Minutes of Eurosafe UK meeting13 September 2018
Thursday 13th September at 10.00am
dormakaba, Wilbury Way, Hitchin, SG4 0AB
|Present: –||Apologies: –|
|Alan Bullock||Insafe||Jasmine Brown||Safelock Systems|
|Charles Holmes||Associated||Michael Joel||Securikey|
|Adam Greenaway||Safe and Vault||Ben Lewis||Burton Safes|
|Chris Goldfinch||A to Z||Richard Matthews||Phoenix|
|Matt Dumsday||Insafe||Dan Thompson||Phoenix|
|Paul Dillon||BRE Global|
|Tony Brown||Safelock Systems|
|Mark Brookes||Gunnebo UK|
|Phil Hill||Thornhill Security|
|Lisa O’Flynn||Abloy UK|
|David Rooms||AB Rooms|
|Raeann Rooms||AB Rooms|
|Robert Evans||Key Secure|
|Salman Mansoor||Dudley Safes|
|Barry Beardsmore||Dudley Safes|
|Andrew Field||Burg Wachter|
|Chris Waylett||Safe Security|
|Dave Ball||Epic Safes|
|Nick Hill||Burton Safes|
|Dean Hollyoake||Burton Safes|
|Tom Rochford||Indep board member|
|Darran Bailey||Gunnebo UK|
|1. Welcome and thanks
· The meeting started at 10.00am. Alan Bullock chaired the meeting.
· AB thanked dormakaba and Steve Bewick, MD, for attending and hosting the meeting, providing breakfast and for paying for the dinner and wine last night.
· SB said that the merger had occurred three years ago which gave them a broader business model. He thanked Kate Palk for organising this meeting and explained there would be a mobile show bus at lunchtime for the attendees to have a look around.
· AB reminded everyone that upon voting, there would only be one vote per company allowed.
· AB thanked Raeann Rooms for taking the Minutes of the meeting.
· AB asked for phones to be on silent and PD went through the necessary housekeeping.
· Ben Lewis – Burton Safes.
· Richard Matthews – Phoenix Safes.
· Dan Thompson – Phoenix Safes.
|3. Minutes of last meeting/matters arising
· The Minutes of the last meeting were agreed and there were no matters arising.
|4. Finance update
· From 29/03/18 at the AGM, Matt Dumsday from Insafe is our Treasurer.
· MD gave thanks to Richard Matthews for his previous hard work.
· Signatories for the account have been changed accordingly.
· Balance is approximately £13,500.00.
· Outgoings include: –
· Squeaky Carrot – for IT – £972.00 annual payment takes us to July 2019.
· £250.00 to Mike Palmer for doing the Newsletter.
· Room hire £277.00 for a management meeting in London
· Credits include: –
· £2,300.00 (6 fees and then 2 x £100.00 from two new members).
· Looking at next year projections: –
· £12,000.00 from membership fees.
· £3,500.00 to parent Eurosafe.
· £2,000.00 for the website.
· £750.00 for the Newsletter.
· AiS – £2,000.00.
· £2,000.00 for meetings.
· Full accounts will be distributed at the AGM in March.
· From now on, this Management Committee will not claim any expenses in relation to Eurosafe business for travel and hotel etc.
· Apart from the room hire, no personal expenses were raised at the Management Committee meeting. Charles Holmes has to go to Europe for Eurosafe meetings and his expenses will be paid for by ASS and this will continue to be the case. AB said that if this does change, it is only reasonable that we will pay the expenses. There were no objections.
· There is a file that is available at each of our meetings with bank statements, receipts, invoices etc for any member to view – all for transparency.
· There were no further comments from the members.
|5. Membership fees
· Alan Lee asked if there was to be an increase of £50.00 per member? Eurosafe is raising its fees.
· It was noted that any changes to membership fees are discussed and agreed at the AGM.
|6. Fees to Eurosafe
· AB said it was unfair that Eurosafe is raising its fees per member as Eurosafe UK is the largest member. This will lead to us paying more than the other members overall.
