BASC to launch £100,000 legal expenses cover for members.

Fair post Cwmman and thank you. :-D

Turning to another point, looking at self insurance, much depends on how large the pot is. Taking for example cases we have dealt with and been aware of in say the last 12 months on firearms appeals, in cases that are won by the certificate holder usually (unless the Judge is minded otherwise) is only liable for their costs and if they have used a lawyer and a barrister this could be around £6000. If the shooter loses the police will almost always ask for their costs too, and in a recent case I know of this ran the bill up to over £30,000. So we can see you need a pretty large pot!

Looking at insurance, its perfectly possible that in any one year, the claims on a policy may be over the premiums taken but insurers can be tolerant of this if in previous years the claims have been lower than the premiums taken, and if the 'bad' year has been an exceptional one e.g. one with a couple of 'disaster claims, and that this increase in claims is not a change in claim frequency due to a change in the market - ie they take a longer term view. However, if claims keep going above premiums and it look like this is likely to continue then the insurers will have no choice but to significantly increase the premiums or walk away and cut their losses.

I think we all know that at the moment there is far more chance of the licencing teams being risk averse and refusing, thus making an appeal through the courts more likely, this is exactly why BASC have launched this addition to our membership package, to protect our members rights.

David
 
No thank you and all at BASC, I see this as yet another small but significant step towards ensuring the rights of shooters in the quagmire of firearms legislation often inconsistently applied.
I'm impressed in the progress made by BASC on firearms licensing issues & understand its been a long & sometimes painful battle, this will hopefully ease the pain in future a little.
Fair post Cwmman and thank you. :-D

Turning to another point, looking at self insurance, much depends on how large the pot is. Taking for example cases we have dealt with and been aware of in say the last 12 months on firearms appeals, in cases that are won by the certificate holder usually (unless the Judge is minded otherwise) is only liable for their costs and if they have used a lawyer and a barrister this could be around £6000. If the shooter loses the police will almost always ask for their costs too, and in a recent case I know of this ran the bill up to over £30,000. So we can see you need a pretty large pot!

Looking at insurance, its perfectly possible that in any one year, the claims on a policy may be over the premiums taken but insurers can be tolerant of this if in previous years the claims have been lower than the premiums taken, and if the 'bad' year has been an exceptional one e.g. one with a couple of 'disaster claims, and that this increase in claims is not a change in claim frequency due to a change in the market - ie they take a longer term view. However, if claims keep going above premiums and it look like this is likely to continue then the insurers will have no choice but to significantly increase the premiums or walk away and cut their losses.

I think we all know that at the moment there is far more chance of the licencing teams being risk averse and refusing, thus making an appeal through the courts more likely, this is exactly why BASC have launched this addition to our membership package, to protect our members rights.

David
 
David as you know SACS did this years ago why did it take you so long to add this to your service.? What has happened recently that has made you put this in?
 
6pointer,

BASC have been going down the self funding path for decades, however there have been increasing calls from members for BASC to add a formal legal expenses policy to our membership portfolio. You may know as well as I do that this view has been voiced on this and other forums several times...I have listened, and together with colleagues from our firearms team spent most of 2013 researching different insurance offerings from a range of potential suppliers until we were able to develop a product that meets our members needs.

This together with the fact that many licencing teams have become more risk averse so the risk of refusal or revocation is increasing meant that it made perfect sense for BASC to add £100,000 of legal expenses to our package, its as simple as that.

Similarly, given the current licencing climate it must have been a very tough decision by SACS to drop was one of their main selling points....

David
 
David I congratulate you on this and I hope many members benefit from it. I will stay were I am as you know BASC can at times be extremely fickle when they decide to take on a case for one of there members and SACS are currently working hard on a few issues with the licencing department for me and others from my group.
 
I think 'can be fickle' should perhaps now read - 'have in the past been fickle'...new era - better services.

Best wishes

David
 
Having talked to SACs I now know that I am insured for £10,000,000!

I have tried finding out about AIM insurance, who appear to be a new company that have a credit limit of £50,000 according to one site I found online, but I find very little other information. I am making further inquiries to find out who they actually are and where the funding comes from. I have heard many versions but look forward to finding out the full facts.

Simon
 
£10m public liability cover with SACS I think you will find,just as you always had, but now with a £250 excess ( 7 years SACS membership subs) on all property damage claims. Full and clear details were in the December SACS newsletter.

AIM are the brokers not the underwriters of the BASC Legal Expenses Policy, the underwriters are Markel International

More details of the BASC legal expenses insurance will be in the March issue of Shooting & Conservation and on the BASC web site in due course.

But in the interim if you have any questions I will see if I can help
 
Well ............. I've been with the NGO for umpteen years, but we've got little in common. As an organisation it's interests are narrow. The predominant tone and sentiment of the articles in the 'Keeping the Balance' magazine is a bit too cap-doffing for me. I just can't ignore the fact that as a group gamekeepers employed by an estate still have feudal allegiances out of tune with the times, whereas BASC does have a largely voluntary membership.

The annual NGO fee has now gone up to £40 compared with £65 for BASC. As the gap has narrowed a lot I'm going to watch avidly what develops on legal expenses cover. A proper legal aid service which backs members against arbitrary action by the executive is a compelling idea, but we need to see a track record of successful actions in print to prove this is real. I'm still sceptical that this new benefit will mean that only the easy cases will secure BASC funding, so am going to wait a year to decide whether this service is pie in the sky or not before switching.
 
Are Market International an MGA syndicate?

I quote from Managing General Agents Association web site, written by Chief Executive Reg Brown, "The MGAA is planning a number of educational seminars this year, and it is readying itself to confer with Financial Conduct Authority, which is one of the regulators to be created to replace the Financial Services Authority. The MGAA is planning a position paper for the FCA outlining its case against putting MGAs and insurance brokers in the same class for regulatory purposes. "And our argument is that [MGAs] are not brokers at all," Brown said.

So it seems they are not insurance brokers/underwriters, or am I wrong?

Simon

PS: MGA site;
http://www.mgaa.co.uk/mgaa/about-us/
 
Last edited:
10 out of 10 for digging to find weakness in the BASC product,a bit surprised you are not questioning more seriously the dropping to LEinsurance and adding of an excess from SACS:roll:…but here you go:

The BASC policy is underwritten Brit Syndicate 2987 at Lloyd’sof London and administered by Abbey Legal Protection, a trading division ofAbbey Protection Group Limited. Who have just been taken over by Markel International

If you genuinely have any more interest in this policy please contact our insurance brokers, Aim Risk Services.


David

 
David,

The only other question I have is about Aim Risk Services. Why go with a newly formed (by whom I wonder?) company like Aim rather than a well recognised and well respected firm that has a good track record?

It seems odd to me.

Simon
 
Simon,

Good evening and thank you for your question. Let me try and explain the process, but of course if there are any points I have missed please let me know.

For the last 18 months BASC have been investigating the Legal Expenses market, as there was a growing demand from our members to introduce this, over and above the self insurance protocols that we have been using for several decades. So working with our firearms team we developed a proposal for the events we wanted to cover and placed this with our own brokers Marsh to look at, we looked at providing a policy that members could opt into as well as a policy that would cover all members from inception. At the same time we were approached by Aim, who have experience in specialist risks, who asked if they could also take our proposal to market, as there was no cost or risk for doing so we agreed.

During early 2103 both brokers came back with proposals from several, different, underwriters. However, only a small number from the initial batch could offer terms along the lines we were looking for, and after further clarification on covers, and premiums we fined it down to one underwriter from each broker, both of who came to face to face meeting to discuss the fine details of cover and how it would work.

After more discussion, only one provider was left, and that was Abbey Legal introduced to us by Aim. The proposal was then fully reviewed by BASC Council.

I accept Aim are relatively new to the market, but Abbey have a long track record, and its they who are underwriting the BASC product, Aim's role is much more in the day to day administration, they are the link between BASC and the underwriter. The nitty gritty of cover and dealing with claims, that rests with Abbey and of course our board of solicitors and barristers in conjunction with the BASC firearms team.

The product,broker and underwriter are all FCA compliant.

I hope this helps.

David
 
Back
Top