First application

tjwaines

Well-Known Member
A mate of mine is applying for his first FAC and is having some hassle from the usually compliant Humberside. He's an armourer at Hereford army base, arming the special forces and squaddies day in day out. He handles and fires a whole manner of service weapons, but as usual this counts for nothing when applying for a civilian FAC. He has permission to shoot our farm but the land won't ever get 'deemed suitable by chief officer of police' and they're wanting to push this condition onto his certificate. Is there any way around this?

Also, he has access to land down in Hereford but wants to keep his rifles up here, in Yorkshire. Is there any reason why he can't use that land for his application and not use the land up here?

Any input is gladly received.

Tom
 
He has permission to shoot our farm but the land won't ever get 'deemed suitable by chief officer of police' and they're wanting to push this condition onto his certificate

What condition are they trying to put on his certificate?
 
'Such and such rifle can be used over land which is deemed suitable by chief officer of police' something along those lines. Our land has a fair few public footpaths and the odd caravan site here and there so it's a none starter for him if they want to survey the land.
 
'Such and such rifle can be used over land which is deemed suitable by chief officer of police'

I'm afraid that is a standard condition on a first (Closed Novice) Fac.
 
Where the land is is immaterial. As long as it's cleared by the chief officer then it can be used as "good reason".

I'd say he could definitely push to have the restrictive land condition left off. If he is up for a bit of a fight, he can refuse to accept the condition. If they then refuse to issue, he has a pretty strong case to appeal, and a letter to the chief officer for Humberside stands a good chance of succeeding. He should remind them that the CC's conditions should only be applied in "exceptional circumstances" and not "as standard", and that they have to be "wednesbury reasonable", lawful; unambiguous; Proportionate; Non-contradictory; demonstrably beneficial to the public safety; properly notified and evidenced.

I'd say that they would fall down on a couple of those points at least.

A letter to the chief constable might well find a receptive audience!
 
Crown, the law says that there can be no such thing as a "standard condition", each case must be assessed on it's own merits.

Somebody who is deemed safe to handle all the weapons a military armourer will come across must surely be considered capable of deciding if land is safe to use a given weapon on surely?
 
This is out of the Home Office Guidance

Where the firearm is authorised for morethan one purpose, care must be taken toomit the word ‘only’ in the conditions.An asterisk conditions specific firearms on acertificate but may be replaced by the phrase,“The firearms and ammunition…..” where asingle condition applies to all firearms (andammunition) on the certificate.​
1. Quarry Shooting (for vermin, foxor deer)​
• The *calibre RIFLE/COMBINATION/SMOOTH-BORE GUN/SOUNDMODERATOR and ammunition shall beused for shooting vermin and groundgame/fox/deer (delete as appropriate) andfor zeroing on ranges, or land
deemedsuitable by the chief officer of police for the areawhere the land is situated and over which theholder has lawful authority to shoot.(The words in italics may be omitted oncethe certificate holder has demonstratedcompetence. There is no set time for thisand each case should be considered on its
individual merits.)

That didn't paste very well:oops:
 
Also, he has access to land down in Hereford but wants to keep his rifles up here, in Yorkshire. Is there any reason why he can't use that land for his application and not use the land up here?

A lot of deerstalkers will quote land elsewhere... say in Scotland... as the 'named land' anyway so there's nothing unusual in that. FLD's have reciprocal clearing/inspection arrangements with other forces as routine. If the foreign patch is large and remote the local force will clear it possibly by 'phone.

He'll still have to serve his time, but oddly enough the availability of this other land would be a faster route to an open ticket. Then he can shoot on your farm without the need for prior CC approval. If his initial application is based on your land this may get 'blacked' on inspection. Maybe it's best not to name it at all, unless this is unavoidable.
 
The words in italics may be omitted oncethe certificate holder has demonstratedcompetence.

And handling firearms day in day out, and being trusted to handle and fire all sorts of firearm, doesn't classify as demonstrating confidence?

I still maintain that they cannot, legally, apply a "standard" condition such as that. It needs to be assessed for each application.
 
And handling firearms day in day out, and being trusted to handle and fire all sorts of firearm, doesn't classify as demonstrating confidence?

I still maintain that they cannot, legally, apply a "standard" condition such as that. It needs to be assessed for each application.

This is also from the same guidance.

There is nostatutory right of appeal against certificateconditions (
Buckland v CambridgeshireConstabulary) although unreasonable additions
may be challenged by way of Judicial Review
 
This is also from the same guidance.

There is nostatutory right of appeal against certificateconditions (





Buckland v CambridgeshireConstabulary) although unreasonable additions





may be challenged by way of Judicial Review

And........................?

With respect, you are wasting your time quoting the standard recommended conditions that may be applied to novices. As Matt has said, every application must be considered on it's own merits. In the case of individuals that are already very experienced with full-bore firearms and safety they can probably teach those who are seeking to impose unlawful blanket conditions on them a few lessons.

In reply to the OP. If the applicant has the cojones to stand up for what is his lawful right then on the information you have supplied he can make the FLD look idiots if he wants to take them on. He will have to nominate an area of land to provide the 'good reason' to support his application - this can be anywhere in the UK, (or even use abroad), so don't get hung up about nominating your land.

Best to get it all sorted out before they issue the FAC and if the FEO starts to indicate that they will want to put any 'standard' restrictive conditions, (mentoring, territorial etc.), then question them and get the reasoning behind them. Get it all in writing and refuse anything that he considers unwarranted - you can appeal against a constructive refusal to grant an FAC, you can't appeal against conditions once imposed.

Good luck.

BTW. In the case my own 'new' FAC application after a layoff from shooting for 8 years I received an open FAC with AOLQ after referencing previous experience, (despite having an FEO who insisted I couldn't have anything like it). They will try and impose what they are told to impose because many of them know no better and can't think outside of the box. ;)
 
Last edited:
Just an update on this thread, my friend I was referring to in this post got his first Firearms Certificate issued yesterday. We had a bit of a struggle with Humberside wanting to impose the restrictive condition of 'land deemed suitable by chief officer of police' on his use of firearms. But a well worded letter, pointing out that .50bmg and .338lapua are to name but two of the large calibres he uses on a daily basis at Hereford army base, meant he has been issued with an 'Open' certificate.

He's really chuffed and is very grateful for the advice on here and from myself, so thanks to anyone who contributed!

Regards

Tom
 
Good news, and I hope that those who appear to believe that all new applications must have any kind restrictive condition applied them - territorial, 'mentoring', whatever - will take note.

It is not mandatory for any condition at all to be entered onto the FAC by the CC other than the 4 x prescribed ones that are pre-printed on it that are required by the Firearms Act(s).

Conditions should be the exception rather than the rule, and each application must be considered on it's own merits - 'blanket' FLD policies should not be applied - it just takes the applicant to stand up for themselves.
 
Back
Top