Martyn’s Law Is Coming. Most UK Venues Have Not Walked Their Own Sites Yet

The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act, better known as Martyn’s Law, received Royal Assent in April 2025 with an implementation period of at least two years. For thousands of UK venues, offices, retail sites and public buildings, the countdown is now measured in months. Premises expecting 200 or more people at a time will need documented procedures, and larger venues and events of 800 or more face stricter duties, including measures to monitor and reduce risk.

Yet a surprising number of organisations still could not say with confidence where their own weak points are. Before buying new cameras, barriers or access systems, the most useful first step is often the simplest: an independent physical security survey that looks at the site as an intruder would, and ranks the gaps by how much they actually matter.

Why Boards Underestimate Physical Risk

Cyber risk has a seat at most board tables now. Physical security often does not. It tends to sit with facilities teams, spread across contracts for guarding, CCTV, locks and alarms, each managed separately and each assumed to be doing its job.

The trouble is that those pieces rarely get tested together. A camera covers a gate that is propped open at lunchtime. A card reader protects a door that has a fire exit next to it with a broken alarm. Visitor sign-in exists, but nobody checks who is actually walking through reception. On paper, the site looks protected. In practice, it has gaps that anyone paying attention could find.

What a Proper Survey Looks At

A good physical security survey starts with a conversation, not a checklist. What is the organisation protecting? People, stock, data, reputation? Which threats are realistic, from opportunistic theft through to a planned attack?

From there, the work moves on site. Assessors walk the perimeter and look at fences, gates, doors, windows and lighting. They check how people and vehicles get in, and whether access control is enforced or just installed. They watch daily routines: how keys are managed, how visitors are handled, and what staff do when a stranger walks in confidently with a clipboard.

The most valuable output is prioritisation. Not every gap carries the same weight. A ranked report tells leadership which issues put key assets or people at risk, which can wait, and where money will make the most difference.

Independence Matters More Than It Sounds

Many security assessments are carried out by the same companies that sell the equipment. That does not make them wrong, but it can shape the recommendations. A survey from a firm with no hardware to sell is more likely to suggest fixing a procedure, retraining staff or repositioning an existing camera before recommending a new system.

For finance directors, that independence is often where the savings are. Many of the most serious weaknesses on a site cost little to fix once they are identified.

Getting Ahead of Compliance

Martyn’s Law will bring regulatory oversight and the possibility of penalties for organisations that do not meet their duties. Waiting for the final guidance before acting risks a rush, with organisations competing for the same consultants and suppliers in the months before the deadline.

Organisations that survey their sites now get a clear baseline. They can see what they already do well, fix the obvious gaps on their own timetable, and plan any larger investment properly rather than under pressure. For premises that fall outside the Act, the same exercise still reduces theft, protects staff and can support insurance conversations.

Security as a Leadership Question

The organisations that handle physical security best treat it the way they treat financial controls: reviewed regularly, owned at senior level and tested against reality. That starts with knowing what the site actually looks like to someone who wants to get in. For many UK businesses, finding out before the law requires it may be the most cost-effective security decision they make this year.