Need help with 8 big safes

[stevenkuk]

Hi everyone,

We've just acquired a commercial building and in it we have 8 big safes. There are several makes of safes and the chubbs safe have serial numbers on them, but the problem is I cant find any information as the prefixes dont match with the ones on the internet.

Im looking to get some information as to the cash rating of them, weight etc so that we can plan to either get them removed or to sell them on (preferably if they worth anything).

I have attached some photos on so if anyone knows anything about them i would greatly appreciate it.

Chatwood Milner type 6220
Chubbs (no serial number)
Chubbs Serial D4908
Remington Rand (no serial number)
Stratford sterling (not sure if this is serial number SE 73012)
2 x chubbs serial number H870 and H879
Ratner

I have more photos if required and I have 6 keys out of the 8 and all are open. Any advice info would be appreciated :)

[Huw Eastwood]

Hello stevenkuk, I'm unable to add much from memory and as you've researched them you will already know that with the exception of the Chubb (pic #2), the Stratford Sterling and the Ratner, which are decent burglary resistive cash safes, all the others are large fire resistant safes intended for fire protection of paper documents. They were often called 'record protection cabinets' back in the day, the term 'cabinet' being the hint as to their focus of importance of fire protection over security.

You will probably find you'll get more interest in the cash safes than the others, but often any value takes a big hit against the cost/work involved in moving them, unless of course your business specialises in heavy lifting/moving equipment!

The Chubb in pic 2 with the distinctive hinges, from memory they made a few varying models of that appearance, from a lower range Commerce to a pretty heavy build anti-blowpipe (ABP). The latter had similar hinges but were even thicker IIRC, but without numbers and unable to see door/body thickness difficult to tell.

Stratford made several versions of the Sterling, four in total IIRC, if the serial number you've posted is correct its probably a later Mk4 version. Might have a Sterling brochure, plus similar Chubb for idea of weights, and possibly the Chatwood Milner, but unfortunately be a while before I can look for them.

[stevenkuk]

Thank you Hew! that was very helpful and I appreciate the info on the fire resistant cabinets.

The building is is being completely renovated with escalators being removed so even though we don't specialise in heavy lifting and machinery, we may be able to get them moved at the same time by the workmen! (Its on the second floor as well! )

For the chubb, I do have a photo of the doors





and also the number thats on the stratford. (as you can see it looks like someone just stuck it on hence why im not sure if its the serial number)



If you do come across the stratford brochure that would be very helpful as it would make a big difference to find out if these cabinets and safes weigh closer to 4000kg or 1000kg.

[Huw Eastwood]

Just checked my own notes/drawings and your Chubb (pictured with door open) looks same as the 'Standard ABP', but the one I saw had a chrome backplate under the handle and keyhole escutcheon. Door was 1.75 inch outer protective slab, and the boltcase housing the mechanism and back pan another 4.75 inches, so door was 6.5 inches thick overall.

Some Stratfords can be a pain to ID and date, as mentioned here:
https://www.antique-locks.com/showth...light=Sterling

[Chubby]

I have a Sterling brochure somewhere.

Details from the brochure:



The big size- which is 700mm wide is effectively a ton.Nice safe. The door is the strongest part. I wouldn't necessarily believe that a dymo label on the outside is the serial number of the safe. Of course it could be.

[Brian Morland]

Chubby, do please forward me the brochure and I will be pleased to insert it.

[Gary Stephenson]

"The Cash Ratings will be approximately £4000 for the Sterling, £8000 for the Executive and £10000 for the Trustee but my personal belief is that these Ratner figures are unrealistically high."

interesting, If it was my money going in it between the Ratner and something modern with 10k cover like a Chubb Duoguard, I would pick the Ratner every time.

[Chubby]

Amen to that.

[Huw Eastwood]

Safeman's surprised me with those figures, I'd have thought the Sterling would be ok for £7-8k, perhaps even £10k at a push, and more like £15k on the Ratner. Realise ratings are always subjective and it varies between insurers, but they seem a bit low.

If I had 15 grand in cash laying around I'd happily keep it in either of those two before any modern euro grade 1 or 2 box!

[safeman]

Safeman's surprised me with those figures, I'd have thought the Sterling would be ok for £7-8k, perhaps even £10k at a push, and more like £15k on the Ratner. Realise ratings are always subjective and it varies between insurers, but they seem a bit low.

If I had 15 grand in cash laying around I'd happily keep it in either of those two before any modern euro grade 1 or 2 box!

Hello Huw,

As regards the Ratner, I think I was mistaken in thinking it was one of the post 1970 Ratners made by Tann whereas from the handle it appears more like a T4 which had a rating at the time of only £6000 for reasons which I cannot go into on this site.

Why was a Sterling IV safe made in 1974 given cash rating of £2000 yet today seems to be good for £10,000?

The main problem with safe ratings is that decisions by insurers were usually based on in-house makers tests (demonstrations). You say that you believe the ratings to be too low but the reason the British safe industry has been descimated is that the unsubstantiated commercially driven high ratings caused long established companies like Tann to go out of business after almost 200 years.

When the LPC came to establish the British safe testing authority in 1990 at Borehamwood I was invited to work with the test team in setting up the training techniques which reinforced my belief that despite the misgivings, made me realise that this was the most reliable means of grading a safe as it included all the equipment and methods that could be brought to bear in reality (apart from the fatigue factor).

There are ongoing discussions regarding the standards of some European test houses.