Variation Advice Please

Conditions

when i put my variation in for 243 to notts police it was mentioned about foxing only while deer stalking,i just said that most foxing ws done at night but you cant stalk deer at night so that was impractical.finneshed up with open for fox etc but stalking only on land passed for that calibre by chief of police which i was satisfied with.i will ask at later day for this to be lifted.

I stated this fact in my initial letter to Firearms Manager (Sharon).

She sees them in the morning and daytime quite regularly. Its basically a no brainer with her. Its like polishing a turd!! She won't ave it.
 
Last edited:
If they had a ton of bricks they would build some more plush offices for the upper class, toothless, money wasters that are in the employ of basc. What is the point of all these acpo felweg meetings if the recomendations from these are ignored? Just seems like a jolly for basc staff and plod.

To be fair to BASC (of which I must admit that I am a memeber, and whom I've found very helpful in the past in this sort of case) they generally offer advice on these matters which the member then needs to use to help himself.

One can see that their actually intervening themselves with FLOs might be a reasonable course on some occasions, but by and large they offer adice, not an advocacy service. Presumably their policy of offering advice to empower FAC-holders to persue their own specific cases with respect to FLOs is considered a better use of time.

Their meetings with FELWG, the HO Guidance and the Firearms Act combined with careful letter-writing by the FAC-holder to the right people should really be the remedy for difficulties of these kinds.

Prolonged and/or heated discussion with FEOs; fervently-expressed desires that someone else should sort the problem out for us; accepting unreasonable conditions 'for a quiet life': none of these is in my view the way forward.
 
Last edited:
I want to echo what someone else mentioned; going to Chief Constable's "PA" or direct to CC him/herself. I had a nightmare FLO (Strathclyde) dealing with my FAC renewal a few years ago and eventually, in a moment of total frustration, phoned Police HQ direct and asked to speak to CC, I was put through ! a short conversation of the problem and I had the situation, which had dragged on for 6 months (3 mths after expiry on 3 temporary certs), solved instantly - new FAC delivered within 48hrs.

I now live in Northern Constabulary, which must be the best in the country; next day service if urgent, and no restrictions or calibre issues.
 
I'm really going to have to stop reading threads in the legal section, it plays havoc with my blood pressure :rolleyes:
 
I'm really going to have to stop reading threads in the legal section, it plays havoc with my blood pressure :rolleyes:

Si, take a chill pill, breath deeply, let it out slowly and.....................relax.

None of this police administration of the Firearms Acts stuff is real - it's all from some kind of Bizzaro World where reason and logic have been turned on their heads. ;)

Somewhere in the pages following is my own 'Tale of two FACs' that can well illustrate the above, but if you can't be bothered to wade through it all, (next installment should be soon), here's an extract from my initial meeting with the local knowledge-challenged FEO 'person';

"The first major point of contention was the number of rifles and my choice of calibres. It was suggested that instead of a 22-250 for fox, (no vermin with that you know!), and a 6.5x57 for 'small deer only' ( :confused: ), I should instead have a .243 which would be suitable for both. After patiently explaining that I wanted the sweet recoiling 6.5x57 in a light Stutzen for woodland stalking and the .308 for more open terrain etc., (plus the odd bit of range work), I thought I was getting somewhere - then bang! Did I realise of course that the .308 would be conditioned only for Red deer and the 6.5x57 for 'small deer', (I should have picked up on that 'small deer' phrase earlier!).

Okay, so realising that this was likely to be a bit of a long haul. I innocently questioned why any calibre that satisfied the requirements of the Deer Act (.240/1700ft/lb) should be conditioned for some species of deer but not others? Apparently, dear reader, and hopefully you will now be as enlightened as I am, it's because that's the way it is here! After asking for the reasoning behind it and getting nowhere, and finally agreeing to disagree, I requested that my application remain as requested and be dealt with on that basis."

Luckily, the powers that be 'in the office' sorted it out before I had to reach for the Prozac!
 
Last edited:
I want to echo what someone else mentioned; going to Chief Constable's "PA" or direct to CC him/herself. I had a nightmare FLO (Strathclyde) dealing with my FAC renewal a few years ago and eventually, in a moment of total frustration, phoned Police HQ direct and asked to speak to CC, I was put through ! a short conversation of the problem and I had the situation, which had dragged on for 6 months (3 mths after expiry on 3 temporary certs), solved instantly - new FAC delivered within 48hrs.