· Adam Greenaway stated that a raise from £350.00 to £400.00 per member of Eurosafe UK was agreed at this year’s AGM and will be billed in January.
|7. Membership update
· Chris Goldfinch explained that this Management Committee was sharing roles with only the Treasurer a specific assignment.
· CG said that TSI have left the group – Chair has recently received a letter from them which will be explained later in the meeting.
· We have a new member – Alba, represented by Robert Meechan.
|8. Marketing update
· AG explained that we have nothing planned at the moment as all the money has gone on the website and Newsletter. We have also spent money on the members’ certificates – it was noted that payment from the members was slow this year.
· AG asked if you have not received your certificate yet, then please email him – there have been lots of changes in emails of the members and he has missed a few.
· The website had been discussed at the Management Committee meeting. At present, if a member of the public sends in an enquiry, that goes to AB, RM and MD and it is up to them to forward it to either all the members or particular members. AB suggested that this should change in so far that the email on the site should be for administration enquiries and not sales. The public should be encouraged to look on the website and choose which member(s) they would like to approach for advice, enquiries and sales. This would therefore remove any chance of favouritism.
· We have a couple of choices – the website can be left as is as the moment (as we do not want to discourage the public from approaching us) or we can amend the site and add contact details for each company which will of course cost us money. The £1,000.00 we pay at the moment in fees only hosts the site for a year.
· Companies could get more exposure by adding logos and photographs, links and specialisms together with a paragraph of around 200 words but, even if Eurosafe subsidised it for each company, it would still be costing up to £300.00 each. Because of the costs involved, it would have to go to a vote.
· Chris Waylett suggested our website should just be an informative site and not for leads. Alan Lee suggested that if we can reduce Management Committee involvement, would the members go for the new format? David Rooms asked what the visitor statistics to the site were? AG said he didn’t know but he will find out and let the members know – he does know that there is not a huge amount of traffic. DR asked if we can have these figures available for each meeting please.
· AB said we need to raise our exposure and therefore “beefing up” the website should be important showing our connections with AiS and MLA and ensuring the Codes of Practice are adhered to. We may get more interest if we improve our website which, in turn, could give more leads to everyone.
· Dean Hollyoake even though it would be a big benefit to the members, how would we deal with the different categories of members?
· AL pointed out that leads have been generated from the website, but the members need to know it is a fair procedure. Again details on traffic to the website would be useful.
· AG pointed out that there is a banner on the landing page on which random companies are shown. Suggestions of removing the banner and just having a members’ page were discussed. AB said the banners should be informative about Eurosafe and not the members although members should have a profile to show credibility.
· DR suggested that we remove the scrawling banner and take away any obvious signs of lead generation but have company profiles and those making enquiries could make their own approaches to companies. The site should be for information and education only.
· AL asked if the website should have any Eurosafe contact details? Who should get the enquiries i.e. should it more than the three in the Management Committee? AL proposed a vote on whether the Management Committee should investigate the costs for adding company profiles or leave as it is. All members present voted for finding out the costs; no objections and no abstentions.
|9. MLA/Sold Secure update
· AB said that Steffan George had been invited to this meeting and he had not attended.
· We have been invited to their new premises in Rugby to hold one of our meetings which we will consider for next year.
· Sold Secure’s testing was discussed and questions were raised as to why they are tested differently as they are nothing special. Jeremy Cassady explained that insurance companies know and accept Sold Secure and therefore should we take their guidance? JC’s products are Sold Secure tested and they do spot checks so why is this still an issue since the discussion started in 2012? Mark Brookes said there was no rule to stop anyone from setting up as a Tester and it is hard to police – it is the insurance world that gives kudos to certain companies and organisations. AB questioned whether Eurosafe is an organisation set up to promote the Standards and we should therefore include MLA and Sold Secure? Is this the elephant in the room? Should we put on the next Agenda to discuss that we support the MLA and Sold Secure like we do the other Test Houses and put it to bed once and for all?
· MD stated that our Code of Practice (COP) is clear regarding LPCB and EFSG – we have to be careful to not downgrade our COP so it must be amended.
