guns taken

[Apthorpe]

Realistically an investigation doesn’t happen overnight-it’ll be weeks or months possibly, depending on the allegations. One word against another, no witness/injuries and no previous…sorted in weeks. It’s likely a voluntary revocation in any event, certainly he won’t be fully revoked until the end of the investigation.

That's not what the story is. The story is that he has been presented with an instant revocation and a refusal to tell him what the reason is. He says it isn't a "voluntary revocation" - a term that doesn't make sense, btw. The thing you're certain about is exactly what is supposed to have happened here.

I really hope this guy is telling the truth and there isn’t more to it (not for a second am I suggesting anything different)…butttt… I think FSB should be rather careful throwing support behind him until the facts surface. I find that account hard to understand, to be candid.

So do I. But I can't imagine that the channel (FSB?) would bother going to interview the guy, edit and put out such a video without performing a reasonable amount of due diligence. Neither the keeper nor the channel will think there is any advantage of going public with deliberately misrepresenting the situation. It's certainly not going to help the keeper. Taken rationally, the most probable understanding of the situation is that the police have made procedural errors. Nobody else has anything to gain for pretending.

 

[25 Sharps]

And you can bet they know that BASC has done away with its legal cover insurance for its members.

No it hasn’t, not entirely and this case would have been covered I believe

 

[Oracle]

A “historic review” (as outlined in the letter) re examines all the original evidence which was available at the time, the original decision making processes and whether those decisions were justified and correct. The evidential test is based on the balance of probabilities, taking into account the available evidence, guidance and relevant legislation on which those original decisions were made and any subsequent action.

It will also take into account any new evidence which has since come to light and whether the original decision making process and findings were correct, based on any new or updated statutory guidance or legislation.

Appears that D&C must already have all the available evidence and have deemed that no further investigation is needed. Therefore after a review, and taking into account the new statutory guidance have made the decision to revoke.

As previously mentioned, part of the notice of revocation letter, importantly the reason(s) why, appears to be missing and some parts redacted.

 

[Liveonce]

No it hasn’t, not entirely and this case would have been covered I believe

Believe or know? Thought if circumstances merited it they may fund deserving cases from their own funds, was that not the idea?

 

[T.eddie]

Didn't the bloke say he was with the NGO as opposed to BASC? If so shouldn't the questions about legal support go their way?

 

[Blaser243]

Many people need to reconsider their expectations of what "legal support" they can expect from any membership organisation.

BASC was the only org to offer actual (trained/qualified) legal support from solicitors/barristers in court hearings. This was through the insurance policy which the BASC Council decided to withdraw. Previously (and possibly still) Council could authorise BASC funds to be spent on an individual members case in the same manner. No other org has or does offer this type of support. Put simply, if you have to instruct a solicitor to communicate with the police or prepare an appeal against revocation, this is on you.

What the NGO and BASC (possibly others, but not to any known degree) do offer is legal support by lay people (i.e. not qualified legal practitioners). BASC has never had a directly employed solicitor working at Marford Mill. This is not to undermine the great knowledge that the BASC Firearms Team has, but they can't represent you at court and they won't profess to be offering legal advice per se. They can, and do, step in to discussions with police forces - but they can't go much further than that.

NGO has a gentleman who falls into the same category as many of the BASC team (i.e. ex copper, knows his stuff by all accounts) but I've not met him or spoken to him. I'm sure he's perfectly competent, but he is still just one person and a lay-advisor at that.

Involving BASC/NGO may provide knowledge and a degree of separation from the issues that leads to clearer and more efficient communication with any licensing authority. Some licence holders get bogged down in the detail or have unreasonable expectations. Some don't understand the law. Some are unable to communicate clearly or persuasively. That's why we're stalkers, not high court judges. However, you may well be able to do the same job yourself. For many people, instructing a knowledgeable solicitor with firearms experience would be a much better (albeit more expensive) option - but how much are your guns worth to you?

Finally, in terms of the police's general approach at present - it is very much seize now, ask questions later. The Lowe (Surrey puppy farm) case was the main factor in this change, but Plymouth made it more acute for them. Investigations take months - the police are extremely risk adverse and they also aren't very quick at anything. With Covid backlogs, you can expect it to take much longer. None of this is right, but it is a reality and although BASC are putting pressure on the forces about this issue generally, they do not appear to be making much progress.

 

[Whitefront]

According to its latest magazine, NGO members can buy legal expenses cover as a bolt-on for an extra £27.50. No idea if it is any good, as insurance cos tend to wriggle out of anything they can. But the NGO itself is a sound org and will always do its best.

For a non-org route, look at Country Cover "Club", or C3, the trading name of Country Cover Limited, which is touted by some on this forum as an alternative. This is an "introducer", operating out of a terraced house in a village in Northamptonshire, with £75k in net assets and, as far as I can see, no employees, according to Companies House. This "introducer" (most biz seems to be introduced to a firm of which one of its two directors is MD) offers "legal expenses cover". This is actually administered by Legal Insurance Management Limited (or was, until July). On inspection, the master policy states such claims will be entertained "If you can convince us that there are reasonable prospects of being successful in your claim..." Good luck with that!

 

[Blaser243]

According to its latest magazine, NGO members can buy legal expenses cover as a bolt-on for an extra £27.50. No idea if it is any good, as insurance cos tend to wriggle out of anything they can. But the NGO itself is a sound org and will always do its best.

For a non-org route, look at Country Cover "Club", or C3, the trading name of Country Cover Limited, which is touted by some on this forum as an alternative. This is an "introducer", operating out of a terraced house in a village in Northamptonshire, with £75k in net assets and, as far as I can see, no employees, according to Companies House. This "introducer" (most biz seems to be introduced to a firm of which one of its two directors is MD) offers "legal expenses cover". This is actually administered by Legal Insurance Management Limited (or was, until July). On inspection, the master policy states such claims will be entertained "If you can convince us that there are reasonable prospects of being successful in your claim..." Good luck with that!

That is a standard feature of any legal expense policy - no insurer will pay for you to progress a claim unless the solicitors acting for you think that it has a greater than 50% shot of winning. Its up to those solicitors to determine whether its a viable case - and this creates a conflict of interest between you and them. For instance, they may take the case on believing that it has good prospects, but then something changes (they find out new information, you tell them something you didn't think was relevant) and they change their view - they are then obliged to tell the insurer who can pull support leaving you with the option of discontinuing or paying for them yourself.

I'd be interested to see a copy of the NGO legal expenses policy. I've not looked into it, but does it cover FAC/SGC appeals per se, because often administrative proceedings like that (e.g. actions for judicial review) are expressly excluded).

 

[Whitefront]

The C3 wording doesn't even give the usual 50 % stipulation -it's even woollier than normal, and clearly puts the entire onus on you to convince them - no question of an independent legal review. How do you argue a legal point against a solicitor - especially when you don't have an actual membership organisation on your side? As I said before, most of these policies are just an auction of promises and marketing hype.

As you rightly point out, the problem with all legal insurance is that the solicitors are, in reality, working for the insurance company, not you; it's the insurance co that pays their fees, after all. They don't want to damage their relationship with their real client. This is exacerbated by the fact that even if you win, courts hardly ever award costs against the police in firearms cases, so the insurance company is very unlikely to recoup its outlay. I personally do not know of a single person who has had a good experience with legal fees insurance.

If you really do have a good case, then either a) use your organisation's specialist firearms department, free of charge, to negotiate, or b) hire your own expert legal representation - but be prepared to pay.

 

[Pedro]

Anyway, is this going to be one of those threads where we never get to know what happens in the end? Will Fieldsports News follow it up or not? I shall hold my breath for an update, but not for very long.

