A message to BASC...

kes

Well-Known Member
The request for sight of legal advice which recommended a judicial review would not win over medicals was never forthcoming - how can you trust people who say something and aren't prepared to confirm it.
Maybe it was their complicity ? 10 year certs and all that.
I am sick of the failures so I am going to try and keep quiet - again.
 

murray50

Well-Known Member
The request for sight of legal advice which recommended a judicial review would not win over medicals was never forthcoming - how can you trust people who say something and aren't prepared to confirm it.
Maybe it was their complicity ? 10 year certs and all that.
I am sick of the failures so I am going to try and keep quiet - again.
Thanks Kes or Triton
 

baguio

Well-Known Member
I absolutely understood that , being drunk at the wheel of your car can 'technically' invalidate the insurance , but when I tried a little humour on BASCs removal on its legal cover , a move that caused a mass exodus from them, someone lost their %$£"
No one lost their %$£ Rewulf. It just wasn't funny or even understandable. You aren't a professional comedian for good reason! If you think that you're worth getting upset about you clearly have a much higher opinion of yourself than I do which is probably a good thing if you know what I mean?
 

Conor O'Gorman

Well-Known Member
Official Member
Dear BASC

With events that unfolded in Cornwall last year and consequently with the Police confiscating certificate holders’ guns, and with this being copycatted elsewhere, it is becoming very apparent that law abiding shooters I speak to are worried. It is irrespective of whether someone has done something wrong as a simple complaint by an anti may be excuse enough for overzealous Police forces.

It is plainly obvious that the Police are using ‘confiscation’ to be seen to be doing something about in many cases nothing except for ticking their own boxes at the expense of shooters. Very few shooters understand the implications of surrendering their guns without a reasonable and legal reason. Although the ‘English Shooting’ channel is not something I particularly follow it was brought to my attention and was enlightening to what is happening and I would urge you to watch it and make a public announcement on how these sorts of situations should be handled from both sides.

This brings us on to another subject, covered by English Shooting, and that is insurance. Although BASC gives a limited shooting cover with membership it is useless and ineffective for a situation arising that requires legal representation. Unfortunately, as life and situations have evolved since BASC withdrew its legal cover in July 2020 advice is not enough and a more robust insurance cover needs to be re-introduced

There are now several companies offering comprehensive cover including legal representation cheaper than BASC’s full membership. These other insurance company offers are a barrier to taking up BASC membership irrespective of what other benefits BASC does for shooting. In the current climate saving money matters.

I’ve researched one insurance company who for an additional £7 on their standard premium give full legal cover up to £100,000. Why isn’t BASC using their insurance broker to offer this option so retaining or harvesting new members. The CPSA include ‘legal expenses insurance for shotgun revocation and renewal issues’ not rifles or pistols, but they give it.

Come on BASC and without being critical you need to step up to the mark and adjust to the current climate and advise on a robust legal response for shooters faced with Police on their doorstep.

From a long-term member,
(Unlike many who have left for a more economical and comprehensive cover option).

Thanks for the message. The following information may be helpful.

Important notice regarding firearms licensing legal expenses insurance - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation

BASC warns firearms licensing delays at untenable level - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation

BASC medical panels - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation
 

Liveonce

Well-Known Member
Conor,

thank you for your reply.

re insurance is that not exactly the principal of insurance, you pay in the hope that you will never need to claim? But are really glad you have it when the **** hits the fan. And I speak from personal experience having suffered a house fire.

re firearms licensing delays who are you preaching too? Other than those effected by the delays because nobody else will really care, not even those responsible for the process, as they will either issue a section 7 or say store your guns at an RFD.

re basc medical panel, in practice anybody can benefit from at least one of the BASC GP members as they have set themselves up in business to do the reports for the same fee regardless of if you are a BASC member or not.
 

kes

Well-Known Member
Murray 50 - you seem to like verbally abusing those with whom you do not agree - better for your own health if you just walk on by. If you check the BASC links above, they relate to problems and not many solutions maybe 2 years ago.
Nothing wrong with people seeking better representation in my book. If you disagree with me please feel free to press the ignore button.
 

terrier1

Well-Known Member
BASC acts in the best interests of its members and shooting.
Did you ask the members. NO so how do you know it was in their best interest.
 
Last edited:

The deer man

Well-Known Member
Seems I've stirred up a hornets nest reading some posts! Perhaps we should all reflect on what we all want which I would assume is the same thing at the end of the day and find a better and more informed way of cummunicating it between ourselves.

Two points I have discovered since starting this post...

1. BASC magazine. It is sent out as a hard copy as printed material, as such, is VAT exempt being regsrded as an essential item. Online material/magazines are classed as luxury items and are thus VAT'able. The saving on VAT is therefore substantial and far outweighs the cost of magazine postage not forgetting adverts contribute significantly to publication costs.

