’s bills will largely stay the same, but they will be using less energy.

You might ask what’s stopping the energy providers charging what they like for any given ‘energy saving’ installation? And that would be a very good question. The answer, on the face of it, is nothing. Nothing at all. But what we should find is that it will be self-regulating. The energy providers will be under government pressure to achieve a significant number of installations. Each installation will have a prescriptive pay back period. A finite amount of time during which the whole installation cost must be recoverable by the savings it has generated. This is the ‘Golden Rule’ and of course is a ‘deal breaker’ if the installation and pay back figures fail to stack up.

So what happens at the end of that period then? In practice it is hoped the energy saving installation will continue to ‘save money’. Chances are that after say ten, fifteen or even twenty years technology will have overtaken the performance of the PV installation that was commissioned in 2012, such that, for example, in 2030, if PV panels still exist, their efficiency rating will be off the scale compared to today’s technology. You can easily make the comparison with a computer bought today, will almost certainly have been superseded in 6 months time by a model that is smaller, faster and has more memory; all for less money. The counter argument being that if you don’t take advantage of today’s technology TODAY, you will miss out on the benefits offered tomorrow, and the day after. But that is the current way of the world.

Your energy use goes down, but your bill remains the same – So what’s in it for me?

You are not paying any less each month, so YOU are not going to SAVE money by having all this disruption to your home, and, or business then why bother? – On the face of it I think that’s a perfectly reasonable response and reaction. Except we should all have our eye on the ‘energy ball’. We have a duty to the world we live in, our children, their children and so on. So taking the glass half full approach, this is the perfect opportunity to make it work for us at no cost. Short-term disruption to our living and working environments is the price we pay. But is your average man on the street so altruistic? Or, Is he just plain selfish? Will the energy providers need to guarantee some form of saving to incentivise the roll out? I think so. The cynic in me says that people will not budge to save the planet if all they are doing is standing still, because after all W.I.I.F.M. is a very powerful lobby.

How do we get our energy saving measures installed?

Initially there will be a massive media promotion of the Green Deal by both government and energy providers. This is currently scheduled to be rolled out around autumn 2012. Then it is up to you and me to ask whether we are able to qualify for what’s on offer. This could be anything from simple loft insulation, to Biomass boilers, to PV panels and wind turbines. But not every building will be suitable for all that will be on offer. Even if it is, if the capital cost cannot be repaid during the projected ‘pay-back’ period – again that particular horse will be deemed to have fallen at the first fence. However, the energy companies will be under substantial government pressure to make this work for as many applicants as they can. Even if it means bending over backwards. Please get in an orderly queue behind me because I would like to see that first.

Accredited Assessment and Installation

Once we have decided that we want a slice of the Green Deal cake we must invite an assessment of our building by someone trained and qualified to do so. How many times have the public been stung by inexperienced, poorly trained, so-called advisors who plainly didn’t realise the difference between A and E? Why should it be any different this time? Well General Huhne has stated, ” We are working with industry and accreditation bodies to ensure the assessment is robust, delivered to agreed standards by qualified advisers and backed up quality assurance and compliance mechanisms.”  Believe that if you want to. We shall find out in due course.

Likewise, installers trained to understand what they are doing will only carry out the installation. Call me an old cynic, but experience shows that consistency on this will build it’s own mountain, and many so called accredited installers will run out of oxygen long before they reach the top. If only because not all the installation team will understand the science of what they are trying to achieve. However, ‘accreditation means that all installations will be carried out to a new British Standard PAS 2030 (Publicly Available Specification) – Now if you wanted to find out what this contained, you are too late. The draft consultation document has been withdrawn for redrafting. The consultation period having ended on 21 October 2012.

To the government’s credit, the whole package does appear remarkably well thought through. But it is still a dream and the alarms’ not due to go off for another few months. Of course the proof of this pudding, sorry cake, will be in the first few helpings dished up, and that is nearly a year away. The waters will become less murky as more and more of the detail falls into place.

Current status -

The governing legislation has received royal ascent, and if you are prone to believing government rhetoric, things seem to be pretty much on target to start empowering Green Deal providers in spring 2012, ready for a public roll out in the autumn of the same year. What we don’t know is exactly how the Green Deal will be rolled out, and who will be at the sharp end of rolling it out.

