Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Are the police liable for damage to siezed firearms, whilst in storage ?

  1. #1

    Are the police liable for damage to siezed firearms, whilst in storage ?

    Are the police liable for damage to siezed firearms, whilst in storage ?

    If you are required to hand in your sporting guns to the police as a result of an non firearms related matter, are the police liable for damage caused to them due to careless handling and poor storage whilst in police possesion ?

    Cheers

  2. #2
    I do know of someone who claims he was compensated for damage to his firearms while in the care of Notts. Constabulary but as he is a little bit of a Walter Mitty character and an ex-copper I am unsure as to take the claim

  3. #3
    Interesting, mine went off piled on top of each other in plastic evidence bags in the back of a police van, so I'm a little concerned.

  4. #4
    They threw my AYA No.2 in the back of a patrol car even though they were offered a bag when they fetched mine mate so there's nothing unusual there.
    To be fair a copper threw it in the back of the car telling me I would never see it again while his mate walked away,shaking his head saying he wanted no part of what was going on.
    Last edited by perdix; 21-08-2013 at 22:28. Reason: Added some more info

  5. #5

  6. #6
    Brithunter is probably the best source of what can happen to rifles in Police storage...

    Not a happy camper, as can be seen in a thread from some time ago, but I'll let him respond to this
    Sako 75 6.5x55mm-Z6i 3-18x50. MauserM12 .308-SIII 6-24x50. Beretta 690 III Field 12b.
    "You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."
    Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (1874-1965)

  7. #7
    The potential problem is the burden of proof rests with the aggrieved person, unless the police are honest enough to admit to the damage or give you a receipt in respect of the condition of the guns when they were seized, just how do you prove that they were responsible?

    atb Tim

  8. #8
    Yes they are.

    It is a bailment.

    The standard of proof is the civil standard, more likely than not.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by timbrayford View Post
    The potential problem is the burden of proof rests with the aggrieved person, unless the police are honest enough to admit to the damage or give you a receipt in respect of the condition of the guns when they were seized, just how do you prove that they were responsible?

    atb Tim
    by the same token, if they can't be bothered to give a receipt with condition noted ,then how do they prove they haven't caused damage?
    "Politicians must be allowed to panic. They need activity. It is their substitute for achievement"
    "'The matter is under consideration' means we have lost the file. 'The matter is under active consideration' means we are trying to find the file."

  10. #10
    Also, most firearms owners probably like their firearms to be working - so if they were damaged or not working, the police would probably have been unable to collect, as, in all likelihood a damaged or broken firearm would have been at an RFD being repaired.

Similar Threads

  1. Northumbria police firearms
    By bob edwards in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 18-03-2013, 04:22
  2. Another police firearms incident
    By shaun22/250 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-11-2012, 08:16
  3. Surrey Police Firearms Licensing
    By JabaliHunter in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-06-2012, 23:31
  4. Wiltshire Police Firearms Dept.
    By Neil M in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30-07-2011, 10:39
  5. storage of firearms-temporary
    By woody in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-11-2010, 13:39

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •