blackbird Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Shooting times this week join the country side alliance 50% discount for new members £30 from £60, as my BASC is up for renewal I will give them a call & if they don't give me a loyalty discount I am away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatcatsplat Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Bye then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artschool Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I heard that some insurance policies have clauses in them saying this insurance must only be used as a policy of last resort. Need to check what you are paying for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasshopper Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I joined SACS today..BASC where next to useless and disinterested the 2 times i needed them in 15 odd years. £30 Too,so bargain in my eyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anser2 Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) The CA discount in a BIG CON. Its a gimmick to get new members , ( Alice Barnard their director admitted that at a meeting I was at last year ), the fees go up to the full amount the next time they are due. Its a waste of time as far as shooters are concerned. I asked their publicity officer and their director how much of their budget was spent on protecting shooting and how much was spent on hunting , saving rural bus routes , keeping countryside post offices open and so on. As yet I have not got an answer so I suspect very little of the budget goes to shooting. Does the CA hav a wildfowling or pigeon shooting department ? The answer is no. They use a consultant if they think the cost is justified. In my opinion the CA is an organisation of hunters riding on the backs of the shooting community money. In contrast BASC is very clear and open on where your money goes and once running costs are taken out 100% goes to shooting. And yes they do have departments dealing with various shooting sports. Insurance is no reason to join any shooting organisation as you can get it direct for a fraction of the cost. Your member ship of a countryside organisation should be because you want to protect the sport you love and in that BASC is miles ahead of any of the other organisations. Before someone brings up some gripe , yes they are not perfect , and I have had my disagreements with them in the past , but they still by far the best. As for a loyalty discount , get real and if you want to continue shooting stop being so tight. How can they be expected to protect shooting if we shooters are so narrow minded and penny pinching to want a discount. For many years I used to pay double membership as was a member of two clubs and never claimed the second membership back. I must confess I do now as I have joined a couple more clubs and paying 4 memberships is a bit much. I have been a member for 50 years and do not begrudge them one penny. Edited October 31, 2011 by anser2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted October 31, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 The CSA discount in a BIG CON. Its a gimmick to get new members , ( Alice Barnard their director admitted that at a meeting I was at last year ), the fees go up to the full amount the next time they are due. Its a waste of time as far as shooters are concerned. I asked their publicity officer and their director how much of their budget was spent on protecting shooting and how much was spent on hunting , saving rural bus routes , keeping countryside post offices open and so on. As yet I have not got an answer so I suspect very little of the budget goes to shooting. Does the CSA hav a wildfowling or pigeon shooting department ? The answer is no. They use a consultant if they think the cost is justified. In my opinion the CSA is an organisation of hunters riding on the backs of the shooting community money. In contrast BASC is very clear and open on where your money goes and once running costs are taken out 100% goes to shooting. And yes they do have departments dealing with various shooting sports. Insurance is no reason to join any shooting organisation as you can get it direct for a fraction of the cost. Your member ship of a countryside organisation should be because you want to protect the sport you love and in that BASC is miles ahead of any of the other organisations. Before someone brings up some gripe , yes they are not perfect , and I have had my disagreements with them in the past , but they still by far the best. As for a loyalty discount , get real and if you want to continue shooting stop being so tight. How can they be expected to protect shooting if we shooters are so narrow minded and penny pinching to want a discount. For many years I used to pay double membership as was a member of two clubs and never claimed the second membership back. I must confess I do now as I have joined a couple more clubs and paying 4 memberships is a bit much. I have been a member for 50 years and do not begrudge them one penny. You must have more money than sense my friend, I have asked BASC for help in the past & they have been as much use as a chocolate tea pot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Without the BASC you wouldn't have any representation to talk of. I renewed today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 The CSA discount in a BIG CON. Its a gimmick to get new members , ( Alice Barnard their director admitted that at a meeting I was at last year ), the fees go up to the full amount the next time they are due. Its a waste of time as far as shooters are concerned. I asked their publicity officer and their director how much of their budget was spent on protecting shooting and how much was spent on hunting , saving rural bus routes , keeping countryside post offices open and so on. As yet I have not got an answer so I suspect very little of the budget goes to shooting. Does the CSA hav a wildfowling or pigeon shooting department ? The answer is no. They use a consultant if they think the cost is justified. In my opinion the CSA is an organisation of hunters riding on the backs of the shooting community money. In contrast BASC is very clear and open on where your money goes and once running costs are taken out 100% goes to shooting. And yes they do have departments dealing with various shooting sports. Insurance is no reason to join any shooting organisation as you can get it direct for a fraction of the cost. Your member ship of a countryside organisation should be because you want to protect the sport you love and in that BASC is miles ahead of any of the other organisations. Before someone brings up some gripe , yes they are not perfect , and I have had my disagreements with them in the past , but they still by far the best. As for a loyalty discount , get real and if you want to continue shooting stop being so tight. How can they be expected to protect shooting if we shooters are so narrow minded and penny pinching to want a discount. For many years I used to pay double membership as was a member of two clubs and never claimed the second membership back. I must confess I do now as I have joined a couple more clubs and paying 4 memberships is a bit much. I have been a member for 50 years and do not begrudge them one penny. As I both live and work in the countryside the Countryside Alliance (CA) rather than the Child Support Agency (CSA) serve me well. To me there is more to life than just shooting and I am only to pleased to support an organisation that lobbies for all rural issues. That said, as I am as passionate about shooting as I am about hunting I support both the CA and the BASC. Both do a good job and both need our support. What does not help is the continual knocking of one or the other, in a perfect world we should be supporting both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boromir Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Not the BASC vs anything else again. Choose who you want, dont let others choose for you but choose the right one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I heard that some insurance policies have clauses in them saying this insurance must only be used as a policy of last resort. Need to check what you are paying for. Its not really about insurance but this is right some will ask if you have household insurance that covers you etc and if not they will pay out. Fundamentally who cares as long as someone pays, The CA is trying hard to appeal to shooting and does seem to be offering more help to shooters, one things for sure is it is nice to have a choice. The other choices are SACS and personally I don't trust blokes in skirts and the NGO who would probably be my choice if I wasn't with BASC. What I don't like about BASC is the price and the fact it keeps going up I'd be happier if they got a bit of commercial reality about them and worked out if they dropped the price membership would go up so their turnover would go up and they would be no worse off, but there is about as much chance of that as me going to the moon. The CA have run an introductory rate for new members and really for most it will be absolutely fine and they will save enough for a half decent evening out, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