I now live in Northern Constabulary, which must be the best in the country; next day service if urgent, and no restrictions or calibre issues.
On advice from Mike Eveleigh @ marford, I telephoned the chief constables admin officer, well what a fall of soot that caused!, I don't think I made any friends that day!
 
I have just received my variation back from Cheshire. Here we go......

Conditions:
7. The .243 calibre rifle, sound mod and ammunition shall be used for deer stalking only whilst accompanied by an accomplished deer stalker.

8. The .243 Calibre Rifle and ammunition shall be used for shooting deer stalking & fox control whilst deer stalking and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitableby the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot.

Sion,

I didn't read this post of yours fully before but conditions 7 & 8 appear to be contradictory.

7 is stating no use without an 'accomplished' stalker being present (WTF does that mean? :rolleyes:).

8 makes no mention of anything other than the standard usage and territorial conditions for a restricted cert.

How would they stand up in a court of law?

If BASC are not willing to get involved with sorting this kind of crap out for a member then I'm sure SACS would welcome you.
 
Sion,
If BASC are not willing to get involved with sorting this kind of crap out for a member then I'm sure SACS would welcome you.
I do not think anyone can help if the Chief Of Police want to attatch special conditions to your license, they are legally allowed to do so. Unfortunately some seem to think they are obliged to do so.

ft

T​
HE CASE OF REGINALD BUCKLAND - 1997 (CAMBRIDGE CROWN COURT)

Paragraph 10.33 of “Firearms Law Guidance to the Police” states;​
“As the courts have held (R v Cambridge Crown Court ex parte Buckland, 1998) that
there is no right of appeal against the imposition of conditions (as opposed to a refusal
to grant or renew a certificate) chief officers will wish to be cautious in imposing
conditions that might amount to a constructive refusal to grant or renew a certificate,
that is additional conditions that would make possession or use so difficult as to be
redundant in practice.”​
The lack of an appeal procedure for a certificate holder aggrieved by a condition makes
it incumbent upon Chief Constables to be reasonable in imposing conditions. Conditions
must be competent in law and ‘Wednesbury reasonable’.
In his Judgement on the Buckland case, His Honour Judge J Haworth said:​
“That upon
a grant the Chief Constable shall specify any conditions, subject to the test of

Wednesbury reasonableness.”
 
Last edited:
No that's not quite correct.

Although you cannot take the CC to court over conditions in the same way as you can for a refusal to issue an FAC - although it might be argued that very severe conditions might be construed as a constructive refusal to issue a cert as noted in the extract above - there are a few avenues open to someone in that situation.

Apart from actually taking the matter up directly with the CC and requesting a senior officer review - after all who knows if the CC is actually aware that the firearms dept are operating such draconian policies and might not reverse a decision after legal advice?

There is also an approach to your MP who might be willing to follow it up on your behalf if presented with the facts and the actual law - rather than some made-up tosh that the police have decided to implement.

And finally there is a Judicial Review - this is where BASC can be doing some real work on behalf of their members. I'm sure that many situations could be resolved if the threat of a JR was made, and if need be they should follow it up.
 
Last edited:
No that's not quite correct.

Although you cannot take the CC to court over conditions in the same way as you can for a refusal to issue an FAC - although it might be argued that very severe conditions might be construed as a constructive refusal to issue a cert as noted in the extract above - there are a few avenues open to someone in that situation.

Apart from actually taking the matter up directly with the CC and requesting a senior officer review - after all who knows if the CC is actually aware that the firearms dept are operating such draconian policies and might not reverse a decision after legal advice?

There is also an approach to your MP who might be willing to follow it up on your behalf if presented with the facts and the actual law - rather than some made-up tosh that the police have decided to implement.

And finally there is a Judicial Review - this is where BASC can be doing some real work on behalf of their members. I'm sure that many situations could be resolved if the threat of a JR was made, and if need be they should follow it up.

Orion, while I agree that a judicial revue can be granted by the High Courts in exceptional circumstances, it would be unlikely in these cases. It is my belief that case law would prevail. Unfortunately Chief Officers of Police are allowed in Law to impose special conditions on FAC's.

