That is the real nub of it. Although I hate to say it and my colleagues will protest: what really needs to happen is that GPs need to be aware of FAC holders and be accountable if they do not inform the Police of any disturbing behaviour or risks. In the same way they do with the DVLA and drivers. Or the CAA and pilots who drink excessively or take drugs. There is a duty of care to society that over rules confidentiality. It remains to be seen if this new system will make much difference. I hope it does. Lets us not forget it could be your family on the wrong end of bullet and as firearms owners we all will suffer further regulation with any more atrocities.
BASC says don’t pay medical fee
- Thread starter David63
- Start date
That is the real nub of it. Although I hate to say it and my colleagues will protest: what really needs to happen is that GPs need to be aware of FAC holders and be accountable if they do not inform the Police of any disturbing behaviour or risks. In the same way they do with the DVLA and drivers. Or the CAA and pilots who drink excessively or take drugs. There is a duty of care to society that over rules confidentiality. It remains to be seen if this new system will make much difference. I hope it does. Lets us not forget it could be your family on the wrong end of bullet and as firearms owners we all will suffer further regulation with any more atrocities.
375 mag
Well-Known Member
If you've got mental health problems find another hobby.
The whole issue went through significant consultations, the medical tests / medical fees issue was widely discussed in the media and on forums, pilots were run in constabularies and medical organisations and shooting organisations fully consulted with along with of course the home office.
After all this, the clear consensus was for the system we have now. Not everyone will be happy as we have seen never the less its what we have.
There will be teething problems, not helped by what appears to contradictory guidance coming out of the BMA, I hope that is resolved very soon so we cam move forwards
I doubt very much that the alternative , which was in effect compulsory paid for medical tests at every grant and renewal, would have found favor with the vast majority of shooters, nor perhaps GP's in hindsight, imagine having to check every medical record of every shooter on your books and do a medical test every 5 years, plus the 30,000 or so new applicants every year just to show in the vast majority of cases there is absolutely nothing wrong...think of the time that would take up in GP practices, time that could be spent looking after people who genuinely need the expert help offered by GP's help...
David
After all this, the clear consensus was for the system we have now. Not everyone will be happy as we have seen never the less its what we have.
There will be teething problems, not helped by what appears to contradictory guidance coming out of the BMA, I hope that is resolved very soon so we cam move forwards
I doubt very much that the alternative , which was in effect compulsory paid for medical tests at every grant and renewal, would have found favor with the vast majority of shooters, nor perhaps GP's in hindsight, imagine having to check every medical record of every shooter on your books and do a medical test every 5 years, plus the 30,000 or so new applicants every year just to show in the vast majority of cases there is absolutely nothing wrong...think of the time that would take up in GP practices, time that could be spent looking after people who genuinely need the expert help offered by GP's help...
David
If we are concerned about who gets guns who shouldn't then the old system expanded to tag FAC holders medical records and GP cooperation would be sufficient since (I believe) all the failures of the old system which resulted in people shooting people with LEGALLY held guns can be laid at the door of poor or 'damaged' police process. Maybe they should pay for it like insurance ? I would then have no problem with the charge. we have to think of opportunities for the young and less well off to get into the sport and higher cost doesnt help, wherever it comes from especially if it will make no real difference.
Anyway what I really want to know is where the bloody sump plug is on my Lister Petter dumper engine is. I can't find the damn thing and have just burnt myself on the artic light and I bet thing is non metric and I won't have a spanner for it when I finally find it
Last edited:
Hopefully by this time tomorrow we will all be using Whitworth spanners again!
Actually I never have, but with the standard of reply from you, I hope one day that you do.
This seems fair enough.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, the expense should be borne by the Police.
The GP is asked to do work by the Police outside their contract = fee payable
The shooter has paid fees for the licence application = they have paid already
So simple; The Police acting in the public's best interest needs to pay!
Seems too obvious to me
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
This seems fair enough.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, the expense should be borne by the Police.
The GP is asked to do work by the Police outside their contract = fee payable
The shooter has paid fees for the licence application = they have paid already
So simple; The Police acting in the public's best interest needs to pay!
Seems too obvious to me
It is indeed, the fees are statutory set by the Home office.
I have just had a letter from my Medical practice asking for £50 to process the request from the police to know if they have any medical concerns over my ability to have a FAC and to tag my file.
I shall not be paying, however what annoys me most is that the Firearms licensing team do not believe me when i stated i did not suffer from any relevant conditions on my renewal form and asked my GP regardless, even though by signing it, declaring that all statements are true to my knowledge, with the threat of prosecution for giving false information.
Ian
I shall not be paying, however what annoys me most is that the Firearms licensing team do not believe me when i stated i did not suffer from any relevant conditions on my renewal form and asked my GP regardless, even though by signing it, declaring that all statements are true to my knowledge, with the threat of prosecution for giving false information.
Ian
Orion
Well-Known Member
Looks as if the CA are (again) acting on this issue on behalf of FAC/SGC holders and being proactive by asking for details from anyone who is being asked to pay.
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/issues-new-medical-system-firearms-licensing/
https://ukshootingnews.wordpress.com/2016/07/05/gp-to-shooter-give-me-money-or-ill-lie-on-your-medical-report/
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/issues-new-medical-system-firearms-licensing/
https://ukshootingnews.wordpress.com/2016/07/05/gp-to-shooter-give-me-money-or-ill-lie-on-your-medical-report/
Last edited:
So .
Say , for example the chap above doesn't pay his requested £50 & the police as said above go by their guidance & refuse to renew or issue his certificates .....
What will BASC / CA do there ?
Not trying to cause trouble .... Genuinely interested in back up you would receive & where you stand from that point in gaining your certs ?
Paul
Say , for example the chap above doesn't pay his requested £50 & the police as said above go by their guidance & refuse to renew or issue his certificates .....
What will BASC / CA do there ?
Not trying to cause trouble .... Genuinely interested in back up you would receive & where you stand from that point in gaining your certs ?
Paul
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
But surely in the absence of communication from the GP to the FLD expressing concerns about the applicant's suitability no further action is required. The default position placing the onus on the GP not the applicant? i.e. The police will grant/renew unless they hear otherwise.
Orion
Well-Known Member
Unless he has declared a notifiable medical condition on his application then it should be a non-problem for the applicant, as his certificate(s) will have already been issued - the standard 'tick box' letter from the police FLD to GP's should only be sent out after the renewal process has taken place.
I also thought I read somewhere, maybe on another thread, that (I think) Police Scotland were said to be holding back on renewals and grants until after they had received some form of report back from the GP? If it's true it could be a very worrying turn of events as they would be operating totally outside the guidance from the Home Office and the agreement reached by all parties concerned. Anyone confirm?
My FAC is currently being renewed, it does not expire until the 30th July and i did not declare any notifiable condition, on advice from BASC i need to find out exactly what my licensing department asked of my GP before i know if i need to pay or not.
Ian.
Fiadh
Well-Known Member
The Home Office guidance is 'silent' on how these new procedures apply to Scotland, Police Scotland's stance seems to be no GP letter, no certificate. Effectively GP practices can hold Scottish certificate holder's to ransom. I'd be interested to hear what BASC is doing in Scotland to support its members.
Similar threads
