BASC stated in their justification for withdrawing this insurance that only 2 or 3 cases had used it since its inception and it was ludicrously expensive as a result. That may be because the Insurers wanted certainty but the 'partnership' with an insurer allows a view from the other half of the partnership which does not seem to have been tried. If you have never heard of one FEI case that succeeded maybe you should have advised BASC before it offered this tempting benefit to members only to withdraw it one year later? Perhaps they hoped like others the members affected would forget the DD's. Its like being in a hole and continuing to dig.
Thoughts on BASC's new stance on Police Firearms Licensing Departments!
- Thread starter TomTalks
- Start date
Interesting, because I tried replying to the post, but it had been removed, or moved.
Rather than beating about the bush, WHO ARE YOU, and your connection to the BASC ?
The BASC car discount worked for me. Got 19% off a HiLux Invincible X and swerved 3 price increases before delivery. With 20% VAT back as well it makes for a cheapish motor. The NFU offer a similar discount scheme. The order went through the dealer's fleet department and payment was direct to Toyota UK. I couldn't better the BASC deal elsewhere. Just my experience.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
With 150,000 members BASC covers a diverse range of interests and meeting the needs and wants of its members and BASC is continuing to fight for improvements in firearms licensing and I will continue to update on that work.
An overview of BASC's work in 2021 is covered in the following report.
As regards how BASC is constituted and run by its elected Council members that is all outlined here:
basc.org.uk
An overview of BASC's work in 2021 is covered in the following report.
As regards how BASC is constituted and run by its elected Council members that is all outlined here:
BASC Council elections and AGM
Two new members of BASC Council were elected at the Association's AGM on 18 May 2024.
basc.org.uk
Rewulf
Well-Known Member
How do you think it works, BASC obviously didn't send them a cheque for 8 or 9 grand?
Or do you think they are such good buddies with them that they'll 'do you a favour' seeing as you're a BASC member.
Old thread but have a pre use of these comments.
Pick up truck discounts with BASC/SACS/NGO etc.
Hi all, I’m looking at buying a new truck and wondered if anyone could tell me anything about the discounts that the various shooting organisations have brokered for their members. Anyone bought a truck like this? How does it work? I’m assuming you get a set discount on the list price and no...
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
S
In other words it's like a nuclear deterrent. That you have it but have never had to use it shows it has worked. The money spent on Polaris, on Chevaline, on Trident is the same.
Sometimes when people that seek to cause you problems see you are carrying a big stick they decide, then, not to cause you problems.
In other words it's like a nuclear deterrent. That you have it but have never had to use it shows it has worked. The money spent on Polaris, on Chevaline, on Trident is the same.
Last edited:
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
I will ask CPSA and perhaps those who are BASC members could ask BASC how many revoked or renewals refused prior to their insurance being withdrawn and how many so far since it's withdrawal?
Last edited:
BASC does not have 150,000 members anymore since 8 % have left but I doubt 8% have rejoined. There is also the loss of benefit, the £5 increase, the lead position - a number have left so lets recognise that and hope BASC recover members but ONLY based on improved performance, proper consultation and changes to meet a modern shooting agenda. The BASC council post above is neither helpful nor unhelpful. Is this what is really needed for the future? Or is it simply self-promotion and, in my poor view at that and probably 10 years out of date. Just my opinion though.
On what informed basis are you challenging BASC representative Mr O'Gorman?
With 150,000 members BASC covers a diverse range of interests and meeting the needs and wants of its members and BASC is continuing to fight for improvements in firearms licensing and I will continue to update on that work.
An overview of BASC's work in 2021 is covered in the following report.
As regards how BASC is constituted and run by its elected Council members that is all outlined here:
BASC Council elections and AGM
Two new members of BASC Council were elected at the Association's AGM on 18 May 2024.
Did you see the post above by BASC which said we had 'lost' 8% of shooters ? Well, being stupid I assumed BASC would have lost 8% of its members or are BASC members so different than 'normal' - also I see that many here and elsewhere are not satisfied with BASC, so you see there is a very sound basis for saying BASC don't have 150,000 members anymore. I have tried via Companies House to determine BASC's exact number of members but there is no requirement for BASC's type of Company to register the number.
I gave other reasons above - non of which are likely to guide you to the inevitable truth of less than 150k. - by the way I had to unignore you to respond to this but could not let such fantasy' continue.
Why have you not challenged that which must be untrue by BASC's own admission ?
Not keen on the truth ?
