Night Shift at the Distribution Warehouse: The Unlogged Van
You are a licensed guard working a solo 22:00-06:00 shift at a logistics depot in Ghent. Access control policy: all freight vehicles enter through gate 2, drivers present a printed manifest, and the guard logs plate, manifest number, time in and time out in the paper register. At 02:40 a white van with no company markings arrives at gate 2. The driver, polite and hurried, says he is a subcontractor for a regular client, has no manifest, and asks to be let in 'for ten minutes, just to pick up two pallets, the dispatcher already knows'. The register shows no expected deliveries between 00:00 and 05:00. Your radio battery reads low and the supervisor does not answer the phone. The van's plate is partly obscured by mud. A second person sits in the passenger seat.
1. Analyse the situation and decide what you do in the next ten minutes, justifying each step by reference to access-control principles and the limits of your authority.
Read the worked answer
What is actually established. Four facts are verifiable: no manifest, no entry in the expected-deliveries register, an obscured plate, and an unresponsive supervisor. The driver's claim that 'the dispatcher knows' is unverified assertion, not evidence. A guard's authority is to apply the site's access policy, not to grant discretionary exceptions to it; the policy exists precisely to remove this kind of improvised judgement under pressure.
Correct sequence.
- Keep the vehicle outside the perimeter. Do not open the barrier. This is the decisive step: once the van is inside, control is lost.
- Politely state the rule, not a personal suspicion: 'No manifest and no scheduled delivery means I cannot authorise entry; that is the procedure, not my opinion.'
- Record what you can see now: time, plate as legible, vehicle description, number of occupants, stated destination. Observation and reporting are core duties and the log is contemporaneous evidence.
- Attempt escalation by an alternative channel (landline at the gatehouse, second radio, duty mobile) rather than continuing with a dead radio.
- If the driver becomes insistent or the passenger steps out, withdraw behind the barrier, keep distance, and treat it as a security incident rather than a customer-service problem.
What you must not do. You may not search the van, demand identity documents beyond what the policy requires, detain anyone, or physically block a vehicle with your body. Those exceed a guard's legal position and create liability. If entry is refused, the matter ends with a report; if the driver forces entry, that becomes a police matter and you observe and report rather than intervene physically.
2. The driver now says the client's own dispatcher will confirm everything by phone, and offers you his mobile to speak to someone. Should you take the call as authorisation? Explain.
Read the worked answer
No. A voice on an unknown phone is unverifiable. You cannot confirm the speaker's identity, role, or authority, and the caller controls the entire context. Accepting it would convert an anonymous claim into a recorded 'authorisation', which is worse than no authorisation because it contaminates the register.
The defensible alternative. Authorisation must come through a channel the site controls: the client's listed contact number, called by you, reaching a named person on the approved contact list, or the guard's own supervisor. Say so plainly: 'I can only accept confirmation through our own contact list; give me the name and I will call them back on the number we hold.' If no such route exists tonight, the answer is refusal with a written report, not a workaround.
Reporting. Note the offer itself. A driver who proposes an irregular verification route is a relevant fact for the client, and the report should state it neutrally: time, offer made, your response. Avoid concluding 'attempted fraud' - record behaviour, not motive.
3. At 03:10 the same van returns and parks across the gate 2 entrance, blocking access. One occupant walks toward the gatehouse. Set out your response, including what you record and what you deliberately avoid.
Read the worked answer
Reframe the incident. Blocking an entrance is no longer an access-control dispute; it is a security incident and potentially a public-order matter. Your role shifts from gatekeeper to observer-reporter and safety manager.
Immediate actions.
- Do not go out to argue. Remain inside the gatehouse with the door secured; a guard alone at night has no duty to win a confrontation and no legal basis to forcibly move a vehicle or person.
- Call the police, stating location, vehicle, number of persons, and that access is blocked. Then call the client's duty manager by the alternative channel.
- Keep distance and sightlines; if the person approaches the door, speak through it or from behind a locked barrier, calm and brief.
- Check the site's own safety: is the fire lane or emergency exit now obstructed? If so, that is a priority fact to report.
What to record. Exact times of arrival, parking position, description of persons and clothing, what was said verbatim where possible, whether the barrier or gate was touched, police reference number, and the names of anyone you notified. Note the low radio battery and the unanswered supervisor call - these are procedural failures the client needs to fix, and recording them protects you.
What to avoid. Physical confrontation, blocking a person with your body, verbal escalation, speculation about intent, or leaving the post to follow them. Write facts and times; let the client and police draw conclusions.