Thx Sergey,

In this particular instance I can prevent anyone else messing with the database but I've changed it anyway and will use your suggestion in the future,
Regards,
Viv

>The '@@ROWCOUNT > 0' is not reliable way to check for # of inserted record. What if somebody adds one more INSERT trigger that would fire before yours? The following is better
>

>IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM Inserted )
>

>
>>I added a check for @@ROWCOUNT > 0 in the trigger which cured the problem. So would, for instance. a DELETE trigger fire even if there were no actual deletions ?