As I am a guide/deer stalker/fly fishing guide insurance plays an important part in my line of work.
I am with Clivertons, covers me for taking out clients for stalking/fly fishing, and an add on for sales of venison.
This is a commercial bespoke policy, all guides should have this and not rely on their clients having their own insurance.
I have been with SACS, NGO, BDS, BASC, Country Covers.
Some cover you up to £5k for 'recreational' stalking and distribution of venison.
That is the very grey area, and probably won't be tested until an accident happens, or there is a food poisoning incident, then be prepared to lose your home and/or your liberty.
The way I see it (I'm sure plenty will disagree and that's fine) the recreational stalker, goes out, shoots a deer, consumes himself or gives it away to family friends, he is recreational.
The guy who thinks he is a recreational stalker, goes out, shoots a deer, consumes himself, gives it away, barters, sells to game dealer, or direct to the public, just to cover 'expenses' or up to £5k as per insurance he thinks covers him.
No longer a recreational stalker, they have taken financial reward, even if that doesn't cover their costs, they have taken a reward, and should, I believe, declare to HMRC, but happy to be proved wrong on that HMRC point by any accountants on here.
A good friend of mine asked one of the above (Not Cliverton) for their opinion, back came the answer 'you are covered for recreational deer stalking and sale of venison up to £5k'
My friend does not take out clients, but sells the venison direct at farmers markets and his website.
I'm not sure if he exceeds the £5k, none of my business, but he is a good friend, I would hate for him, or anyone else to believe they are covered by these statements 'recreational stalking' and when it comes to a claim the insurance company wiggles out of it.
I hope this isn't taken the wrong way, or goes down the wrong way these discussions can go on the SD, nasty personal comments taking it off track, it's meant in a positive way, just to make people think, am I really covered?
What are peoples views?
Maybe the above providers can give a definitive legal description of the difference, and stand by it should a claim occur?
Cheers
Richard
I am with Clivertons, covers me for taking out clients for stalking/fly fishing, and an add on for sales of venison.
This is a commercial bespoke policy, all guides should have this and not rely on their clients having their own insurance.
I have been with SACS, NGO, BDS, BASC, Country Covers.
Some cover you up to £5k for 'recreational' stalking and distribution of venison.
That is the very grey area, and probably won't be tested until an accident happens, or there is a food poisoning incident, then be prepared to lose your home and/or your liberty.
The way I see it (I'm sure plenty will disagree and that's fine) the recreational stalker, goes out, shoots a deer, consumes himself or gives it away to family friends, he is recreational.
The guy who thinks he is a recreational stalker, goes out, shoots a deer, consumes himself, gives it away, barters, sells to game dealer, or direct to the public, just to cover 'expenses' or up to £5k as per insurance he thinks covers him.
No longer a recreational stalker, they have taken financial reward, even if that doesn't cover their costs, they have taken a reward, and should, I believe, declare to HMRC, but happy to be proved wrong on that HMRC point by any accountants on here.
A good friend of mine asked one of the above (Not Cliverton) for their opinion, back came the answer 'you are covered for recreational deer stalking and sale of venison up to £5k'
My friend does not take out clients, but sells the venison direct at farmers markets and his website.
I'm not sure if he exceeds the £5k, none of my business, but he is a good friend, I would hate for him, or anyone else to believe they are covered by these statements 'recreational stalking' and when it comes to a claim the insurance company wiggles out of it.
I hope this isn't taken the wrong way, or goes down the wrong way these discussions can go on the SD, nasty personal comments taking it off track, it's meant in a positive way, just to make people think, am I really covered?
What are peoples views?
Maybe the above providers can give a definitive legal description of the difference, and stand by it should a claim occur?
Cheers
Richard