· Paul Dillon questioned that if Eurosafe accepts tested products to a certain standard surely that Testing House should have the same accreditation as BRE? JC suggested we get Sold Secure to one of our meetings to present their case to us. AL said as Sold Secure are not in our COP or Constitution, we cannot accept them at the present time. It was agreed that we would put time aside at the next meeting with Steffan George present (or a statement from him) so we can discuss it.
· David Rooms said that AiS promotes certain standards as does our Constitution – can Sold Secure promote these standards along with BRE? Maybe at our next meeting, we get a representative from each organisation so it can be discussed and finally make a decision on this matter? Should we include Secured by Design too? JC said that BRE may be weighted in the discussion so all have to be included to look at both sides of the argument. PD said he has concerns that all the same types of products by all parties should be treated the same with the same minimum requirements. PD said in his opinion if Sold Secure became UCAS accredited, then he would have no problem with them being accepted.
· AL said we need to bring it to a head with a vote in line with DR’s suggestion – i.e. we bring MLA, Sold Secure, AiS and BRE to the next meeting with a view on accepting or rejecting Sold Secure in to our Constitution and COP. All members voted for this; no objections and no abstentions.
· AB said we are lucky that AiS regularly attend our meetings. Jocelyn Warren said that AiS want to get to understand our industry and take the information to the insurers, but, in the end, it is the insurers who would make the decision to accept a Sold Secure safe. This discussion thread predates her and she would be interested to attend that discussion.
· It was noted that we need to protect the consumers and to give them informed choices.
|10. Eurosafe update
· Ben Lewis was elected as a member of the Advisory Committee and Secretary (with no voting rights) and Charles Holmes is our representative at the main Eurosafe meetings.
· There is a new organisation SECOTA of which BL has been appointed by the President as the main Eurosafe’s observer.
· The General Assembly was held on 25th May 2018 in Seville with a total of 33 delegates attending (5 from Eurosafe UK) from 10 out of the 14 countries involved. Emmanuel Harir-Forouch from Gunnebo France was elected president of Eurosafe. CH is one of the vice presidents. There were two speakers at that meeting relating to private security and the evolution of cash usage in Europe.
· For any of the main Eurosafe meetings, please let CH know and he can take it as our representative. Eurosafe UK is the biggest contributor with BL, CH, Paul Skitt and Simon Arthur being present.
· The next Eurosafe General Assembly will be in Holland late May 2019. CH asked for our members to attend as it is frowned up that as the biggest contributors, we don’t have many delegates turn up.
· Eurosafe’s website is very poor and needs to be revamped and once it is, we will have that link on our website.
|11. Current situation between ECB and EFSG
· There is a meeting in October to discuss the future of the Testing Houses to see how these organisations are going to work bearing in mind the recent activities of ECB. At present, Eurosafe must remain impartial but this will be discussed in detail at the SECOTA meeting.
· PD said he doesn’t know where this will leave BRE bearing in mind that BRE was approached to join EFSG by Eurosafe UK.
· If a new organisation is to be developed who will be managing and regulating it and will BRE be invited?
· It was noted that ECB are looking at other labs to join them and CH is not sure where this would leave EFSG. It is all a bit of a mess at the moment.
· PD sits on Working Group 1 and these Working Groups aim is to propose and amend Standards. AB said that this was brought up by CH at the last Management Committee and AB said the position of EFSG and ECB are quite dangerous as the manufacturers pay these organisations/Test Houses and they feel secure in the fact that Eurosafe states EFSG and ECB – the fact that BRE is not included could lead to the UK manufacturers being in a weaker position.
· Eurosafe was set up for manufacturers, but now embodies the wider industry. AB believes we should have a sub-committee for manufacturers so that they can specifically monitor what is going on in this matter – to include SMP, ASS, Insafe, Dudley and Epic and one of their members should be at each meeting.
· It was noted that it could even be unlawful for EFSG to take action against ECB and it is disappointing that communication has broken down. AB reminded us that at this time, we should be impartial.
|12. SECOTA update
· CH explained this was just an idea at this moment in time.
