Home NewsVacant property security warning

Vacant property security warning

by Andy Clutton

Security incidents and property-related problems at vacant commercial buildings have cost landlords almost £50,000 on average over the past year according to a survey of 350 UK commercial property owners commissioned by SafeSite Facilities and carried out by Censuswide.

The survey findings highlight the growing financial burden associated with vacant commercial property, with landlords facing a combination of crime, damage, deterioration and rising insurance costs.

A total of 45% of landlords said that incidents and issues associated with vacant properties, including building deterioration, theft, trespassing, pest infestations and water damage, cost them between £25,001 and £50,000 in the past year, while 27% said it had cost them between £50,001 and £100,000.

Paul Goossens, operations director at SafeSite Facilities said: “Many landlords understandably focus on the immediate risks of vacant properties such as theft, trespassing or vandalism. However, the real cost is often much higher once building deterioration, water ingress, pest problems, insurance implications and ongoing maintenance are taken into account.

“An empty building can quickly become a significant financial liability if it is not properly protected. The longer a property remains vacant, the greater the potential for costs to escalate.

“Property owners should take a proactive approach to managing vacant assets through regular inspections, robust security measures and preventative maintenance. Investing in protection early is often far less expensive than dealing with the consequences of an incident after it has occurred.”

The average annual cost reported by landlords was £49,268.

Almost all landlords (94%) had experienced increased insurance premiums, tighter insurance conditions, or both because of vacant property risks. It found that almost six in ten landlords (59%) had seen insurance premiums increase because of vacant property risks, while 47% said insurers had tightened conditions on their cover.

Related Articles

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More