We also know that there has been a massive intake of breath from the PV industry over the government confirmation of the reduced tariff. Cries of the industry collapsing. Jobs lost in there thousands, and product manufacturing severely curtailed. It’s not a surprise though is it? We have known the rates were to be slashed for months. This was a veritable golden goose, which has been plucked for the last time. Agreed, perhaps those swines in Whitehall didn’t have to be so swingeing with their PV scythe. But we have to get on with it. Use a bit more imagination. The first enterprising soul to lick his wounds and reinvent his business model will reap the rewards: Bundle PV with something else perhaps. I don’t know. But I’m not here to provide the answers.

The Green Deal. We’ve been expecting it, and now we’ve got it. Well, almost.

This Blog article has been provided by the Building Design Expert

Public Liability insurance: European Campaign for Safety and Health at Work

European Health and Safety Week took place again between 24 and 28 October this year, with the specific and sole aim, as always, of raising awareness of the need for health and safety in the workplace, and reducing Employers Liability and Public Liability insurance cost for businesses of all sizes.

The European Agency for Safety and Health describing the week-long annual campaign as being “Aimed at people in organisations, companies and workplaces of all sizes and sectors. Everybody involved in occupational safety and health matters is invited to take part, especially safety and health institutions and occupational insurance organisations, trade unions and employers’ organisations, companies, managers, employees and safety representatives.”

The two-year campaign is being aimed at a vast range of stakeholders, including employers, employees and health and safety representatives, and is intended to highlight the benefits of carrying out and implementing the findings of a risk assessment.

The campaign seeks to clarify and make more accessible the standard risk assessment procedure in order to demonstrate that risk assessment doesn’t have to be complex, a bureaucratic nightmare or a task reserved only for the so-called experts.

And not only this, but the campaign is also aimed at raising awareness regarding health and safety and its necessity in the modern workplace, identifying and recognising good practice, and imparting knowledge and practical tips that will work to encourage behaviours that have a truly positive impact within the workplace.

The primary theme of this year’s campaign was based on maintenance work, which affects every sector and is, contrary to popular assumption, not the sole province of mechanics, fitters and tradesmen, but encompasses a wide range of workers.

This year’s campaign was aimed at underlining many of the risks associated with both reactive maintenance and routine maintenance, such as asbestos poisoning and other forms of industrial disease, falls from height, injury through using incorrect methods, materials or tools, and incorrect health and safety implementation, to name but a few examples.

Similarly, if an employer neglects to carry out routine maintenance works, this can also generate new hazards and expose employees to an entirely different set of risk factors. The week was run by the European Agency for Safety and Health, which has published on its site lots of news, learning materials and engagement activities, and the week here in Britain was overseen by the Health and Safety Executive.

Lack of smoke Alarm knowledge gets alarm bells ringing

The on-going issue of ensuring that people have fully functioning smoke alarms is a problem that has alarm bells ringing inside fire safety experts’ heads! How so? Well a couple of fire services have conducted surveys about smoke alarms, with some very worrying findings.

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service conducted a survey at Lichfield’s Argos store. People were asked if their home has a smoke alarm and how often it is checked. Of the 60 people asked, 85% had a smoke alarm fitted in their home, however 70% admitted that they don’t test their alarm regularly and don’t know if it actually works.

It is often said that 1 in 4 smoke alarms currently do not work! Obviously an alarm without batteries makes the alarm completely useless and potentially results in a tragic and unnecessary loss of life. Often batteries are removed due to an alarm constantly going off – largely due to being placed in or near to the kitchen.

However, some downright bizarre reasons for one in four alarms not working have been shown in a survey conducted by Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service. The article by The Metro reported the bizarre places where smoke alarms had been placed was researched and recorded in the survey. For example, an alarm had been found by firefighters on top of the TV as the owner thought the set would catch fire! The ideal location for smoke alarms is not “perched” on top of anything, but smack bang in the middle of the ceiling – or as close as possible to the centre. The alarm should be at least 30cm (one foot) away from a wall or light.

As well as smoke alarms protecting the welfare of television sets,  one smoke alarm has been given the sole job of stopping smoke getting into a cupboard! Yes. That’s right. Some ill-advised crack-pot had fitted an alarm inside the door of a kitchen cupboard and has told firefighters that it was there ‘to stop the smoke getting to it.’

The entire concept of logic and good taste was also rocked to its very foundations in the aforementioned Metro article, as it also reports that a homeowner bafflingly said: “I don’t want a smoke alarm unless you’ve got one in pine to match the ceiling.” We can only hope that this comment’s jokey “tongue in cheek” tone had been lost when put down in print.