Author: homesecurityinnovations.com

A car parked on the drive is part of the home’s security perimeter, and the keys inside the house are the weak point. Vehicles with contactless “smart” keys can be stolen without the key ever leaving the hallway. This article summarises Secured by Design’s guidance on relay theft, Home Office statements about signal-manipulation devices, and the text of section 149 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026, which creates offences relating to such devices across the United Kingdom. It is general information, not legal advice or a guarantee that any measure will prevent a theft.

How relay theft works, according to Secured by Design

Secured by Design, the police-backed crime prevention initiative, says vehicles fitted with a smart or passive key are susceptible to relay theft. Criminals normally work in pairs and use cloning devices able to grab the signal from the smart key so that the car appears to detect the key nearby. The process can take as little as 60 seconds, and for safety reasons the engine will not cut out when the key goes out of range. Secured by Design says vehicles are most vulnerable overnight, particularly on a driveway or directly outside a home, where most of these thefts occur.

The practical advice

Secured by Design lists six measures for owners:

• Use a pouch. Store keys in a security pouch, described as a Faraday bag or RFID signal shield, when not in use at home, out and about or on holiday. The pouch is meant to stop the signal being captured.
• Do not leave keys by the door. Fishing for vehicle keys through the letterbox is described as a prominent method of stealing them, and signals are easier to grab when keys are near the front door.
• Disable the fob where possible. Some fobs can be switched off, so the vehicle manual or dealer should be consulted.
• Fit a tracker. Trackers can increase the chance of recovery after a theft.
• Use locks or clamps. Steering wheel locks and wheel clamps are described as a deterrent because thieves prefer to avoid anything that slows their getaway.
• Consider CCTV to view the garden, having first read the Information Commissioner’s Office advice on domestic CCTV systems.

Secured by Design also advises anyone buying a new car to speak to the dealer, because manufacturers and industry bodies have been working against relay theft for years.

How common signal manipulation is

A Home Office announcement dated 24 February 2025 cited the 2022 to 2023 Crime Survey for England and Wales, in which an offender manipulated a signal from a remote locking device in 40% of vehicle thefts in England and Wales. It also cited 732,000 incidents of vehicle-related theft in the year ending September 2024, and the Metropolitan Police Service’s estimate that signal jammers are used in approximately 60% of vehicle theft in London. Those figures describe England and Wales, not the whole UK, and the Metropolitan Police figure is an estimate for London.

The new offence

Before the Act, the Government’s factsheet says, these devices were not in themselves illegal to possess. Offenders could be charged with going equipped to commit theft under section 5 of the Theft Act 1968 or with conspiracy, but the prosecution had to prove the offender’s intention to steal a vehicle. Section 149 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026, headed “Electronic devices for use in vehicle offences” and marked as extending to the UK, changes that focus:

• It is an offence to possess an electronic device in circumstances that give rise to a reasonable suspicion that it will be used in connection with a relevant offence.
• It is an offence to import, make, adapt, supply or offer to supply such a device in the same circumstances.
• It is a defence to show the person did not intend or suspect the device would be used in connection with a relevant offence.
• The court may assume a person possessed a device found on premises they occupy or habitually use, unless they show they did not know of it or had no control over it.

A “relevant offence” is defined separately for each nation: theft of a conveyance or anything in it, or taking a vehicle without authority, under the Theft Act 1968 in England and Wales and the Theft Act (Northern Ireland) 1969 in Northern Ireland, and the equivalent theft or taking offences in Scotland.

Penalties and legitimate devices

On conviction on indictment the maximum is five years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both. On summary conviction it is the general limit in a magistrates’ court in England and Wales, 12 months or a fine in Scotland and six months or a fine in Northern Ireland. The Government’s factsheet says some signal devices are legitimate, such as signal repeaters approved for use by Ofcom to boost weak mobile signals, and that people with a valid use should be able to show it. The site’s separate article on signal jammers and the home covers the older offences about jamming Wi-Fi and cameras.

Is the offence in force?

Legislation.gov.uk shows section 149 as not in force at Royal Assent, with commencement governed by section 255(1) of the Act, and it displays the section as a prospective version until a commencement order is applied. The offences therefore apply from the date they are brought into force.

The bottom line

Relay theft is described by Secured by Design as a driveway-and-doorway problem: keep keys in a signal-blocking pouch, away from the front door and letterbox, consider disabling the fob, and add a physical lock or tracker. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 will add UK-wide offences for possessing or supplying devices used in vehicle theft, with a five-year maximum on indictment, but they apply only once commenced.

Sources

• Secured by Design, “Prevent Keyless Car Theft ’Relay Theft’”
• GOV.UK, Home Office, “Vehicle theft equipment to be banned under new government law”
• GOV.UK, “Crime and Policing Act 2026: serious crime factsheet”
• Legislation.gov.uk, “Crime and Policing Act 2026, section 149”

Scratched paintwork, a smashed window, a kicked-in gate or graffiti on a garage door all point to the same offence in law. The Criminal Damage Act 1971 covers destroying or damaging property, and it is the main statute behind most vandalism reports. This article summarises the Act as published on legislation.gov.uk and the Crown Prosecution Service’s guidance on allocation. The provisions summarised here are marked on legislation.gov.uk as extending to England and Wales, so this article covers England and Wales only. Scotland and Northern Ireland are outside its scope. It is general information, not legal advice.

The basic offence

Section 1(1) says a person commits an offence if, without lawful excuse, they destroy or damage property belonging to another, intending to do so or being reckless as to whether such property would be destroyed or damaged. Two features matter for householders. The offence needs intent or recklessness, so an accident is a different matter, and it applies whatever the value of the damage, from a keyed panel to a wrecked shed.

