Exactly.....friend of mine had his shotguns removed as his ex-partner (not married, not a civil partnership) claimed he'd threatened her.......none of which was true, but she was just particularly spiteful and even when she 'fessed up a few months later there was no return of guns or SGC and my friend gave up after that...
Refusal advice
- Thread starter SC3
- Start date
Ronin
Distinguished Member
Not read the whole four pages of replies but having worked in the arena (back in the day) here’s my take
The police currently will be on high alert with any I really do mean any public safety concern
Public saftey encompasses ex partners
Coercive control - albeit not actual enquiries made - there has to have been alegation of this for it to be in the “system”
It may be worth considering leaving any “appeal” for twelve months
Have zero contact of any kind with the ex and if you have to (for child contact or to sort finances) have a third party present who is neutral or at the very least record contact on your mic on your phone
If there are no other allegations within that period - reapply or even before doing so ask to speak to the firearms licencing officer (a cop not civilian) and discuss with them the likely hood of approval
You could ask by way of disclosure find out what the allegations were and any other background intelligence they hold on you
I’m afraid that due to organisational **** ups in the past any hint of domestic abuse or violence and you are on thin ground (that’s generalising not directed at you)
Wish you well for the future
The police currently will be on high alert with any I really do mean any public safety concern
Public saftey encompasses ex partners
Coercive control - albeit not actual enquiries made - there has to have been alegation of this for it to be in the “system”
It may be worth considering leaving any “appeal” for twelve months
Have zero contact of any kind with the ex and if you have to (for child contact or to sort finances) have a third party present who is neutral or at the very least record contact on your mic on your phone
If there are no other allegations within that period - reapply or even before doing so ask to speak to the firearms licencing officer (a cop not civilian) and discuss with them the likely hood of approval
You could ask by way of disclosure find out what the allegations were and any other background intelligence they hold on you
I’m afraid that due to organisational **** ups in the past any hint of domestic abuse or violence and you are on thin ground (that’s generalising not directed at you)
Wish you well for the future
Thanks Bruce, so you agree then that from the limited info we have of a family court case 5 years ago, there is no reason the OP shouldn’t have an SGC or FAC as they are not a prohibited person, have no previous or pending convictions and have nothing to say they are a danger to public (as if they were they would have convictions or a record)
What I think is irrelevant, it’s what the Police think that matters. As one Chief Constable once said to me it’s the only lethal thing the Police are responsible for directly licensing.
They don’t licence vehicles.
Frank Homes
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid you are wrong and MJ is correct,the police can draw on any evidence they like and base their decision on it..unpalatable but true.
And that my friend is the issue - too many people seem to say “what I think is irrelevant”….that’s not the case at all, roll over and shrug your shoulders to everything and it won’t be long until you are unable to do anything.
If the limited details we have are correct (5 years ago and ex-partner made an allegation, with no police follow up, no charges and no convictions) and this is grounds to not issue a cert then we are all in trouble, especially if it is allowed to happen.
What evidence is there??? Nothing documented (as no charges or convictions) so where is the documented evidence that is being drawn on?
indeed but they know most will not have the financial ability to appeal via the court and if you do and win then the judge not the Chief Constable is now the responsible party should at a later date the **** hit the fan.
fixedwheel
Well-Known Member
Have a good long read of Firearms Licensing: Statutory Guidance for Chief Officers of Police, Feb 2023 - https://assets.publishing.service.g...rms_Licensing_Statutory_Guidance_Feb_2023.pdf - for how the police are processing the application
Also handy for the OP @SC3 to get a handle on the procedure.
Gary, the weakness of your argument is encapsulated in the phrase "from the limited info we have"
Speculation and ranting about the unfairness of a refusal is pointless unless we had ALL of the same information as the police had when they made their decision - and even then we could reach a different conclusion from the police.
Unless you have a lot of time and money, applying for an FAC or SGC is like being a player in a football match - the referees decision is final
Cheers
Bruce
Bruce,Gary, the weakness of your argument is encapsulated in the phrase "from the limited info we have"
Speculation and ranting about the unfairness of a refusal is pointless unless we had ALL of the same information as the police had when they made their decision - and even then we could reach a different conclusion from the police.
Unless you have a lot of time and money, applying for an FAC or SGC is like being a player in a football match - the referees decision is final
Cheers
Bruce
The weakness in your argument is quoting legislation that could be used to counter your own argument.
And referee’s decisions can be challenged and overturned, it doesn’t always necessitate a length expensive legal process.
Regards,
Gixer
Bavarianbrit
Well-Known Member
Agreed but she isn't going to be dragging me through all that family court BS.
I walked once back in 1978 from a very toxic one that included an eye to eye death threat to me from her new "not known to me lover". There was no point in going to the police as I had no evidence to back it up, my body would have served that purpose. I rearranged my life afterwards to suit.
Having been involved first hand with a toxic ex (and the fight for someone’s firearms and shotgun licences!) I wish you the best of luck in the new relationship and glad you got out of the old one!
Also, to the OP, best of luck with this, don’t lie down and take it - sometimes it can be discussed and turned.
It's completely knocked the confidence out of me, it's a strange feeling. An external source has a stain on my character and there's nothing I can do about it. I'll speak to the FEO (Wednesday as he's away until Weds), I'll have what conversations I can, but I'll have to admit that it's very unlikely to be granted, certainly not unless directed to by a Judge and that's just money I can't spend. I assume it's money I can't spend as I have no idea what the costs are.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Here's my only 2p worth to this thread. I make no comment about the OP's situation as it is not why I have entered this thread. But to shed light on why not being convicted or not being cautioned (remember accepting a caution is to admit the offence) isn't as plain as it may seem.
