Breathometer Corporation

Breathometer

I was recently advised of a device which could benefit business owners and Insurers with managing their risk when it comes to responsible drinking. Here is a summary outlining the potential uses of this tool.

The tool is manufactured in Australia who distribute high quality electronic breathometers to licenced venues around Australia. The units are certified to Australian standard AS3547-1997, and university studies have been undertaken into the effectiveness of these units in reducing violence etc.

They have the support of the Victorian Transport Accident Commission, who share the noble aim of reducing the many instances of alcohol related road deaths and injuries stemming from excess consumption at venues. The value of these units at venues for the licence holder and the wider community I feel is quite significant indeed.

The units have screens which can be used for customised advertising. For example, a patron blows over the limit, and an ad will appear for the local taxi company.  The units are also serviced and calibrated monthly, and will simply shut down if there is an issue.

Perhaps these breathometers could serve to improve the risk profile of your client’s premises with the flow on effect to the motor and even ‘life’ insurance industry.

In any event I consider it a priceless benefit of looking to reduce road accidents through drink driving.

Thanks Todd, a Geelong based broker for bringing it to my attention.

To learn more please visit RIB-UNIFLOW_Canon 5045 Werribee_0883_001

Read Me View comments

It will never happen to me comes very close to home !

FullSizeRender (00000002)Last Sunday I was working in the office catching up on some work, and ended up being at the wrong end of a simple accident.

An electrical appliance boiling water was plugged into a power point inside a cupboard and as I bent down to unplug the item, I moved the cupboard door which in turn pulled the appliance off the bench and on top of me, scalding the side of my face with boiling water and steam.

There are a number of lessons learned from this. The first was that soon after the kitchenette area was finished, I realised that there were not enough power points and I have seen a couple of times where people have used appliances with cables across the floor or from this cupboard which I observed created a risk. I have been looking for a way to install additional power points, but could not work it out.

The second was that when you are tired an accident is more likely to occur.

The third lesson for me was that being a new Grandfather just how important it is not to have any appliance with hot water or steam in a position where a young child could pull it down on top of themselves, such as a saucepan on a stove with the handle out, or any electrical appliance where the cord is below bench height. While the injury was a wake-up call and has prompted me to get the electrician back to work out a way to safely install additional power points to reduce the risk, I also thank my lucky stars that the cupboard door that caused the cord to pull the appliance on top of me, also protected my eye from the scalding water and steam.

Finally the incident reminded me that simple mistakes can result in catastrophic consequences and that anyone who thinks it will never happen to them is fooling themselves.

At day three while the burn looks terrible, it is all healing with no sign of infection I have been able to continue working as normal which I am sure a number of people who do not know me, simply thinking that I have an unfortunate birthmark.

 

Read Me View comments

Defence costs are not litigation costs

dreamstime-s-25435678You cannot live in Melbourne and not have a story involving the Australian Football League as a lead story each day.

Earlier this week it spilt over to the insurance industry when high profile personality, James Hird allegedly is taking action against an insurer for not meeting the costs of his litigating against the AFL and ASADA (Australian Sports Anti-doping Authority).

As I read what has been published, it appears that the Insurers position is that their policy protects against defence costs in actions taken against an Insured but not for actions commenced by an Insured. This is an important point that everyone either selling or buying cover under a liability or financial lines program needs to understand and appreciate.

I think it is now accepted that unless you are a millionaire or a pauper (the later being able to claim legal aid) Australian’s cannot the legal system. If middle Australia loses then they could lose their house. I recall reading a well researched report on the high cost of litigation a few years back. For those interested, here is a link.

This demonstrates the importance of liability insurance which comes with motor vehicle, home and contents policies, contract works, liability policies along with management liability, cyber insurance, directors and officers insurance and professional indemnity to name but a few.

It also explains the rise of litigation funders who may assist where there is a good chance of financial reward from an action started.

With “no win, no fee” matters, while the lawyer acting for you may not charge if they fail, you may well be up for the legal costs of the other side if you fail.

I fear that, if my understanding is correct, Mr Hird may be throwing good money after bad in chasing the insurer unless he can demonstrate that the legal costs were indeed defence costs as defined in the policy. To see whether they are or not we will have to wait and see and if things go as they have in the past we will read all about it in the press.

Read Me 1