 

[foxdropper]

I’ve found in the past ,insurances of any type are found wanting when needed .Off topic yes but try hitting an electric cable and claim on your public liability .Minefield of paper trails and training ,blame and time rigging by utilities .
Nowadays I just pay up ,easier and far less stress .

 

[Free range rob]

I’ve found in the past ,insurances of any type are found wanting when needed .Off topic yes but try hitting an electric cable and claim on your public liability .Minefield of paper trails and training ,blame and time rigging by utilities .
Nowadays I just pay up ,easier and far less stress .

Yep, been there and done that on numerous occasions, I was pleasantly surprised by petplan these last couple of years who I think have been the only insurance company to pay up without a quibble, ever.

 

[foxdropper]

My accountant always queries these bills as they are in the thousands but from experience non payment of said bill even with insurance so say doing their bit ,ends badly in court .
You cannot fight a multinational company hell bent on rigging bill’s and justifying such by any means they can .
Rant over ,return to usual chilled self ,calm .

 

[Free range rob]

My accountant always queries these bills as they are in the thousands but from experience non payment of said bill even with insurance so say doing their bit ,ends badly in court .
You cannot fight a multinational company hell bent on rigging bill’s and justifying such by any means they can .
Rant over ,return to usual chilled self ,calm .

I wiped out a cable a few months back, it was purely my fault, we were doing test holes looking for a drain blockage and had been moving around the site a lot, dropped on one spot and forgot to run the cat over, bang, single cable to the site owners house, 10 inches deep across the garden.
Long story short it took them 2 days from turning up, to leaving and a 8k bill, possibly to cover the 7 men sat in vans for two days

 

[foxdropper]

We were supplied with utility plans on our last extension which showed no cables near the footings .Ran the cat over in grids as per and again nothing in the dig but damn me if I didn’t nick a cable on the final pull .
To fully dig this footing with a machine required a partial fill in of another footing to be dug out after .Right at the end of the clear out ,bang ,barely a foot deep old cable that should have been 4 m away .
You have to provide a receipt of cat scan sale or hire ,proof of scan tracing ,proof of training to use the fecking thing and a machine ticket .First two no probs but it’s not a legal requirement to have training for the use of a scanner so it’s in house training .Also not a legal requirement for a machine ticket on private property but insurance require it to cover a pay out .Mines run out .
Better to just pay the fecker and put it against tax .They repaired the break in an hour which I videoed ,booked 7 hours on the time sheet at time and half .Bill of £3,700 .
No comeback on depth ,no comeback on time they allege it took to repair ,Assholes ……breath ,calm .

 

[tolley]

 

[Benelli m2]

Just remember you lot the police will be looking at your social media activities when your up for a renewal
Stay safe children

 

[Sandyb]

Just remember you lot the police will be looking at your social media activities when your up for a renewal
Stay safe children

All my posts are private.. Nothing public. Are you saying they have the powers to invade the privacy and intrude? It's not as though there's any hostility or threat to the public. I often hear this about prospective employers also, but again, nothing is publicly shared...

 

[Jelen]

As an aside from the loss of the licence this raises other questions.
1) If police seize your guns and your licence is revoked permanently what happens to your guns? Clearly you can't sell them without a licence. Do the police take them to a RFD for sale?
2) What if you eventually get your licence back and the police return your guns in a damaged condition? Can you claim for the loss in value due to the damage?
3) Rifle scopes, particularly thermals, are expensive and not too robust. Can you remove the scopes before the police take them?

 

[Stalker62]

1) If police seize your guns and your licence is revoked permanently what happens to your guns? Clearly you can't sell them without a licence. Do the police take them to a RFD for sale?

They can do. They can and will (if the firearms were used in criminality) destroy them.

2) What if you eventually get your licence back and the police return your guns in a damaged condition? Can you claim for the loss in value due to the damage?

Yes. Good luck with that though.

3) Rifle scopes, particularly thermals, are expensive and not too robust. Can you remove the scopes before the police take them?

Yes. It is wise to do so.