BRITAIN’S national heritage is inadequately protected because of basic security lapses at museums, according to a review commissioned by an adviser to the National Trust and English Heritage.

The review of five leading institutions discovered failings including unlocked fire exits, scaleable walls, security camera blind spots and a shortage of guards.

The Victoria & Albert Museum and the Wallace Collection at Somerset House were identified as the worst offenders. Will Geddes, of the ICP Group, an international threat management company whose clients include royalty, heads of state and Hollywood stars, said: “I was shocked by what I found, how horrendously vulnerable these galleries were. Our national heritage is not being safeguarded.

“What I found at the Wallace frightened me, both from a security point of view and just common sense. In rooms with the most valuable paintings, there was no evidence of any specifically assigned guards to those areas in a static position, and little evidence of any anti-tamper devices near the paintings.

“A determined group of criminals could quite easily mount an aggressive attack against the gallery, easily overpowering and bypassing the few guards, defeating what security was evident, and disappearing with a very valuable haul.”

The Wallace’s walls would not be difficult to climb, he said, with drainpipes at street level, and closed circuit television cameras outside with blind-spots.

Windows had a “distinct lack of any alarm sensors and, despite an impressive grille on the lower half of the window, the top half is extremely vulnerable”. Inside, he said he was surprised to find security more evident in the souvenir shop than in the remaining parts of the galleries.

At the V&A, he found an unlocked door to the roof and potential escape routes, as well as an open electrical box with access to controls.

His risk assessment of five London museums — including the British Museum, the National Gallery and the National Portrait Gallery (NPG) — comes weeks after the V&A and the British Museum both suffered daylight robberies of Chinese antiquities.

The V&A’s ceramics galleries, a sprawling series of spaces across the top floor where the theft took place, was still being patrolled by only one guard: “He was working from one end of the floor to the other, leaving entire rooms vulnerable for minutes at a time,” he said.

An obvious shortage of wardens was also a problem at the Wallace, he said, with an insufficient average of just one guard for three rooms. One guard was even induced to reveal valuable security information.

The survey was commissioned by Susan Ronald, an adviser to the National Trust and English Heritage, and author of The Sancy Blood Diamond. The book, published this week, unravels a real theft from the Louvre. She described Mr Geddes’s findings as more alarming than she had imagined.

Mr Geddes emphasised that security audits normally take weeks and that his study of museums was informal, putting himself in the shoes of a potential criminal “casing” the place. “The more at risk a place appears, the more likely it is to be robbed,” he said.

He noted a marked contrast between the NPG and the adjacent National Gallery, with security cameras “stopping where the National Gallery ended and the NPG began”.

The Wallace and the V&A fared badly against the National Gallery, where there were “good anti-climb precautions in place” and good guard coverage. The British Museum was also considered relatively secure. Peter Osborne, former museums security adviser for Britain’s national collections, estimates that 500 objects are stolen each year from public collections, but said that museums had been reluctant to spend money on security .

The V&A said that new security measures were being implemented. The Wallace said that it had a recruitment drive for more security staff.

ON GUARD

WORST SECURITY

• Wallace Collection
• Victoria & Albert Museum
• National Portrait Gallery

  BEST SECURITY

• National Gallery
• British Museum