It cannot hurt though, to ask the Chief Constable, MP and the Police Liason Comittee why the firearms department are not complying with ACPO guidelines on the issuing and conditioning of FAC's.

ft
 
Sion,

I didn't read this post of yours fully before but conditions 7 & 8 appear to be contradictory.

7 is stating no use without an 'accomplished' stalker being present (WTF does that mean? :rolleyes:).

8 makes no mention of anything other than the standard usage and territorial conditions for a restricted cert.

How would they stand up in a court of law?

If BASC are not willing to get involved with sorting this kind of crap out for a member then I'm sure SACS would welcome you.

I have had a heated 20 min conversation with the licensing manager over the conditions. I basically got nowhere with her. I have sent a letter in from an estate manager to do with my shot placement, as she informed me that if they got this she would consider taking the condition off. Its just a waiting game now to see whether thay have changed it!
I have also sent a letter to the superintendent in charge off the firearms dept, complaining about the whole issue. I am still awaiting a reply from him on that matter.
As for BASC I have had a few chats with Mike Eveleigh over the issues. He basically gave me advice over what to state in the various letters that I have sent in and offered to help in the writing of them.
I like the look of SACS, it looks like it is aimed at Scotland and Northern Ireland predominantly though. Or is that not the case?
Cheers,
Sion
 
Cheshire Firearms shake up.

I have just had a chat with BASC and there has been a bit of a shake up at Cheshire Licensing. Sharon is still there though :doh:, so what has happened he wouldn't give up too much information, but they seem to think that things will start changing, one way or another!!
 
Last edited:
I have had a heated 20 min conversation with the licensing manager over the conditions. I basically got nowhere with her. I have sent a letter in from an estate manager to do with my shot placement, as she informed me that if they got this she would consider taking the condition off. Its just a waiting game now to see whether thay have changed it!
I have also sent a letter to the superintendent in charge off the firearms dept, complaining about the whole issue. I am still awaiting a reply from him on that matter.
As for BASC I have had a few chats with Mike Eveleigh over the issues. He basically gave me advice over what to state in the various letters that I have sent in and offered to help in the writing of them.
I like the look of SACS, it looks like it is aimed at Scotland and Northern Ireland predominantly though. Or is that not the case?
Cheers,
Sion

Bootnec45, I would suggest speaking with a solicitor, a sutiably worded letter from them, may just tip the scales in your favour. Have a look at www.shootinglaw.co.uk, they specilise in this field.
 
Right, just for the ill informed, ACPO publish guildlines, the clue is in the name! Guildlines, they aren't the law. At the end of the day the Firearms Act is very specific, Go to WWw.opsi.gov.uk and read it.

Section 27 2) states: "A firearms certificate shall be in the prescribed form and shall specify the conditions (if Any) subject to which it is held,......" Unfortunately this basically allows the Chief Constable to apply any condition he likes! And Section 29 1) gives him the power to vary those conditions in writing at any time. However:

Section 29 2) a certificate holder may on aplication, vary those conditions. "a person aggrieved by the refusal of a Chief officer of police to vary a firearm certificate may in accordance with section 44 of this act appeal the refusal"

Section 44 basically makes the court responsible for a review (Judical Review)

Now even for an Act of Parliment, that is pretty clear. Now i would interprete the wording to suggest conditions should be occasional rather than the norm, unfortunately the old bill seem to think its a good way to control you, at the end of the day they would all be alot happier if Joe Public didn't have guns! But it is within their power to place conditions on you, however it is also within your power to ask to have them removed. If the COP (Chief of Police) refuses, it is your right by act of parliment to have it reviewed by a court of law. Not some bloody civil servant or Association of police who have no powers at all.

Sorry to sound like a rant but if you let them do it to you its your own fault.
 
There has been a recent addition to "Sharon's" staff, guy's name is Martin, he just happens to be a shooting type.


Yeah real shooting man. Wouldnt give me a .243 for foxing because "I dont shoot in windy enough places!" and who refuses to give .22-250 for foxing becasue "its too fast!" :eek:.

Incidentally Sharon has always smilled upon our household... god knows why!


Sa
 
Back
Top