· At the last meeting, some of the European Law issues were discussed and it was noted that this could take 3 – 5 years to sort out.
· The next meeting is on 19th October 2018 and some of our members have been invited (those that are members of ESSA) but AB believes that UK manufacturers should also be at that meeting. MB will try and find out more details.
There was a comfort break from 11.30am to 11.45am.
Lisa O’Flynn gave her apologies and had to leave the meeting.
|13. Eurosafe accounts
· MD explained that at the GA, the main Eurosafe organisation said they will run out of money by 2021 even with a rise in fees and it was suggested that BL raises it at the next meeting.
· Apparently, 90% of the money of the main organisation go on the GA and it is in MD’s humble opinion that this is reduced by having only relevant speakers.
· CH asked whether all their meetings are relevant?
· MD has no idea what will happen but we have to give the new Presidential Committee time to work it out and it will be a steep learning curve and the new President will look at cutting costs and are meetings necessary for the Presidential Committee and observers.
· AB said that our organisation is unusual in that we use “Eurosafe” in our name but we are two separate entities. If anything happened to the main organisation, we would not have to change our name. At SECOTA, we can make our own decisions.
|14. Reconditioned safes update
· AG said the document was produced and posted on our website. If members require it, he can send the pdf to those who need it – they just need to email him to ask for it (this can be done when asking for certificates).
· The COP stems from BS7582 and it was asked if it will be updated. Phil Hill said BSI has accepted that there has been no real change even though it was written in 2005 and therefore it is still good today. PH will look at the pdf and pass on comments if necessary. End users can view it on our website as it is a good guide.
· PH asked if the document had been provided to AiS? They had approved it before it was uploaded to the website.
· CG asked about the gun safe Standard – it was noted that Working Group 1 had discussed it at their meeting and BSI have to agree to change it and that relates to the sales of that Standard. PD will be tasked to amend the current version with links to EN14450 i.e. a known European Standard. There will be another meeting in December when it will be discussed again but it is way off being finalised.
|15. Newsletter approval
· The Newsletter goes via the AiS to insurance brokers and Mike Palmer puts it together. It is not about individual members to get publicity. AB and one other Committee member approves it on a rota. It includes news and information, awards won etc. It is not about product launches. We want it to drive more hits to our Eurosafe website.
· There have been no complaints about the Newsletter from members or its recipients so we must be doing something right.
|16. Companies self-certifying products
· Following on from the AGM, MD sent a letter in August from the Committee to all the members urging them to have a look at their websites and literature to bring them in line with the COP.
· There was a discussion on how we should follow this letter up – should we insist all members follow the COP and should we pursue it and look at individual cases?
· AB explained that in the past, if a member had issue with another member then CG had to be contacted and he would contact the offending member. Since the AGM, a member can go through any member of the Management Committee.
· Now, if a member has an issue with another member, they can report it to any Management Committee member in confidence.
· At the last meeting, three separate issues were brought to the Management Committee and therefore the letter was sent to all members stating that not everyone was following the COP and that the Management Committee will be enforcing the COP from then on so we are all doing it the right way.
· Three personalised letters were sent out to the companies that members had issue with and the Management Committee has received three replies. One of those was from TSI who resigned from the organisation.
· As an organisation, AB said we need to determine what happens next. The Management Committee needs to answer the other two companies’ questions, but what will happen if they will not correct the issue?
· Should these issues be discussed with the members at our meetings? Should the offending members be removed from the organisation? How should we deal with them?
· Andrew Field said there should be no grey area and all companies should comply. AL stressed is should not be an attack on an individual company.
· DR suggested that the companies involved should be able to publicly appeal at our meetings – keeping it transparent – especially if that company believes that the Management Committee is in the wrong.
· CH said all parties should meet up face to face rather than over emails from this stage onwards to keep an open dialogue and both parties to be flexible if necessary e.g. a point could have been misinterpreted in the wrong way in an email and face to face discussions could resolve it easily and amicably. It could even lead to the COP being amended.
