Unreasonable FAC conditions and their lack of appeal

Labrat

Well-Known Member
This may be a daft question... However it came up down the pub today, and I thought it might be worth opening for discussion!

OK, so, we know that a decision to impose a condition cannot be challenged, however unreasonable it may appear on the face of things, and we also know that the organisations that represent us have so far been unable to make serious inroads on getting fair and equal imposition of conditions across the board - but has anyone tried going the alternative route of challenging a decision by the police, and complaining to the IPCC?

So, reading their website:

People who work in the police service should behave appropriately at all times. Expectations about the behaviour of both police officers and members of police staff are set out in their respective Standards of Professional Behaviour. These expectations include requirements to:

Act with honesty and integrity, fairness and impartiality
Treat members of the public and their colleagues with respect
Not abuse their powers and authority
Act in a manner that does not discredit or undermine public confidence in the police service
If you feel that someone working for the police has not met these standards, you can make a complaint.

Complaints about the overall policies and procedures of a police force (often referred to as ‘direction and control’ issues ) rather than the behaviour or conduct of a police officer or member of police staff do not fall within the remit of the IPCC. These should be directed to the police force concerned.


Now, I note the last paragraph, but since each application should be dealt with on its individual merits, the obvious defence by the police that "protocol" made them impose a particular condition fails, as such a protocol or standard condition would be ultra vires.

anyone with experience of the police have an opinion on the approach?
 
Not yet but my FEO has made it clear that he has nothing more to say...

[quote:]

Mr ##########,

If you have any reply to the above or wish to question further any Policy of the Greater Manchester Police Firearms Licensing Unit you must reply in the first instance to
the Firearms Licensing Manager at the above address.


So, watch this space ;)
 
This may be a daft question...

Far from it IMO! :D

There may not be a legal mechanism to allow an 'appeal' against a condition but there is always the Judicial Review route if it ultimately comes to it - and it isn't as expensive or daunting as it may sound. If you use the forum search facility under that phrase it will throw up several threads where the subject has been discussed.

The link that Dalua posted contains some info on it:

"Where conditions are opposed by an applicant on the grounds that they are too onerous for
example, the usual recourse is to have them judicially reviewed, where the issue of whether
or not they are [‘Wednesbury’] unreasonable will be considered.

They must be lawful; unambiguous; Reasonable; Proportionate; Non-contradictory;
demonstrably beneficial to the public safety; properly notified and evidenced.

The reasons for the conditions should be provided though again this is not mandatory".

The BASC website has a more detailed guidance .pdf via the link from here: http://www.basc.org.uk/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm/docid/04DDFD91-A9AA-45E4-9344064E62F3689D

It might be worthwhile considering that before getting to the stages mentioned above, there is scope for much to be achieved by progressing any opposition to a condition by the individual FAC holder 'up the chain of command' before trying to go legal. If the admin bods and the department manager at FLD level prove to be unreceptive, then a letter to the force Professional Standards Department copied to the Chief Constable might produce a result rather than trying the IPCC route.

Have a look at this thread and from message #32 onwards for how that can work:

http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk/showthread.php?14261-Question-for-Home-Loaders/page4
 
Last edited:
Back
Top