Section 10 defines “property” as property of a tangible nature, real or personal, including money. It also treats property as belonging to anyone who has custody or control of it, or a proprietary right or interest in it, or a charge on it. That means a tenant, a lender with a charge or someone renting a car can all be the person to whom the property “belongs”. The section excludes wild mushrooms and wild flowers, fruit or foliage, and section 10(5) says altering the contents of a computer is not damage unless it impairs the physical condition of the computer or storage medium.

Endangering life and arson

Section 1(2) covers a more serious version: destroying or damaging any property, even the person’s own, intending to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether life would be endangered. Section 1(3) provides that an offence committed by fire is charged as arson.

Threats and possession

Two further offences complete the Act. Section 2 makes it an offence, without lawful excuse, to threaten another person with the destruction or damage of their property, or of a third person’s property, intending them to fear the threat would be carried out. It also covers threats to destroy the threatener’s own property in a way that endangers life. Section 3 covers having anything in custody or under control intending, without lawful excuse, to use it or let another use it to destroy or damage another person’s property. The Act records that sections 2 and 3 were amended as to mode of trial by the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980.

Maximum sentences

Under section 4, arson and the section 1(2) life-endangering offence carry a maximum of life imprisonment on conviction on indictment. Any other offence under the Act carries up to ten years on indictment.

Where the case is heard: the 5,000 pound line

The CPS guidance on allocation explains why most vandalism is dealt with in the magistrates’ court. It says that, although criminal damage is triable either way, for allocation purposes a charge under section 1 of the 1971 Act is treated as if it were summary only where the value is less than 5,000 pounds, except in cases involving arson or memorials. The CPS adds that the six-month time limit for laying an information in section 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 does not apply to criminal damage.

“Lawful excuse”

The Act does not define lawful excuse in the abstract. Section 5 says a person charged with a section 1(1) offence is treated as having a lawful excuse in two situations:

• they believed the person entitled to consent to the damage had consented, or would have consented had they known of it and its circumstances; or
• they damaged or threatened to damage property to protect their own or another’s property, or a right or interest in property, and at the time believed both that it was in immediate need of protection and that the means used were reasonable in all the circumstances.

Section 5(3) says it is immaterial whether the belief is justified, if it is honestly held. The site’s article on booby traps and DIY deterrents looks at the position of traps aimed at intruders, and the article on reasonable force against a home intruder covers the separate force rules.

How this differs from burglary

Burglary is a separate offence under the Theft Act 1968. The site’s guide to what legally counts as burglary explains that offence, while criminal damage under the 1971 Act is charged as its own offence.

Questions people ask

Does it matter who owns the damaged item? For a section 1(1) offence the property must belong to another, and section 10 defines belonging broadly. Section 1(2) applies even to a person’s own property where life is endangered.

The bottom line

The Criminal Damage Act 1971 treats deliberate or reckless damage to another’s property as an offence in England and Wales, with a ten-year maximum on indictment, life for arson or endangering life, and most low-value cases dealt with in the magistrates’ court. A genuine belief that the owner consented, or that damage was necessary to protect property, can amount to lawful excuse.

Sources

• Legislation.gov.uk, “Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 1”
• Legislation.gov.uk, “Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 5”
• Legislation.gov.uk, “Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 10”
• Crown Prosecution Service, “Allocation, Sending and Committal for Sentence”
• legislation.gov.uk, Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 2
• legislation.gov.uk, Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 3
• legislation.gov.uk, Criminal Damage Act 1971, section 4

Unwanted attention that reaches the front door, whether it is repeated visits, parked cars, watching the house or gifts left on the step, can be stalking even when no single act looks serious. The Stalking Protection Act 2019 created a civil order that lets police act early, before any conviction. This article summarises the Home Office statutory guidance for the police on Stalking Protection Orders (April 2024), the text of the Act, and GOV.UK’s 2026 factsheet on further changes. The guidance states that it applies to England and Wales only. Scotland and Northern Ireland are outside its scope. It is general information, not legal advice or a safety plan.

What a Stalking Protection Order is

The guidance describes a Stalking Protection Order (SPO) as a civil order that can be sought by the police. It was created to close a gap in the existing protective orders regime: the threshold for starting criminal proceedings does not need to be met before an order is made, which allows early intervention before behaviour becomes entrenched or escalates. No prior conviction for stalking is required. Where the criminal threshold has already been met, an SPO is not an alternative to prosecution under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. It can complement a prosecution.

Only police can apply for an order (through a chief officer of police, who may delegate), to a magistrates’ court. An application is made in respect of a person who lives in that force’s area or who the chief officer believes is in, or intending to come to, the area. The person seeking protection does not apply themselves.

When police can apply

The guidance says police should consider applying where it appears that the respondent has carried out acts associated with stalking, poses a risk of stalking to a person, and there is reasonable cause to believe an order is necessary to protect that person. A magistrates’ court may make an order only where similar criteria in section 2(1) of the Act are satisfied. The person to be protected does not need to have been the victim of the earlier acts.

The guidance also makes several points that matter for a household:

• Risk can be physical or psychological harm, or physical damage to property.
• Acts that look harmless alone, such as unwanted gifts or flowers, may be stalking when combined with other behaviour.
• An application can be made whether or not the police pursue a prosecution, and at any stage up to and after conviction or acquittal.
• Police can consider an order to protect people connected to the victim, not only the victim.
• Orders can be sought against children aged 10 and over, in which case cases go to the youth courts.
• Orders are not limited to stranger stalking and can be used in a domestic abuse context, including after a relationship has ended.

Interim orders

An interim order is a temporary order imposing prohibitions or requirements the court considers appropriate, aimed at protecting a victim between the application and the full decision. The guidance says the court may make one if it considers it appropriate to do so, a lower threshold than for a full order, and that it is intended for limited periods. Breach of an interim order is an offence with the same maximum penalty as breach of a full order.