All persons unless they have been convicted of an offence are entitled to be regarded in law as "being of good character". However that a person has not been charged with or convicted of an offence does not necessarily mean that they did not actually commit that offence. It may be because it has failed the test used by the CPS.
If you've ever been arrested and bailed "pending further investigation" you will eventually either be invited to attend a police station to be charged, or sent a summons by post, or receive a notice stating that the bail has ended and that no further action is being taken. This will have four boxes of which maybe one, or two, or all four may be ticked.
The boxes are:
Insufficient evidence, Unrealistic prospect of conviction, Not in the public interest to proceed, Other.
Most of those that are discontinued as noted below are motoring offences or offences against the person. Here is a cut and paste from the internet.
All persons unless they have been convicted of an offence are entitled to be regarded in law as "being of good character". However that a person has not been charged with or convicted of an offence does not necessarily mean that they did not actually commit that offence. It may be because it has failed the test used by the CPS.
If you've ever been arrested and bailed "pending further investigation" you will eventually either be invited to attend a police station to be charged, or sent a summons by post, or receive a notice stating that the bail has ended and that no further action is being taken. This will have four boxes of which maybe one, or two, or all four may be ticked.
The boxes are:
Insufficient evidence, Unrealistic prospect of conviction, Not in the public interest to proceed, Other.
Most of those that are discontinued as noted below are motoring offences or offences against the person. Here is a cut and paste from the internet.
Jeff8861
Well-Known Member
Firstly make an appointment with you're flm and put you're case. Meetings provide alot of helpful information to the flm. It doesn't need to go to appeal at this stage.
The police have access to all databases regardless of arrest caution or any other out of court disposal the flm has the advantage of this and can rely on both sides of civil and criminal standards of proof. They can also use items of intelligence from all sources. They don't need to provide evidence that the Intel has been rated or not.
If you do appeal the fld will no doubt contact you're ex. This conversation could make matters worse, remember you're ex only has to say something depremental and if it's linked to a dv matter then dv matters fit the criteria for revocation or refusal. If you're ex attends the court or a statement is read out the panel will refuse the appeal. The fld have to send you or you're legal team an evidence pack. If they can't or breach the time frames they will be held accountable. Before any appeal the evidence is scrutinised by the force legal team this can have a positive and negative impact on the case. The flm may have been over zealous and the refusal is removed or the legal team dig further.
My advice would be to sit down with the flm and discuss you're history. Point out it was toxic relationship with a financial reason which wasn't supported with any material evidence. Highlight that you have never been arrested cautioned etc and if you're with a new partner there has never been any incidents.
Unfortunately with the current system some flm don't have the same training some are civilians some are cops. Some are more risk overt than others. If you go to basc ngo etc they will tell you the same.
Good luck.
The police have access to all databases regardless of arrest caution or any other out of court disposal the flm has the advantage of this and can rely on both sides of civil and criminal standards of proof. They can also use items of intelligence from all sources. They don't need to provide evidence that the Intel has been rated or not.
If you do appeal the fld will no doubt contact you're ex. This conversation could make matters worse, remember you're ex only has to say something depremental and if it's linked to a dv matter then dv matters fit the criteria for revocation or refusal. If you're ex attends the court or a statement is read out the panel will refuse the appeal. The fld have to send you or you're legal team an evidence pack. If they can't or breach the time frames they will be held accountable. Before any appeal the evidence is scrutinised by the force legal team this can have a positive and negative impact on the case. The flm may have been over zealous and the refusal is removed or the legal team dig further.
My advice would be to sit down with the flm and discuss you're history. Point out it was toxic relationship with a financial reason which wasn't supported with any material evidence. Highlight that you have never been arrested cautioned etc and if you're with a new partner there has never been any incidents.
Unfortunately with the current system some flm don't have the same training some are civilians some are cops. Some are more risk overt than others. If you go to basc ngo etc they will tell you the same.
Good luck.
TringSaint
Well-Known Member
Ok, so Jo’s view is as follows:
If a judge has made findings then they will stick - family court burden of proof is super low so if they feel it’s the case then they can make findings.
Given it’s 5 years ago it’s too long gone to insist on another fact finding hearing, so it is what it is.
Her advice would be to speak with the police and ask them to undertake a detailed risk assessment if you.
You can present your evidence to them and have testimonies provided by current and/or other past partners highlighting your personal conduct.
You can reflect on your ‘behaviour’ with your ex and show contrition and demonstrate that you have understood how she may have felt under your control and see what the police say.
Given the seriousness of the claim it’s low down the list but as it’s also linked to DV, they are really hot in that, so there is your hurdle.
As she said to me, it’s not fair and many non-resident parents have to deal with issues like this and the claimant often can make up all sorts with zero comeback (she is currently helping a family friend who has been subjected to a non-mol order based on DV, only for his ex to now drop all of the claims! Jo is insisting that he has her initial claims here at a fact finding, else they will continue to be on his record moving forwards).
So try that approach and see what happens.
MAH
Well-Known Member
Given the above, I assume that you have kids and access arrangements from time to time.
.
If that's true my guess is that; given the allegations, and ongoing contact with your kids then s the police will be worried about the possibility of things going wrong during pick up drop off. Especially if you've use the word toxic, when describing your ex or the relationship.
So the refusal is not a penalty for something in the past, in there mind it might be a real time concern now and they years ahead.
As others have said a calm and polite conversation with your FLO is the first step.
Ask them to explain their concerns in detail face to face. Once you understand the details you can think about mitigating them.
M
Frank Homes
Well-Known Member
Opinion,hearsay, evidence based on the balance of probabilities can all be used and it doesn't need to be convictions or charges. From what the Op has told us it all seems a bit thin and is probably worth appealing. But the decision has been made and the only way to get it overturned is to appeal to the Crown Court.
Similar threads
