More Extra-Legal Fiddling of the Treasure Act?

An interesting comment from Neil MacGregor in the 2012 Annual Report of the PAS:

The Treasure Act 1996 would be unworkable without the support offered by the PAS and its network of Finds Liaison Officers (FLOs). The FLOs are the primary point for reporting Treasure finds, but also offer guidance on the Act, write reports on Treasure finds and also help courier them to and from the national museum, for valuation etc. This is in addition to their primary role of recording non-Treasure items found by the public, raising awareness of the PAS and the importance of recording archaeological finds.

What insurance cover do these objects have when in transit in the FLO's car? In how many cases last year were specialist security firms commissioned by the PAS to do this work and how were the costs met if the involvement of the FLO in the process is not defined in the Treasure Act? What guidelines are issued to FLOs undertaking this task?

If the Treasure Act is "unworkable" without adopting extra-legal measures, then is not the logical solution to get it changed so it can work within the frames established by law?