What an order can prohibit or require

The guidance lists conditions police may ask for, while noting that the magistrates’ court makes the final decision and that the list is not exhaustive. Prohibitions could include:

• entering certain locations or defined areas where the victim lives or often goes;
• contacting the victim by any means, or through third parties;
• referring to the victim on social media;
• recording images of the victim;
• physically approaching the victim, at all or within a specified area or map boundary; and
• any form of surveillance of the victim.

Positive requirements could include attending an assessment or a perpetrator programme, surrendering devices, giving police access to accounts, phones and passwords, or signing on at a police station. The guidance tells police not to ask for electronic monitoring because the infrastructure is not in place. Conditions are meant to be clear, specific and proportionate, and police are advised to consult the victim on the conditions they want.

Length, reach and breach

An order lasts for the fixed period the court specifies, which must be at least two years, or until a further order is made. Different conditions can run for different periods. A prohibition or requirement has effect throughout the United Kingdom unless expressly limited to a locality. A person who breaches an SPO or an interim order without reasonable excuse commits a criminal offence, and the guidance says the CPS is involved if a breach is prosecuted.

Recent changes

GOV.UK’s factsheet on the Crime and Policing Act 2026 says the Act amends the Stalking Protection Act 2019 and the Sentencing Code so that courts can make an SPO on conviction or acquittal without a police application, and so that the civil standard of proof, the balance of probabilities, applies to SPOs. The factsheet also describes a Home Secretary duty to issue multi-agency statutory guidance on stalking. Northern Ireland changes are made through the Protection from Stalking Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. The 2024 guidance predates these changes, so current procedure should be confirmed with the police.

Questions people ask

Can I apply for an SPO myself? Under the guidance, applications are made by the police, not by the person being protected.

Does an SPO replace reporting stalking as a crime? No. The guidance says an SPO does not replace prosecution under the 1997 Act and can complement it.

The bottom line

A Stalking Protection Order is a civil, police-led tool in England and Wales that can restrict a person’s contact, approaches, recording and surveillance for at least two years without waiting for a conviction, with breach a criminal offence. It sits alongside, not instead of, prosecution. Anyone worried about stalking at home should report it to the police, who make the application decision.

Sources

• GOV.UK, Home Office, “Stalking Protection Orders: statutory guidance for the police (accessible version)”
• GOV.UK, Home Office and Ministry of Justice, “Crime and Policing Act 2026: stalking factsheet”

For anyone who holds a firearm or shotgun certificate, home security is a licence condition rather than a matter of choice. The Home Office publishes the Firearms Security Handbook 2020 as guidance for police and others on how those conditions are usually met, and it doubles as a detailed account of what a well-protected home looks like. This article summarises the handbook and the statutory guidance for chief officers of police on firearms licensing. The statutory guidance states that it applies to England, Scotland and Wales, and this article is limited to Great Britain. Northern Ireland has separate firearms legislation and is not covered. It is general information, not legal advice; the handbook itself says it is not a statement of the law.

The legal condition behind the guidance

The handbook explains that it is a condition of a firearm certificate that the guns must be stored securely at all times, except in certain circumstances, so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, access to them by unauthorised persons. Here “unauthorised persons” means anyone without a certificate allowing them to possess the holder’s guns. Shotgun ammunition is not covered by the condition, although the handbook says it is advisable to store it safely.

The police statutory guidance adds that a home visit must be carried out before a certificate is granted to a first-time applicant, that it must include inspection of the security arrangements, and that a certificate should not be granted where there is doubt about whether the applicant will keep firearms secure at all times. The handbook is the reference document for those inspections.

The cabinet itself

For most homes the handbook expects a purpose-made cabinet. New cabinets should conform to BS 7558, and an older cabinet that is satisfactory need not be replaced. Where only one rifle or shotgun is held in a low-risk situation, a gun clamp or similar device fixed to the building can be reasonable. The cabinet should be fixed to the structure and sited to frustrate attack and to avoid being identified by visitors, ideally out of view from both inside and outside the building. Wardrobes, cupboards, lofts and cellars are given as examples, with a caution that damp or condensation can damage firearms and corrode the fixings.

Ammunition and easily removable parts such as rifle bolts may be stored separately as an extra layer. Section 1 ammunition must be kept secure, and the handbook suggests its own lockable compartment in the cabinet.

Fixings, weight and walls

The handbook is specific about anchorage. Fastening to timber stud walls should be avoided unless extra anchorage is provided, while floor or roof joists are acceptable, and brick, concrete or masonry walls are usually best if the correct fixing is used. Breeze and thermal block walls are noted as poorly suited to ordinary fixings. For a floor fixing, it gives an example of coach screws at least 3/8 inch (8 mm) in diameter and 2.5 inches (63 mm) long, driven into joists rather than floorboards. It also warns that a large steel cabinet can exceed typical suspended-floor loading and that lofts may have lighter joists, so structural advice should be taken where in doubt.

Three levels of security

The handbook describes proportionate levels rather than fixed rules. Level 1 is the normal standard: a cabinet, good final exit doors (ideally to PAS 24) and suitable locks on ground-floor and patio windows. Level 2 applies where factors such as repeat victimisation, a high-crime area, a regularly unoccupied building or a substantial number of guns are present. It adds final exit door locks to BS 3621 (2016) or equivalent, secure window locking and an audible intruder alarm. Level 3 covers a higher assessed risk, and the handbook suggests dividing the guns between separate cabinets, additional target hardening or a gun room, and an alarm to BS 4737 3.30:2015 or equivalent, ideally monitored by an NSI monitoring centre. Section 5 firearms held in a dwelling call for Level 3.

The guide gives rough numbers, treating six to ten guns as the lower end of Level 2 and more than twelve as a “larger” number, but stresses that number alone is not enough and that type of firearm and other risks matter.

Garages and outbuildings

The handbook prefers storage in the occupied part of the dwelling. Detached buildings and garages with only external access should not be used unless they meet the standard, and if used they should be protected by an intruder alarm linked to the household to BS EN 50131. For an integral garage it recommends external walls built to the same standard as the house, a vehicle door rated to LPS 1175 Security Rating 1 or above (or equivalent listed standards), other doors specified like a main entrance door, and the cabinet positioned away from the vehicle door and screened from view.

