Executive Hire News › Archives › December 2009 › Executive Report: Protect your plant
Executive Report : Protect your plant
Alan Guthrie reports from the fifth annual CITS Conference which discussed solutions to the problem of plant theft.
Estimates suggest that plant theft costs the construction industry between £500m and £900m annually, taking into account factors such as man hours spent sourcing replacement machines and the consequential project delays. Speakers at the CITS (Construction Industry Theft Solutions) Conference, hosted recently by JCB at its Rocester headquarters, highlighted the scale and nature of the problem, and various preventative measures. CITS aims to raise awareness of the risks amongst equipment owners and users, and includes representatives from the police, manufacturers, associations like the CPA, and security system suppliers.
Hugh Edeleanu, CEO of HE Services (Plant Hire) Ltd, which offers more than 2,500 fleet items from 12 depots nationwide, said that the problem of theft continued to grow and he described various types of loss his company had experienced. While opportunist theft seemed to be in decline, such as the unauthorised removal of equipment left by a roadside, planned theft was still a problem, with criminals becoming smarter. In many cases, stolen equipment is moved to a location not far where it was taken, and the thief will wait to see if anyone comes to recover it via a tracking system. If not, they remove the machine to a more distant site. This shows the advantage of fitting such recovery aids.
‘Scams’ on the increase
Fraudelent hires or ‘scams’ were also increasing, said Hugh Edeleanu, such as thieves who hire equipment using the identity and details of bona fide organisations. In one instance, someone had rung to open an account giving the address and corporate details of a contractor, which checked out without suspicion, and equipment was hired to the enquirer. It was only some time later, when the real company rang to query the purchase number quoted on the invoice, that the scam was detected. Again, machines could be tracked if appropriate devices were fitted. Hirers and users could also adopt preventative measures like painting equipment in strikingly recognisable liveries, using immobilisers, and parking machines overnight in places with restricted access.
William Todd, EHS (Environmental, Health & Safety) Compliance Manager with A-Plant, described the success the hirer had found after introducing its A-Trak tracking and security system, developed by Enigma Vehicle Systems. This is fitted to 60% of A-Plant’s fleet, including mini excavators, telehandlers, dumpers, compressors and generators. It has given a recovery rate of 95% compared to an approximate industry average of 5-10%. Customers can track hired equipment via A-Plant’s extranet site, and if unauthorised use is detected, machines can be immobilised via a mobile phone. The system can send an alert if equipment goes outside a defined zone, and the location and distance covered by machines over a period can also be displayed on a map, together with levels of fuel, oil and battery condition, enabling customers to control their carbon footprint.
Detective Constable Ian Elliott, from the Metropolitan Police’s Plant and Agricultural National Intelligence Unit, said that the recovery rate of stolen machines was improving, helped by the ‘cleansing’ of the central database of recorded equipment theft to ensure accurate manufacturer details and model specifications were in place to facilitate computer searches. This was also circulated to the Serious Organised Crime Agency and Interpol. Recovery rates were also being helped through the wider adoption of Cesar, the covert and overt identification and registration system developed by Datatag for the Plant Theft Action Group (PTAG), a Home Office advisory body.
Rigorous systems and procedures
DC Elliott stated that crime invariably increases during a recession, and that equipment owners must be vigilant. He reiterated the point that scams involving unauthorised use of genuine companies’ identities and details were increasing, and suggested that hirers should confirm purchase order numbers with an organisation’s head office, as well as establishing other rigorous systems and administrative procedures. He added that the Cesar system helped recover equipment because it was becoming more widely known amongst police officers and, even, the general public, who recognised the distinctive tamper-proof triangular identity plates on machines.
Datatag Director, Kevin Howells, said that a Cesar tagged machine was four times less likely to be stolen than an unmarked one and,
if stolen, its recovery was six times more likely. Manufacturers fitting the system include Ammann Equipment, Bobcat, Doosan, Hanix, JCB, Manitou, Merlo, NC Engineering and Takeuchi. Cesar also incorporates hidden security transponders and liquid ‘DNA’ containing identity microdots painted on machine surfaces, and Datatag provides a round-the-clock telephone service to the police and customers, enabling machines to be identified from the database.
During the Conference, Yvette Henshall-Bell, JCB’s UK & Ireland Sales Director, announced that the company has become the first excavator manufacturer to achieve a 3 star rating from the Thatcham testing organisation for security measures that will be fitted as standard from 1 January on all 801 and 8020 minis. Throughout the first six months of 2010, the manufacturer will expand the initiative to include all mini and midi excavators above 1 tonne.
The first Thatcham star is awarded for vehicle identification and registration (such as Cesar, which JCB has fitted since November 2007), while the second recognises the presence of an appropriate immobiliser. The third star is given for the use of a unique key for each machine (customers who prefer a keypad ignition system can specify this when ordering). As some conference speakers stated, many users prefer the operational flexibility offered by the traditional arrangement of having a single key that fits any machine. However, CITS regards the provision of a unique key as a sensible requirement, similar to the standard security measures found on cars. • |