Sorry
There is no statiscal correlation that determines that a general loss of “shooters” should be equally reflected in BASC numbers.
I was therefore interested to understand where your assumed BASC membership number came from that you would effectively call Mr O’Gorman a liar on a public forum.
I see no need to challenge Mr O’Gorman’s stated membership figure as he appears to be an intelligent gentleman who would not set himself up for a fall by lying on an un-editable post on a public forum.
BASC membership numbers were routinely stated as being circa 155,000 last year so if they are now being stated as 150,000 then that suggests a net decrease of circa 3.2%.
Feel free to put me back on your ignore list at your leisure.
Regards
Mike
Last edited:
Simple answer, Freedom of info?
Len the dog
Well-Known Member
To anyone thinking of ditching BASC in the belief that other insurers will give them cover for things such as revocation, read the small print first. I have and found that the policy of one of the better known isn’t worth the paper it is written on.
They get to decide the probability of a successful outcome, not you, and they also get to decide if the cost is proportional to the result, again not you. If either of these tests aren’t met they they will not pursue your case, but they already have your premium.
They get to decide the probability of a successful outcome, not you, and they also get to decide if the cost is proportional to the result, again not you. If either of these tests aren’t met they they will not pursue your case, but they already have your premium.
bottletopbill
Well-Known Member
Do you really think they care us shooters. How many things have we lost from them. Med forms . No licence support. Value for money not know
This is standard policy on legal insurance and also applied to the BASC policy, before it was removed from membership subs with no cost reduction to the subs. This statement is true and can be checked.
Whitefront
Well-Known Member
Yes, it is a standard condition - but here's the thing: it is uniquely problematic for firearms-related LEI, because even if you win against the police at court, you are highly unlikely to recover your costs. This is a real problem for all firearms related legal insurance, even for the easier SGC (as opposed to FAC) stuff. Another standard clause in LEI policies refers to the prospects of success. Here again, the way firearms cases play out in court is likely to discourage an insurer, because the legal system is, unfortunately, loaded against the claimant.
In my personal opinion, the unique features of firearms court cases may discourage an LEI company's solicitors from taking up your case in the first place. And even if they do, if too many cases start coming in from any source, the insurance company has an incentive to start ramping up its fees at every annual review, or imposing increasing onerous restrictions and exclusions, or both, to keep the financials tilted in its commercial favour. When BASC discontinued its experiment with LEI (which had not been funded by commensurate increase in membership fees) it did so with a public announcement. Others orgs simply canned their LEI without being so candid. Still others continue to offer it, but I never seem to be able to find out how many of cases are actually funded, let alone won at court.
I am sceptical about LEI. In my own opinion, the best option is not to get into court in the first place, but to negotiate via a good firearms team, who probably know more than most solicitors anyway.
I recently read in my NGO magazine that the org has started offering LEI as a bolt-on, for an extra £27.50. The third party that provides this is called Side by Side Insurance. I have looked at their website and they claim to have firearms specialists on board - and that is a key positive, to my mind. On paper, the offer looks better than others - for what that's worth. However, I think the outfit is relatively new, so may not have track record yet. Above all, insurance is a financial product and you would have to satisfy yourself that they provide what you need for your specific circumstances.
I am not an insurance broker, but I have looked into the LEI issue at some length for my own for my own personal needs and spoken to legal experts. You really do need to do your own research. Don't take any promotional literature at face value.
Rewulf
Well-Known Member
Im not sure what that has to do with the fact that BASC doesnt even give you LEI anymore, and CCC does, even if you dont believe its worth the digital paper its written on ?
The fact is , for £33 you get all the insurance , and more, than BASC give you for £80, and not a single person has come forward to say CCC doesnt pay out if you make a claim.
You must know that if they did fail to honour the terms of the contract you have made with either of them, then the FSA would have something to say ?
I think what youre trying to say , is that BASC being the bigger company , would be more trustworthy in the event of a claim , than CCC ?
Yet there isnt a shred of evidence to support this.
Im happy with the 3 years Ive been with C3 , no Ive not needed them for anything, but then I never needed BASC either.
The plain facts of the matter is , I dont trust BASC anymore, so I will not support them, as Ive seen them do nothing to support the shooting that doesnt profit them.
Len the dog
Well-Known Member
The only thing I can see that BASC represents is large scale commercial shoots and a certain agency that will find a peg for a gun to stand at. Could it possibly be that these large businesses are also BASC’s largest donors and the owners of such businesses have the biggest sway?
Similar threads