Fire escape and safety

The handbook says no security requirement can prevent the immediate and unobstructed use of a window or opening provided as an emergency escape, and that any conflict with safety regulations should be resolved with the agency responsible. Ammunition should not be kept in an area exposed to fire risk or on an escape route. For garage doors more generally, see the site’s article on garage doors and the door into the house.

Keys and access

Security includes managing who can open the storage, not only the hardware. The handbook says access control, including the security of keys, is important, especially where children live in the household.

The bottom line

The Home Office handbook treats gun storage as a layered, proportionate system: a fixed cabinet to BS 7558, sound doors and windows, alarms as risk rises and careful key control, with emergency escape routes kept clear. It applies to certificate holders in Great Britain under the Firearms Act 1968 regime. Anyone holding or applying for a certificate should take the exact requirements for their home from their police firearms licensing team.

Sources

• GOV.UK, Home Office, “Firearms security handbook 2020 (accessible)”
• GOV.UK, Home Office, “Firearms licensing: statutory guidance for chief officers of police (accessible)”

A pet taken from a garden, a car or a front step is a security incident as much as a welfare one, and since August 2024 the law has treated it differently from stealing an object. The Pet Abduction Act 2024 created two offences, dog abduction and cat abduction. It draws on the Act, the Government’s Royal Assent announcement and the House of Commons Library briefing. It is general information, not legal advice, and it is careful about geography, because the offences do not cover the whole UK.

What the law was before the Act

The Commons Library briefing explains that, before the Act, animals fell within the definition of property in legislation, so pet theft was dealt with under the Theft Act 1968. Campaigners wanted a law that reflected the emotional value of pets and the distress of losing them. The Government set up a Pet Theft Taskforce in May 2021, which concluded in September 2021 that a new pet abduction offence should be created to shift the focus at sentencing towards the welfare of the animal.

The Government’s announcement of the Act cites Taskforce evidence that around 2,000 dog thefts and over 400 cat thefts were reported to police in 2020, and describes cats and dogs as sentient beings that can suffer distress when stolen.

Where the offences apply

Geography matters more here than in most laws. Section 1 makes dog abduction an offence where the person and the dog are both in England or Northern Ireland at the time the dog is taken or detained. Section 2 uses the same test for cats. The Act’s extent marking covers England, Wales and Northern Ireland, but the offences themselves are drawn around conduct in England or Northern Ireland. On the wording of sections 1 and 2, they do not describe conduct that takes place in Wales or Scotland, and the Government’s announcement says the new legislation creates offences for dog and cat abduction in England and Northern Ireland. A taking in Scotland or Wales therefore falls outside these two offences.

What counts as abduction

For dogs, an offence is committed by taking a dog so as to remove it from the lawful control of any person, or by detaining a dog so as to keep it from the lawful control of the person entitled to have it. The Act says taking includes causing or inducing a dog to accompany someone, so a dog lured away is covered as well as one physically carried off. For cats, only taking is an offence. The Act creates no detention offence for cats.

The separating-couple exception

Both sections contain a carve-out for people who lived together before the animal joined them. There is no offence if the person who took the animal, the person it was taken from and the animal all lived in the same household, the two people had lived together before the animal began living with them, they later stopped living together, and the taking or detention happened at or after the time they separated. In plain terms, the offence is not aimed at disputes between former partners about who keeps a pet. Those disputes are left to other areas of law.

Defences

Both offences have a defence for a person who shows lawful authority or a reasonable excuse. The Act also gives dog-specific defences for people who detain a dog they believed was a stray.

• In England, the person must have believed the dog was a stray, taken all reasonable steps to comply with section 150(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (delivering a stray dog to its owner or a local authority officer), and not detained the dog for more than 96 hours, disregarding any period in which it was kept under section 150(2)(a) of that Act.
• In Northern Ireland, the person must have found the dog in accordance with Article 24(1) of the Dogs (Northern Ireland) Order 1983, given the notice required by Article 24(2) and taken all reasonable steps to comply with arrangements for collecting the dog under Article 24(3).

For each defence the Act says a person is taken to have shown the fact if enough evidence is produced to raise the issue and the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Penalties

A person convicted on indictment of either offence is liable to imprisonment for up to five years, a fine, or both. On summary conviction in England and Wales the maximum is the general limit in a magistrates’ court, or a fine, or both, and in Northern Ireland it is up to 12 months, or a fine up to the statutory maximum, or both.

Other pets and commencement

Section 3 lets the Secretary of State for England, and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for Northern Ireland, amend the Act by regulations to apply similar offences to other species. The power may be used only if the authority considers the species is commonly kept as a pet and there is evidence that unlawful takings are significant or increasing significantly, and the regulations cannot vary the penalties. The offences in sections 1 and 2 came into force on 24 August 2024, for England and Wales by section 6(1) and for Northern Ireland by a statutory rule. The Government’s announcement adds that microchipping of cats in England became compulsory from 10 June 2024, which makes it easier to reunite lost, stray or stolen pets with their owners.

The bottom line

The Pet Abduction Act 2024 makes taking a dog or cat, and detaining a dog, a specific offence with a five-year maximum where the person and animal are in England or Northern Ireland, with defences for lawful authority, reasonable excuse and genuine strays and an exception for separating couples. Scotland and Wales are not covered by these offences, so the location of the incident matters.

