My nephew had problems with Cleveland Police turning up at his parents home where he lived, complete with their side arms etc and demanding to see his firearms. Problem was, his firearms were legitimately stored in my cabinet as he only did his shooting with me. When he applied for a moderator it was refused with them stating, Cleveland Police don't allow moderators.
When his certificate was renewed they failed to give him the open certificate stating they had to check all land he had to shoot over. The Police randomly continued to call at his home to check his firearms which were not there and when his certificate was again due for renewal he received a letter from same force that his certificate had now been revoked with the reason given, he did not purchase enough ammunition and the rule is, use it or lose it. They also stated several other reasons which related to the Cullen enquiry.
He contacted B.A.S.C and they informed him that he would lose in court so let it go but I being a fighter decided to try and help him as I had a copy of his letter and had something to research.
I put together a document which highlighted the forces reasons for revoking his certificate and information which I found on the internet, mainly from the Lord Cullen enquiry which was orientated around handguns. I also printed out the rules pertaining to obtaining a firearm certificate, good reason etc .
In crown court my nephew was asked who was representing him and he informed them that his uncle,(me) was going to attend to give evidence but the Police had refused this stating that they should have known about me earlier, however he had a document from me for the court.
This document was read by the judge during the break after the prosecution had had their say and justice prevailed.
The judge asked the prosecution barrister if he had a copy of the home office guidelines on firearms and to point out exactly where it stated their allegations. He could not but stated, that was their interpretation. The judge would not accept this as it was not up to interpretation. As for use it or lose it, he stated that the law states you give good reason for each firearm and the defendant had clearly done this as his firearm was granted, and as a recreational stalker who only stalked two or three times a year with no guarantees of a shot, other than checking the zero he would not be expected to use large numbers of rounds as would be expected of a person with handguns used for target practice.
Cleveland Police were ordered to reissue my nephews certificate and also give him the open certificate and the moderator condition.
I phoned B.A.S.C to inform them of the outcome and they were amazed that he had won but were even more shocked to fine he had also been granted an open certificate and moderator condition.
Sadly, the Police kept on harassing my nephew which escalated into random spot checks of his vehicle for alleged faulty lights or whatever and the next time his certificate was up for renewal he gave up the battle and surrendered it, resulting in me buying his firearms.
All this happened during the handgun years so a few years ago now and things have changed within firearms licensing so they hopefully have mellowed since then, they certainly will be aware that they are not the final say in firearms and can be beaten in court.
Elmer