I think you must possibly have a relative in your family tree, Albert Pierpoint ring any bells?
Word of warning, Grant or renewal information.
- Thread starter spforrest
- Start date
I would have offered the text "Appeared to have transgressed"
gerarddwatts
Well-Known Member
....and the story was???????....
deerpath
Well-Known Member
I too had a pilonidal (?) abcess which developed in 1998 just after starting a course of the anti malarial, Larium. And spent two nights in hospital ( and also cancelled the trip). I have never declared that on my renewals since so I think you have no worries under the de-minimus limits. Unnecessaryily pedantic and time wasting. Good luck but I doubt you will need it..
jon2
Well-Known Member
What a load of rubbish as was your previous post for criticising BASC for going above and beyond as they quite often do.
Last edited:
news of the world
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by JC275
"The Police and CPS have much better things to do than sit around making up allegations against innocent people. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with the Internet conspiracy theorists but that's the way it is".
Really! tell that to the 96 at Hillsborough..
"The Police and CPS have much better things to do than sit around making up allegations against innocent people. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with the Internet conspiracy theorists but that's the way it is".
Really! tell that to the 96 at Hillsborough..
No problem, you're entitled to your opinion the same as me. All I ask is that you keep an open mind and remember this topic if you find yourself in a situation where a large shooting organisation is defending known wildlife and firearm criminals just because their boss is 'one of the chaps, jolly good bloke, what' and another of these jolly good chaps is paying for it and the end result of this miscarriage of justice is that we all suffer. Before you ask, yes, I did bring this to the attention of the chief executive of the organisation but basically he said ' I know it's bad but they are jolly good chaps after all'
Me, cynical? Damn right I am.
Whilst my comments relate to a specific case and, I will admit, may not be relevant in this topic, I would ask you all to consider how it must look to an outsider? Anyone can access this website and one glance at the legal section would tell you that a great many of the posts are anti-police, not the best way for legitimate firearms owners to be seen in my opinion.
news of the world
Well-Known Member
I would like a little more clarification if thats possible.
Which shooting organisation are you talking about?
Who are the known criminals, and what have they been convicted of?
How did you bring it to the attention of the CE, and what was his response?
I'm sorry if I have missed this in previous posts, as I have only come in on the end of these comments.
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Does anyone know how the OP got on with his problem?
Probably in jail by now for lying on the app! LOL
Quick update- I attended the meeting with the officer in charge. He put his concerns to me and gave me the opportunity to explain my failure to disclose relevant medical facts. I found him extremely fair and friendly. I pointed out that I had not intended to deceive anyone, and that I did not feel any of my medical history was relevant. I was proved wrong !
After a long discussion clarifying my medical history, I accepted that I could have and should have disclosed conditions and treatments. He accepted that none of my conditions at the present time preclude me from being a licence holder, and so did not revoke my FAC or SGC.
I found the whole procedure quite stress full but It was dealt with in a frank and fair manner. I am grateful for being given the opportunity to meet and talk things through. (non-disclosure is grounds to refuse on its own let alone potential criminal charges).
Firearms licencing officers carry a huge burden of responsibility and have to be satisfied that each applicant is suitable. I don’t envy that responsibility.
In my opinion, good communication is the key to reaching a mutual agreement.
In future I will be declaring all conditions no matter how irrelevant (I feel) they may be. I suggest other applicants do the same. It was implied that the GP would be contacted in all applications or renewals received anyway, prior to issue of a new application and after issue of a renewal.
Don’t make the same mistake as me !
Thanks for all the advice given.
After a long discussion clarifying my medical history, I accepted that I could have and should have disclosed conditions and treatments. He accepted that none of my conditions at the present time preclude me from being a licence holder, and so did not revoke my FAC or SGC.
I found the whole procedure quite stress full but It was dealt with in a frank and fair manner. I am grateful for being given the opportunity to meet and talk things through. (non-disclosure is grounds to refuse on its own let alone potential criminal charges).
Firearms licencing officers carry a huge burden of responsibility and have to be satisfied that each applicant is suitable. I don’t envy that responsibility.
In my opinion, good communication is the key to reaching a mutual agreement.
In future I will be declaring all conditions no matter how irrelevant (I feel) they may be. I suggest other applicants do the same. It was implied that the GP would be contacted in all applications or renewals received anyway, prior to issue of a new application and after issue of a renewal.
Don’t make the same mistake as me !
Thanks for all the advice given.
stalker.308
Well-Known Member
I am glad it is sorted, but something doesn't ring right. they agreed your medical conditions weren't relevant to you being a fac holder and the application form asks for medical conditions relevant to your application. So tell me why they made a fuss and having agreed they were not relevant why would any other applicant take your advice and disclose what is not asked for? this whole thread is strange and i seriously cannot believe the police firearms wasting time pursuing something that they agree is dot relevant to your fac. either you have upset the wrong person somewhere sometime or this is a wind up.
relevant medical conditions are around stress/depression/anxiety/epilepsy/etc. and are listed on the form, anything else not relevant and is not to be disclosed. There was no reason why any of this took place, and you should be no means ever have to apologise for their failures to apply their own regulations
you probably want to just sit back and thank god it's all fine, but I personally think you should take this much further up the food chain, to the head of police, ask for a formal investigation and apology!
this isn't a joke, you've been messed around with big time for no reason, either by people with no understanding of their own regulatory guidelines, or people who are abusing their positions of self perceived power.
Unless you are literally kidding, I find the whole thing truly disgusting.
you probably want to just sit back and thank god it's all fine, but I personally think you should take this much further up the food chain, to the head of police, ask for a formal investigation and apology!
this isn't a joke, you've been messed around with big time for no reason, either by people with no understanding of their own regulatory guidelines, or people who are abusing their positions of self perceived power.
Unless you are literally kidding, I find the whole thing truly disgusting.
don't you think it's a bit odd you are probably the only person in the UK who's had to disclose more than just the application form 'relevant' conditions?????
one of four things
a. you're having a laugh
b. there was something 'relevant' you've not disclosed for whatever reason that might be
c. you're going to appear on 'you've been framed' next week.
d. your local FLO is way over the line and is drunk with power.
In reply to the posts above, I did withhold relevant facts.
I had symptoms of depression, admittedly it was 21 years ago (when i was 17 years old following my parents separation) but the question does ask have you ever been treated for depression ! No time scale is given.
Medical records go back to your birth !
I had symptoms of depression, admittedly it was 21 years ago (when i was 17 years old following my parents separation) but the question does ask have you ever been treated for depression ! No time scale is given.
Medical records go back to your birth !
Vipa
Well-Known Member
So... is that the part they had issue (past depression) with rather than the 'do you have any medical conditions?' section? The way it was put originally is that they pulled you for not disclosing every minute detail of your medical history... genital warts and all!?