Sources

• Legislation.gov.uk, “Pet Abduction Act 2024”
• GOV.UK, Defra, “Pet Abduction Bill becomes law”
• House of Commons Library, “Pet Abduction Bill 2023-24”

After a burglary, the second shock is often the insurance settlement: what will be replaced, with what, and whether cash or a voucher is offered instead. The Financial Ombudsman Service publishes guidance for insurers, and a page for consumers, on how it looks at complaints about settling home insurance claims. This article summarises two of those pages, “Settling home insurance claims” (guidance for businesses) and “Home and buildings insurance” (for consumers). The Ombudsman says it follows the Financial Conduct Authority’s Dispute Resolution Rules and looks at the policy, relevant law, regulator guidance and good industry practice. It is describing how it approaches complaints, not creating rules for every claim, and the policy wording always matters. This is general information, not insurance or legal advice.

The starting point: indemnity

The Ombudsman says buildings and contents policies are generally policies of indemnity: they aim to put the policyholder back in the position they were in just before the loss or damage. Where a claim is accepted, the insurer decides how to settle it: by repairing, replacing, or paying cash for the cost of repair or replacement. The guidance says that policy terms usually let the insurer choose, but it expects the insurer to consider the specific circumstances of each customer and what is reasonable for them. It also says a reasonable settlement puts the customer into a broadly similar position to before, not necessarily an identical one.

Contents or buildings?

The consumer page explains that contents insurance covers possessions such as a TV, jewellery, furniture or clothes, in other words, items taken along when moving house, while buildings insurance covers the structure and permanent fixtures such as baths or fitted kitchens. It says buildings policies usually include outbuildings such as garages and sheds, but that the policy should be checked. The Ombudsman treats fitted carpets as contents because they are transportable, regards items such as fitted wardrobes, fitted kitchens and built-in appliances as buildings, and says free-standing furniture and appliances are contents. The guidance for insurers notes that replacement usually applies to contents claims because buildings are repaired, though sometimes part of a building is replaced, for example a front door that has been smashed in.

Replacement: exact match, reasonable match, new for old

• Exact match. The Ombudsman expects an insurer that settles by replacement to provide an item that is the same as the lost one, ideally an exact match. If that is impossible, for example because the item is no longer made, it says a compromise is needed.
• Reasonable match. Where an exact match cannot be found, it thinks the fairest solution is the closest equivalent that is broadly as good or better. It does not expect insurers to exhaust every option, and does not expect customers to accept something inferior. What is reasonable depends on what matters to the customer and what is available to the insurer.
• New for old. The guidance says most policies replace damaged items “new for old”, so a customer claiming for a ten-year-old item would be entitled to a new one.

Sets that no longer match

Where a stolen or damaged item is part of a matching set, the Ombudsman says most policies limit the insurer to the damaged item only. If a customer suffers a “loss of match”, it says it has often found fair compensation to be 50% of the cost of replacing the undamaged parts, though this depends on the circumstances, such as how much of the set is affected and how prominent the mismatch would be. It usually thinks compensation should be paid in cash.

Cash settlements

An insurer can settle with cash whether or not an item can be repaired or replaced, and the Ombudsman says the amount should reflect the cost to the customer of getting a repair done or replacing the item, and be enough to put them back in their earlier position. If a customer insists on cash when the insurer had offered a fair repair or replacement, the insurer may pay only what it would have cost the insurer to do that, which may be less than the customer would pay. The Ombudsman says that is fair only if the original offer was itself fair.

On VAT, it says it usually thinks it fair for an insurer not to include VAT in a cash settlement, on the basis that the customer may spend the money differently, but that insurers would usually be expected to pay VAT added to insured work once the customer has shown they paid it. Where the customer has a clear plan, such as a detailed estimate from a contractor that certainly charges VAT, it is likely to say VAT should be included.

Vouchers

The Ombudsman says an insurer may offer a voucher instead of cash, usable only with certain companies. The voucher must be for enough to buy a reasonably matched replacement, and the companies must be able to provide one. If not, it is not a fair settlement. It notes that vouchers are often used in jewellery claims, that insurers use them because they get a discount from the supplier, and that a customer who wants cash may receive only the insurer’s cost of the voucher, which can be much less than its face value.

Common questions

Where does security equipment fit?

Whether an item is contents or buildings follows the fixed-versus-removable test above. The site’s guide to telling your insurer about locks and alarms covers what to disclose at the start of a policy.

The bottom line

The Financial Ombudsman Service treats home insurance as indemnity: a fair settlement puts a burgled household back in a broadly similar position, through repair, replacement, cash or a voucher that buys a reasonable match. Its guidance on exact matches, matching sets, VAT and vouchers explains the points that most often cause disputes. The wording of the individual policy still sets the limits, so it is sensible to read the settlement terms before accepting an offer.

Sources

• Financial Ombudsman Service, “Settling home insurance claims”
• Financial Ombudsman Service, “Home and buildings insurance”

A dense, thorny boundary can make a garden harder to enter without a single camera, and the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) publishes practical advice on using planting for security. A tall hedge can also become a dispute with a neighbour, and in England the council has powers over evergreen hedges above two metres. This article summarises the RHS page “Garden Security Tips to Prevent Theft” and the government guide “High hedges: complaining to the council”, and it treats them together because a security hedge that grows too tall can become a complaint. Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, which the guide explains, is shown on legislation.gov.uk as extending to England and Wales, and this article does not cover Scotland or Northern Ireland. It is general information, not legal advice.

What the RHS suggests for boundaries

The RHS says the first line of defence against garden theft is secure boundaries, particularly at the rear, where people are often less watchful. It says any measures must be reasonable in law and warns against barbed wire or other materials that could seriously injure an intruder, because an injured intruder may take legal action against the homeowner. The site’s guide to booby traps and DIY deterrents covers that legal point in more detail.

On fences, the RHS says they should be of solid construction and that planning permission may be needed for fences over 2 metres, so the local planning office should be asked. It suggests fixing 30 to 45 centimetres of trellis to the top of a 1.8-metre fence, because trellis will not support a person’s weight and the noise of it breaking is a deterrent. It also suggests growing thorny climbers such as roses up fences. In front gardens the RHS prefers low walls and fences of no more than 1 metre, which do not screen intruders from view, and it advises pruning overhanging branches and foliage from around windows and doors to keep the view clear. The site’s piece on front fences, walls and gates explains the height limits.

Thorny hedges

The RHS says hedges can make a very good barrier, that most conifers form a thick hedge that is difficult to get through and that thorny shrubs are the most effective. It lists these thorny plants as making a medium to large hedge of 80 centimetres to 1.8 metres:

• barberry (Berberis × stenophylla);
• hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna);
• holly (Ilex aquifolium);
• firethorn (Pyracantha);
• Scotch briar (Rosa spinosissima); and
• blackthorn (Prunus spinosa).

It adds that low-growing thorny shrubs can be planted at the base of fences and under windows and drainpipes. It also says gravel drives and paths make it impossible for an intruder to approach a property quietly, that gates should be kept shut and locked, especially those to the rear, and that two locks, top and bottom, with securely fixed hinges, are a good policy.

When a security hedge becomes a neighbour problem

The government guide says Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 lets councils deal with complaints about high hedges. Councils must decide whether the hedge’s height is having an adverse effect on a neighbour’s enjoyment of their home or garden, and if so can order the owner to take action. A hedge qualifies as a “high hedge” only if it meets these tests:

• it grows on land owned or occupied by someone else;
• it is made up of a line of two or more trees or shrubs;
• it is mostly evergreen or semi-evergreen;
• it is more than 2 metres tall, measured from ground level; and
• it is a barrier to light or access, even if there are gaps.

The guide says a semi-evergreen plant is one that keeps some live or green leaves all year round, and that it does not include privet hedges that lose all their leaves in winter or beech or hornbeam hedges that keep dead leaves in winter. It says single trees or shrubs cannot be the subject of a complaint, that councils cannot deal with root problems such as subsidence, and that a council can reject a complaint if the complainant has not taken all reasonable steps to settle the dispute first. Councils can set and charge fees for handling complaints. Anyone growing a thorny evergreen boundary should therefore keep it below 2 metres if it borders a neighbour’s home, or agree the height with the neighbour first.

Insurance and the value of garden contents

The RHS says the value of equipment, structures and plants in gardens often amounts to thousands of pounds, and that most household policies offer limited cover for garden-related items, so owners should check theft cover for gardens and outbuildings. It notes that items stolen from a building are more likely to be covered than those stolen from the garden, that buildings policies cover most structures such as sheds and greenhouses but are unlikely to cover decking, pergolas or raised beds, and that there is often no cover for plants, containers and statues.

Marking, anchoring and lighting

For valuables the RHS suggests proprietary land anchors, movement detectors under items such as statuary, electronic tagging and marking property with the postcode, ideally by engraving. It advises installing outside security lighting that comes on automatically, positioned so it is not a nuisance to neighbours or a distraction for road users, and CCTV set up so that it captures only the owner’s own house and garden, because footage of a neighbour’s garden or a public area brings data protection duties.

Common questions

Is a hedge over 2 metres illegal?

No. The guide says a council can act only on a complaint about a qualifying evergreen or semi-evergreen hedge causing an adverse effect. Tall hedges are not banned in themselves.

The bottom line

The RHS treats thorny planting, sound fences, gravel, locked gates and lighting as layers of garden security, with insurance cover checked separately. In England and Wales a hedge that is evergreen or semi-evergreen and higher than 2 metres can be the subject of a council complaint, so height should be managed. Any deterrent should stay reasonable in law.

Sources

• Royal Horticultural Society, “Garden Security Tips to Prevent Theft”
• legislation.gov.uk, Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, section 66 (high hedges)
• Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities, GOV.UK, “High hedges: complaining to the council”

Home security usually means locks, alarms and cameras, but one of the most damaging attacks on a home involves no forced entry at all: a fraudster pretends to be the owner and sells or mortgages the property on paper. HM Land Registry, which registers property in England and Wales, publishes free advice on this risk and runs a free alert service. This article summarises two GOV.UK pages, “Protect your land and property from fraud” and “Property Alert” (updated 10 October 2025), and it covers England and Wales only. Scotland and Northern Ireland use different property registers. It is general information, not legal advice.

What property fraud is

HM Land Registry describes property fraud as fraudsters trying to “steal” a property, most commonly by pretending to be the owner and selling or mortgaging it without the owner’s knowledge. It says that from April 2023 to March 2024 it stopped 97 registered title fraud attempts on properties valued at a total of £58 million. That is the regulator’s own figure for attempts it stopped, not a count of all attempts.

Who is more at risk

The GOV.UK guide lists the situations in which a property is more at risk of fraud:

• the owner’s identity has been stolen;
• the property is rented out;
• the owner lives overseas;
• the property is empty;
• the property is not mortgaged; or
• the property is not registered with HM Land Registry.

It says a property will be registered if it was bought or mortgaged since 1998, and that the register can be checked if the owner is unsure. Owners must also tell HM Land Registry if register information is incorrect, for example after a change of contact address. The site’s guides to empty second homes and landlord security cover the physical side of two of these situations.

Option one: Property Alert

The service is free. GOV.UK says an owner can sign up to receive alerts if someone applies to change the register of their property, for example by trying to use it for a mortgage, and can monitor up to 10 properties. It also says a person can monitor the property of a relative and does not have to own a property to set up an alert. To sign up, a person creates an account, activates it through a verification email and adds properties using the address or title number.

The alerts are sent by email. Each tells the recipient the type of activity, such as an application to change the register or notice that an application may be due, who the applicant is and the date and time it was received. The page says an alert is sent each time there is significant activity, such as a new mortgage taken out against the property, and that not every alert means fraud. Anyone without an email address can telephone the Property Alert team.

The guide is explicit about the limit: signing up will not automatically block changes to the register or stop fraud. The owner has to decide whether the activity looks suspicious and act quickly, and the alert email says whom to contact. HM Land Registry gives an example of a landlord living overseas who received an alert about an application to register a mortgage of more than £300,000 that he did not expect. He contacted the property fraud line, and HM Land Registry investigated and prevented the application from being registered. Because his contact details were out of date, it advised him to update them.