2. Insurance. Two points here. Firstly, BASC when they did offer legal cover had an inordinate ammount of claims which pushed their premium up substantially. In order to keep premiums down 'exemption clauses' were put in place that would/could bar many claimants making a claim rendering the policy inneffective in many cases. Either way premiums were escalating to a point that would make membership expensive.
Secondly, exemptions on other policy suppliers may render those policies not as effective as assumed and detailed analysis of those policies should be investigated. Worth noting the CPSA only cover shotgun activities so reducing risk. Gunplan have a list of exclusions/limitations which need to be viewed.

Where this leaves us is cover that is not as robust as we think. Certainly BASC have a fighting fund to help members and where they believe they have a chance of succeeding, not unreasonable. I would not expect BASC to assist someone who has been involved in e.g. assault or drink driving who subsequently loses their licence.

Where this leaves us, is to ensure we read the small print and perhaps realise there are always other factors at play and the grass is not always greener on the othe side.
 
Last edited:

Liveonce

Well-Known Member
Seems I've stirred up a hornets nest reading some posts! Perhaps we should all reflect on what we all want which I would assume is the same thing at the end of the day and find a better and more informed way of cummunicating it between ourselves.

Two points I have discovered since starting this post...

1. BASC magazine. It is sent out as a hard copy as printed material, as such, is VAT exempt being regsrded as an essential item. Online material/magazines are classed as luxury items and are thus VAT'able. The saving on VAT is therefore substatial and far outweighs the cost of magazine postage not forgetting adverts contribute significantly to publication costs.

2. Insurance. Two points here. Firstly, BASC when they did offer legal cover had an inordinate ammount of claims which pushed their premium up substantially. In order to keep premiums down 'exemption clauses' were put in place that would/could bar many claimants making a claim rendering the policy inneffective in many cases. Either way premiums were escalating to a point thst would make membership expensive.
Secondly, exemtions on other policy suppliers may render those policies not as effective as assumed and detailed analydis of those policies should be investigated. Worth noting the CPSA only cover shotgun activities so reducing risk. Gunplan have a list of exclusions/limitations which need to be viewed.

Where this leaves us is cover thst is not as robust as ee think. Certainly BASC have a fighting fund to help members and where they believe they have a chance of succeding, not unreasonable. I would not expect BASC to assist ssomeone who has been involved in e.g. assault or drink driving who subsequently loses their licence.

Where this leaves us, is to ensure we read the small print and perhaps realise there are always other factors at play and the grass is not always greener on the othe side.
Actually I think Conor was saying the opposite they had so few legal claims that it made the £1 million premium untenable.

which is great as for me only car insurance is required by law so I will cancel all my other insurances as they are just a waste of my money after all I will never claim on my life insurance.
Or first I will shop around to see if I can get better value, wonder if BASC did that?
 

Rewulf

Well-Known Member
Actually I think Conor was saying the opposite they had so few legal claims that it made the £1 million premium untenable.
They did say that.
They absolutely stated, it wasn't worth paying the premium, as so few people make use of it.
Or first I will shop around to see if I can get better value, wonder if BASC did that
Whatever BASCs excuses and reasons, I'm very happy with my C3 policy for less than £40, complete with legal cover, public liability ect.
For £80 and a bucket full of advertising revenue, BASC seem unable to match this.
Very strange, probably got nothing to do with their massive HQ, 100 odd employees, company cars and associated expenses?
And the 'fighting fund' what have they fought lately?
They like to slap their badge on any Defra or other government depts battles with WJ ect, and pretend THEY won the case, when their involvement was usually minimal.
I'd love to see the figures of their membership loss lately.
 

kes

Well-Known Member
Actually I think Conor was saying the opposite they had so few legal claims that it made the £1 million premium untenable.

which is great as for me only car insurance is required by law so I will cancel all my other insurances as they are just a waste of my money after all I will never claim on my life insurance.
Or first I will shop around to see if I can get better value, wonder if BASC did that?
Regarding the first bit of comment - why would you pay £1m without 'testing' the market for such a proposal ? Surely BASC had some historic info ? This does not ring true to me but then...........
After one year of high cost would you not also [perhaps try to re-nogotiate and go to perhaps another supplier? I am sure the idea for moneysupermarket et al didn't spring up overnight.
The excuse for stopping legal cover seems to me to stem more from how many cases the ;egal company would take of those asking for legal support and my guess would be very, very few, hence although you have however many cases, the supplier controls the number getting support.
Not perhaps beyond the whit of man to put this right, rather than cancel a useful, helpful, and member centric benefit ?

Still its just guessing on my part.
 

enfieldspares

Well-Known Member
I get legal cover for revocation or refusal to renew my SGC through my membership of the Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (CPSA) and as an old git over sixty I get it for £63 or if I were under sixty for £73.

And the insurance covers me for stalking, game shooting, pigeon shooting as well as clay shooting:


OTOH I'm quite disappointed that the CPSA don't give free driven days at Catton Hall to MPs and also disappointed that CPSA chose not to sign that notorious letter agreeing to a voluntary lead shot ban in the UK.

Yet BASC full membership is £82 and only once you're over sixty-five do you get old git rates...of £71. So that's more money for NO LEGAL COVER. But then again all the facilities at Marford Mill do cost don't they.
 
Top