· If the offending company still will not assist the Management Committee and is digging its heels in, then they make be asked to leave the organisation but reducing the membership is not wanted. MD said it should be up to each company to stand up in a meeting to voice their thoughts if they wish.
· All members agreed in a mandate to enforce the complaint by first stage resolution as detailed above. No members were against/abstained.
· MD asked the members if they felt that self-certifying was going against the COP? MB said we had to note the difference between testing and certifying. Certifying is a method of auditing and maintenance of the product. But anyone using the words “according to” and/or “in line with” equals a breach of COP. Members need to be specific in their literature and websites. CG reminded the members they can sell what they want but must be in line with the Eurosafe COP.
· AB suggested we have a mandate that all members follow the COP and should be brought to task if not.
|17. Guideline for safe engineering rates etc
· In certain professions, there are guidelines for rates and AB wondered if we should have one?
· JC asked if this was legal? AB explained it was legal to have guidelines but cannot insist on that being adhered to so not price fixing.
· There were no comments on bringing in a guideline for safe engineering rates.
|18. Standards update – TBC
· Historically, manufacturers have recommended the Euro Standards for burglary and fire (in line with USA).
· Around Europe and UK, manufacturers used the construction standards to use for certification as it is about the whole unit. However, DIN4102 and BS476 are about component testing and not a whole product. This has led to over time the different Standards have been to lesser levels which lead to more safes having a 30/60 minute fire test.
· DR asked which tests had been discussed a couple of years ago – NT and EN tests or UL test? The discussion asked that if no fire test is done, then it should only be described as “light fire protection”. MB said we should not declare any type of fire testing if it has not been done as we need to give the customer the correct information.
· MB said that EN15659 is a light test similar to NT107. EN1047 includes a drop test and has roots in the UL Standard (which is more stringent than EN1047). As an organisation, we should be enforcing this. MB is a fire specialist and in 2013 ESSA issued guidelines that those members should remove that information from all their marketing and websites.
· AL wants to check previous Minutes to see what was discussed on this point.
· DH said that a test for light fire should be done and not just mentioned. There is no margin of error when testing for fire (unlike the testing for burglary) – it is either a pass or a fail. DIN4102 is vague and can be misleading. MD said it was discussed in March and concluded it needed to be supported by certification. MD suggested the COP should be amended. AB said members should not claim a timed fire resistance without certification.
· AB asked if we should go one stage further? Fire testing is very expensive, especially for the lower grade safes – in fact, the cost could even stop production. It was noted we cannot do anything about non-members advertising “fire resistant”. Members should not state a product us up to a certain standard if only part tested.
· Ian Cocker said that wording on fire retardant product should not be fluffed up to be misleading either.
· AL asked if we can revisit this at the next meeting after he had read the previous Minutes. It was agreed this would be the case.
· AL mentioned that the tax of electronic product recycling is different in Europe and Ireland. It was noted that the UK’s position is that it is not applicable to safes.
· This tax is due on the initial sale of the safe and not the lock but rather the onus is on the original manufacturer of the electronic part and only on domestic products.
· PD – En1143 Part 1 has been revised and drafted and will go to a public vote on revisions. It has another Annex of tools and the manufacturer of the safe will be able to state whether it has used List A or List B. List B could be assisting to future-proof safes. A labelling requirement of the Standard must state List A or List B. PD said this is definitely just one Standard but in two parts. Grade requirements will remain the same. List B will be the better one to use as it lists newer tools. PD reminded everyone that it has to be voted in first.
|20. Date and location of next meeting
· Assa Abloy has put out an invitation to host the next meeting. However, the timings are to be different. AB is suggesting a meeting at the end of November at 3pm at Assa Abloy in Wolverhampton then dinner at the hotel around 6pm and the Management Committee will pay. There could even be a factory tour arranged. A Christmas get together would be the mood of the meal !
|21. Buffet lunch and close
· AB thanked dormakaba again for being a great host and providing the buffet lunch.
· The meeting was then closed at approximately 12.55pm.