Option two: a restriction on the title

A restriction is a stronger step. GOV.UK says an owner who thinks they are at risk can put a restriction on the title that stops HM Land Registry registering a sale or mortgage unless a conveyancer or solicitor certifies that the application was made by the owner. The conveyancer or solicitor may charge for providing that certificate when one is required.

• Company owners: fill in a request for a restriction and send it to the address on the form; GOV.UK says there is no fee.
• Private owners who do not live at the property: fill in a request for a restriction for owners not living at the property; no fee.
• Owners who live at the property: fill in an application for a restriction, which GOV.UK says costs £40.

Completed forms go to the HM Land Registry Citizen Centre, and HM Land Registry says it will tell the owner when the restriction is added.

If fraud is suspected

GOV.UK tells suspected victims to contact the HM Land Registry property fraud team, and to consider advice from Citizens Advice or an independent legal adviser. The property fraud team can be reached by email or by telephone on weekdays, excluding bank holidays, in office hours.

A short household checklist

• Check whether the property is registered, which the guide says it will be if it was bought or mortgaged since 1998.
• Keep the register’s contact address and email current.
• Sign up to Property Alert if the property is rented out, empty or owned from overseas.
• Consider a restriction if there is a specific reason to think the property is at risk.

Common questions

Does Property Alert cost anything?

No. GOV.UK describes it as a free service, and a restriction is also free for company owners and private owners who do not live at the property.

Will an alert stop a fraudulent sale?

No. GOV.UK says an alert will not automatically block changes to the register; the owner has to act on it.

The bottom line

Property fraud is a form of home security risk that locks cannot address. HM Land Registry advises owners in England and Wales to make sure their property is registered, keep contact details current, use the free Property Alert service and consider a restriction on the title where the risk is higher. Alerts inform an owner but do not block changes, so acting quickly on a suspicious one is the key step.

Sources

• GOV.UK, “Protect your land and property from fraud”
• HM Land Registry, GOV.UK, “Property Alert”

Many home insurance policies attach security conditions to cover: keep the alarm set when the house is empty, use approved locks, fit window locks, or keep valuables in a safe. A householder who breaks one of these terms can worry that any later claim will be refused, even when the security lapse had nothing to do with the loss. Part 3 of the Insurance Act 2015 limits what insurers can do in that situation. The relevant sections carry a UK extent marking on legislation.gov.uk. This article explains sections 10, 11 and 15 and the Explanatory Notes that accompany them. It is general information, not legal or insurance advice, and the wording of an individual policy always matters.

Warranties: suspension, not the end of cover

A warranty is a term that has to be complied with exactly, whether or not it is material to the risk. Before the 2015 Act, breaching a warranty discharged the insurer from liability entirely from the moment of breach. Section 10 abolishes that rule. Instead, under section 10(2), the insurer has no liability for a loss occurring, or attributable to something happening, after a warranty has been breached but before the breach has been remedied.

Three practical points follow from the wording of section 10:

• Cover can resume. Under section 10(4), the insurer remains liable for losses before the breach, and for losses occurring after the breach has been remedied where it can be remedied.
• What counts as remedied. In most cases, a breach is remedied when the insured ceases to be in breach, for example by repairing a broken lock or switching a lapsed alarm back on. Where a warranty required something to be done by a set time and that deadline was missed, section 10(5) treats the breach as remedied if the risk later becomes essentially the same as originally contemplated.
• Exceptions. The suspension does not apply if the warranty stops being applicable because of a change of circumstances, if compliance becomes unlawful, or if the insurer waives the breach.

The Explanatory Notes add that the Act does not change the definition of a warranty. Whether a security term in a policy is a warranty at all is a question of policy wording and general law.

Terms that are irrelevant to the loss

Section 11 is the provision most relevant to household security conditions. It applies to a term, express or implied, other than one defining the risk as a whole, where compliance would tend to reduce the risk of loss of a particular kind, loss at a particular location or loss at a particular time. If the term has not been complied with and a loss occurs, the insurer may not rely on the non-compliance to exclude, limit or discharge its liability if the insured shows that the non-compliance could not have increased the risk of the loss that actually occurred, in the circumstances in which it occurred.

The Explanatory Notes give a household example: where a property has been damaged by flooding, an insured is expected to be able to show that failing to use the required type of window lock could not have increased the risk of that loss, so the insurer should pay the flood claim. The notes also say a direct causal link between the breach and the loss is not required; the test is whether the non-compliance could have increased the risk of the loss that actually happened, not whether it caused the loss.

Where section 11 does not help

Section 11 works only where the security term is not irrelevant to the loss. If a policy requires window locks and a burglar enters through an unlocked window, a householder would have difficulty showing that the missing lock could not have increased the risk of that burglary. The Act protects against unrelated refusals; it does not remove genuinely relevant conditions. The Explanatory Notes also say section 11 covers more than warranties and can catch conditions precedent and exclusion clauses, provided they relate to a particular type of loss or a particular place or time. Terms defining the risk as a whole fall outside it; the notes give a requirement that a property is not used commercially as an example.

Sections 10 and 11 can apply together

Section 11(4) says section 11 may apply in addition to section 10. The Explanatory Notes explain this arises only where the term is a warranty, because section 10 applies only to warranties. A householder who breached a warranty could therefore face suspension of cover under section 10 while still arguing under section 11 that the breach was irrelevant to the loss suffered.

Why consumers cannot be contracted out of these rules

Section 15 provides that a term of a consumer insurance contract, or of any other contract, that would put the consumer in a worse position on matters covered by Parts 3 or 4 of the Act than the Act itself provides is to that extent of no effect. In practical terms, wording in a home policy that promises to void cover for any security lapse, regardless of relevance, cannot override sections 10 and 11 for a consumer. Section 15 does not apply to a contract settling a claim.

What householders can do

• Read the policy schedule and wording for terms headed conditions, warranties or security requirements, and note what they require.
• Keep records showing compliance, such as lock certificates or alarm servicing invoices. Background on lock standards is in the guide to BS3621 and insurer-approved locks.
• Fix or report any lapse quickly, since section 10 treats a remedied breach as restoring cover for later losses.
• Tell the insurer about material security changes when asked; the separate disclosure rules are covered in Telling Your Insurer About Locks, Alarms and Past Burglaries.

The bottom line

The Insurance Act 2015 turns security conditions from an all-or-nothing trap into a narrower rule. Breaching a warranty suspends cover until it is fixed, terms unrelated to the loss cannot be relied on, and consumer policies cannot contract out of either protection. None of this replaces compliance: a security term that is relevant to the loss can still defeat a claim.

Sources

• legislation.gov.uk, “Insurance Act 2015, section 10: Breach of warranty”
• legislation.gov.uk, “Insurance Act 2015, section 11: Terms not relevant to the actual loss”
• legislation.gov.uk, “Insurance Act 2015, section 15: Contracting out: consumer insurance contracts”
• legislation.gov.uk, “Insurance Act 2015, Explanatory Notes: Part 3, Warranties and other terms”

A knock at the door from police is unsettling, and a forced entry is worse. In England and Wales, officers searching a home are bound by a statutory code, PACE Code B, which sets out when they may come in, what they must tell the occupier, how much force is allowed and what happens to a damaged front door afterwards. This article summarises the version of Code B in force from 20 December 2023. It applies to England and Wales only; Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own arrangements, which are not covered here. It is general information, not legal advice.

Three ways police can lawfully enter

Code B describes police powers to search premises and to seize property found there. Broadly, entry rests on one of three foundations:

• A search warrant. A justice of the peace can issue a warrant for stolen property, drugs, firearms or evidence of serious offences. The application must be specific about what is sought and where, and if an application is refused, a further application for the same premises needs additional grounds.
• Powers without a warrant. Section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 lets a constable enter and search premises for purposes including executing an arrest warrant or arresting someone for an indictable offence. After an arrest, other sections of the Act allow searches of the place of arrest or of premises the arrested person controls, subject in the latter case to written authority from an inspector or above.
• The occupier’s consent. Where possible, consent should be given in writing on a Notice of Powers and Rights before the search starts.

The Home Office notes that around 900 separate powers of entry exist across legislation, so other officials, such as trading standards officers, may hold their own powers under different rules.

Consent: what you are entitled to know

Before seeking consent, the officer must state the purpose and extent of the proposed search as specifically as possible. The person must be told they are not obliged to consent, that consent can be withdrawn at any time, including part-way through, and that anything seized may be produced in evidence. A search cannot begin or continue on the basis of consent given under duress or later withdrawn.

What officers must do at the door

Unless the premises are empty or alerting the occupier would frustrate the search or endanger people, the officer in charge must first try to speak to the occupier and explain the authority under which entry is sought. Where the premises are occupied, the officer must:

• identify themselves and show a warrant card if not in uniform;
• state the purpose of the search and the grounds for it; and
• identify and introduce anyone accompanying them, with a brief description of that person’s role.

Searches under warrant must take place within three calendar months of issue.

Force and forced entry

Reasonable and proportionate force may be used to enter if the officer in charge is satisfied the premises are those named in the warrant (or that the no-warrant powers apply) and the occupier has refused entry, communication is impossible, or the exceptions to speaking first apply. Once inside, searches must be conducted with due consideration for the property and privacy of the occupier and with no more disturbance than necessary. If premises are entered by force, the officer in charge must make sure they are secure before leaving, by arranging for the occupier or their agent to be present or by other appropriate means. For a household, that is the point where a broken door or lock becomes a security problem; a practical checklist for boarding up is in How to Secure a Broken Door or Window After a Break-In.

Paperwork you should receive

Unless impracticable, the occupier must be given a Notice of Powers and Rights. It must say whether the search is under warrant, with consent or under a power that needs no warrant; summarise the search and seizure powers; explain the rights of the occupier and of the owner of anything seized; explain that compensation may be payable in appropriate cases for damage caused when entering and searching; and state that the code is available at any police station. If the occupier is present, copies of the notice and warrant should be given before the search begins, unless the officer reasonably believes that would frustrate the search or endanger people. If nobody is home, copies are left in a prominent place, endorsed with the name of the officer in charge and the date and time.

Witnesses and seized property

A friend, neighbour or other person must be allowed to witness the search if the occupier wishes, unless the officer has reasonable grounds to believe their presence would seriously hinder the investigation or endanger people; the search need not be unreasonably delayed to wait for them. Questions asked purely to further the search, such as where a key is kept, do not require a caution. Officers may seize items covered by a warrant, and items subject to legal privilege may not be seized.

Compensation for a damaged door

Code B says compensation depends on the circumstances of each case. Compensation for damage caused when entering is unlikely to be appropriate if the search was lawful and the force shown to be reasonable, proportionate and necessary. If the wrong premises are searched by mistake, the code says everything possible should be done at the earliest opportunity to address any sense of grievance, with a strong presumption in favour of paying compensation. Photographing damage and keeping the Notice of Powers and Rights are sensible first steps, since the notice gives the address for a compensation application.

The bottom line

PACE Code B gives householders in England and Wales concrete expectations: a stated legal basis, identification, a written notice of rights, proportionate force, a secured property afterwards and a route to claim compensation in appropriate cases. It does not remove police powers, but it makes their exercise accountable. Keeping the notice and any warrant copy is the most useful record a householder can hold.

Sources

• Home Office, “PACE Code B 2023” (accessible version)
• legislation.gov.uk, “Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 17”
• Home Office, “Powers of entry”