Doctors reports.

1967spud Reloading Supplies Ltd - UK Suppliers for Reloading Equipment supplies, We also stock Bullet Heads and Bullet Cases Guns Cabinets, Night vision and much much more...
O

old keeper

Well-Known Member
Supporter
I've just learned that my local surgery will no longer provide a medical report for firearm renewal. They now say they will deal only through one of the online providers.

I realise this has been covered before, but I wondered what the up-to-date situation is, and who those who have dealt with those offering this service would recommend.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
Seems short sighted by surgeries that do this. They have to do the same work (apart from filling in the form) for the online company but cannot charge for it. I suppose their reasoning is that they don't agree with shooting. And like many in today's society, they feel the need to impose their beliefs onto everyone else. Ho hum. At least you'll know the cost up front I suppose.

Sorry, that's not what you are asking, but I just felt the need to comment. The shrapnel probably moved in my head.
 
Pedro said:
Seems short sighted by surgeries that do this. They have to do the same work (apart from filling in the form) for the online company but cannot charge for it. I suppose their reasoning is that they don't agree with shooting. And like many in today's society, they feel the need to impose their beliefs onto everyone else. Ho hum. At least you'll know the cost up front I suppose.

Sorry, that's not what you are asking, but I just felt the need to comment. The shrapnel probably moved in my head.
Click to expand...

and they likely think they will not be held partly responsible if the applicant should go on to use the firearms illegally.
 
Swedish said:
It specifically mentions on the form that doctors are not responsible for the asessement of suitability to posess firearms, that responsibility lies only with the police.
Click to expand...
The form may say that, but if the **** hit the fan, I can understand why a GP might think it wise not to do the assessment, after all the whole process is just a backside covering exercise for the Chief Constable.
A five year MOT and if all end up not using their registered GP and flags get missed on GP records or GPs do not ethically engage in the process it all falls apart.

The media would have a great time laying blame at whoever, so long as it sells news.

The police do not like the use of third party GPs but are tolerating it, they said so in the minutes of the NPCC firearms and explosives licensing working group, a long time ago.
 
Liveonce said:
and they likely think they will not be held partly responsible if the applicant should go on to use the firearms illegally.
Click to expand...
It's gonna look bad for a doctor when someone with mental health signs does something bad and it turns out the doctors hadnt done their bit and updated the flag as they didnt agree with shooting
 
weblyish said:
It's gonna look bad for a doctor when someone with mental health signs does something bad and it turns out the doctors hadnt done their bit and updated the flag as they didnt agree with shooting
Click to expand...

look bad yes, but is not a legal requirement or part of their NHS contract, which will then look bad on the government, but we know the **** never sticks on them.

let’s hope the worst never happens.
 
Liveonce said:
look bad yes, but is not a legal requirement or part of their NHS contract, which will then look bad on the government, but we know the **** never sticks on them.

let’s hope the worst never happens.
Click to expand...
agreed - I realised my comment seemed like i wanted that to happen I dont

I can just see the regular path - some admin isnt done properly + someone goes off the rails -> the worst outcome happens -> public outcry -> governmental overreach = now we have to submit to a pysch panel each renewal or whatever else they come up with
 
I use Medicert they charge £72 all in for renewal.
They don't have the authority to put a fac/sgc marker against your medical records, unlike your GP if they wanted.

This medical thing is all very well if "the person" went to see their GP if they had a severe anxiety, stress or mental issue and they we're prescribed medication......
but if they hid the problems, no one would ever know.
 
FWIW reviewing the form form my FAC appliciaont3 years ago, the medical form requires whomever fills it out a series of questions which require factual answers, i.e. they are not asked to express an opinion about the patients mental health, base on their records.

That is except for the final box on page 2 which invites them to give any further information which may be relevant in determining whether the patient is safe to possess firearms. As i had to point out to a doctor many years ago, the form is about confirming your mental health based on your history only.

Doctors are not required to express an opinion about your mental health, the risks to the doctor are primarily administrative if it leads them to "knowingly or recklessly make a false statement". The same risks would apply however, and to whomever they provide that information if they know why they are providing that information for as far as i can tell.
 
slider said:
Gp is legal obliged to send your records in one calendar month
Click to expand...

Obliged may be, but the legislation allows for them to take longer in extenuating circumstances, but does not define what that means, So possibly they could put seeing ill patients before sending data to a third party for firearms.
 
Quote from the Information Commissioner.

What are the time limits?
If you exercise any of your rights under data protection law, the organisation you’re dealing with must respond as quickly as possible. This must be no later than one calendar month, starting from the day they receive the request. If the organisation needs something from you to be able to deal with your request (eg ID documents), the time limit will begin once they have received this.

If your request is complex or you make more than one, the response time may be a maximum of three calendar months, starting from the day of receipt.
 
slider said:
Gp is legal obliged to send your records in one calendar month
Click to expand...
You are right but if they dont send them then you have to make a complaint to some governing body and the GP responds with excuses .In my case he just did not respond .I could not get any help from the manager and they refused to speak or answer my e mails .Just being awkward
 
@old keeper
Just found i'm in a similar boat come the end of the year.

Check with your gp if they have a "preferred" 3rd party provider.
Mine use medi2cert and as a "partner" guarantee access to my records within 3 -4 days.

Cost is £75 + vat.... about the same as basc provider with member discount, but £30 more than CCC's motor medicals.

Think I'm going to go with the gp's "pet provider " to make sure there aren't any hiccups with record transfers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Failure to renew???
2 3
Replies
55
Views
4K
quarrystalker
Q
Medical reports
Replies
12
Views
673
wytonpjs
wytonpjs
Certificate Renewal
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
SunnyDays
S
Firearms Law - Setting the Agenda
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
nightcrow
N
Paperless Firearms Licensing Process - Impact on older applicants.
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
5K
Foxyboy43
Foxyboy43
Game Larder - Your reliable choice for Game Larder solutions - www.gamelarder.com
Back
Top