AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

P !tor th a m pt on ba sed C Butt

1st July 1993, Page 36
1st July 1993
Page 36
Page 36, 1st July 1993 — P !tor th a m pt on ba sed C Butt
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

had taken all the standard precautions to protect its warehouse in Tamworth with round-the-clock patrols, an alarm system and a secure fence.

But that didn't deter whoever broke in last Easter just after a security officer had visited the spot. In the ensuing blaze 9,300m3 of the 16,250m3 shed was gutted with 28 trailers damaged and seven destroyed together with millions of pounds-worth of Texas Homecare stock. The tally is around the El Om mark.

Although there is no hard evidence of an arson attack the incident has been logged as one in "suspicious circumstances". There is a complete ban on smoking on the site and there were no electrical problems uncovered.

An amateur film taken at the time showed the ferocity of the blaze. Clive Hodgkinson, the group's general manager, was shocked when he viewed it. "When you look at it you have to be grateful that no-one was hurt," he says. The group acted quickly to switch to other company warehouses and reschedule vehicles and manpower. But they reckon to have lost £4,000 a day in business from the stricken Tamworth depot over a two to three-week spell. Texas would have lost even more as the goods were part of the spring lines which were difficult to replace during their peak selling season.Both Butt and Texas were able to claim against their insurance policies for the goods and vehicles destroyed. Unfortunately loss of business is currently uninsurable. Drivers suffered too. Hodgkinson reckons that up to 20 of them lost overtime for two to three weeks.

Replacing lost facilities has proved a costly headache. The company did not own the building and has now taken a new one closer to Northampton. It also had to buy new trailers, as Hodgkinson explains. "The trailers only had a written-down value—some of £6-7,000. But if you buy second-hand replacements with the money the insurers give then your

maintenance costs will be higher. We had to replace with new, at a cost of £14-20,000 each."

As for damage to the company's position,Hodgkinson is hardnosed. "The service sector has to be very competitive to keep business. All operational costs have to be contained ie on wages, fuel, maintenance and insurance. Our maintenance and insurance premiums will go up as a result of the blaze so we have to be vigilant to ensure that the others do not."

He believes the company could not have done more to deter break-ins. "Even if you have, as we do, a secure site, a good perimeter fence and rigid disciplines and procedures, it is still difficult to stop break-ins. "What we need are stricter prison sentences for vandalism."

Tags