englishman-in-wales Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 As I both live and work in the countryside the Countryside Alliance (CA) rather than the Child Support Agency (CSA) serve me well. To me there is more to life than just shooting and I am only to pleased to support an organisation that lobbies for all rural issues. That said, as I am as passionate about shooting as I am about hunting I support both the CA and the BASC. Both do a good job and both need our support. What does not help is the continual knocking of one or the other, in a perfect world we should be supporting both. Very well said...i'm of the same opinion all the way!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Join the organisation which best represents your interests.Considering letting My BASC membership lapse and join the NGO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anser2 Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 (edited) Blackbird I can assure you I do not have more money than sence in fact I suspect i earn a lot less than the majority of people on here. But shooting is very important to me and if it means missing some of the other good things in life then so be it. If you want realy cheap insurance go to your local broker and you should be able to get it for less than £20.00, but do not be surprised if your sport is lost in the future because the organisations that support it are starved of funds. If you have a problem within reason I suspect david BASC will help you out if you contact him. A chance for the CA to change my mind about them if they will answer a question I have asked several times before . What percentage of your members fees do you spend on pigeon shooting , wildfowling , game shooting , hunting , rural services ect and running the CA. Be open with your finances and perhaps you will win a little more trust in the shooting community. Edited October 31, 2011 by anser2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayman Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I heard that some insurance policies have clauses in them saying this insurance must only be used as a policy of last resort. Need to check what you are paying for. This is standard policy practice - there are "lead" and "follow" type policies. A lead policy will pay out and then look for ways of reimbursing themselves if there is other insurance that could take some or all the liability - and follow policies that say if the lead does not pay or there is no other policy covering the claim, then we will pay or make up any cover deficit. Having a policy that is a "follow" is in no way detrimental. It means you are covered should any other acting insurance not pay out - for instance, if you are at a shoot and the shoot itself holds cover, then that is the lead. If the shoots own cover does NOT cover all or any of your claim, your own policy performs. In some cases, both policies might be leads or follows in which case the underwriters would bear 1/2 each. This is really an arrangement between insurers and ultimately does not change the fact you have full cover even if the policy is a follow. The idea of "last resort" does not really apply - it just means that policy is last in the liability chain when liability is proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyboots Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 we all know BASC wont take on a case where sumone has had their FAC revoked and the case has very little or no chance of winning where as SACS tells its members they have 100k legal fees to fight in court agaisnt a revoked FAC well just a heads up SACS are the same as BASC if your case has little or no chance of winning then SACS insurer"s wont pay up and your case wont get to court to chanllege a chief constables decision in northern ireland, so all SACS members bear this in mind when you are sitting back thinking i can go all the way to court with my case cos you wont and i speak from personal experiance so in my case i was misslead with the 100k legal fees at least BASC told it straight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 In my view BASC and the CA are totally different animals. BASC is all about shooting, nothing else that’s what they do and frankly do well. So if shooting is your thing then BASC should get your support. The CA is much broader ‘church’ so to speak and no one else is doing anything about Hunting as far as I can see. Personally I support both and pay both by phased Direct Debit I also support the GWCT and Angling Trust by the way and personally think the CPRE (who I am also a member of) do more for rural business etc than anyone else, but thats just my view! However I do disagre with Clayman, if I am joining an association mainly to get the insurance, and then find out that they wont pay up because my home insurance will...I ask why the hell did I bother with XYZ association then! Monkeyboots - thanks for that post, I knew this was the case, but sorry you have to find out the hard way as it were. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayman Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I agree with David that if a person does have comprehensive primary cover that suits their needs they may not need additional insurance, and that every-one should be aware of exactly what cover they have within any given policy. Its likely, how-ever, that many HH policies etc will not have the full extent of cover contained in specialist policies designed for specific purpose. Third party liability cover inside a HH policy may not have the same geographical extent, or the same limits of cover. It may have excesses etc. Legal cover may not be bundled. PA is almost certainly not covered although separate stand alone PA covers can be obtained. Claims on specialist "follow" policies simply top up the cover not contained by default in other policies the individual may hold. The point was simply that policies that follow any existing cover are not "last resort" as expressed by another forum contributor as they still perform in full if no other cover exists, and should not be disregarded because they only respond to a claim if no other cover exists. The shooter wants to know they are covered to, say £10m for stalking, and whether this is a split of £2m on their HH and the remainder on their other P/L hunting policy is not relevant in my view. Its standard practice in the insurance industry to mitigate risk and include clauses in policies that say, in effect, we top up any shortfall of cover that may exist elsewhere. All claim forms I'm familiar with ask if there is any other cover that may respond to the claim, and Loss Adjusters would investigate this and join other insurers who have joint or underlying liability should a claim arise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Star Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) I joined SACS today..BASC where next to useless and disinterested the 2 times i needed them in 15 odd years. £30 Too,so bargain in my eyes You said it mate ! as other people who have left said " if you want them to do some thing for you they dont want to know !" all they want is an ever increasing subscrition fee & its all about jobs for the LADS !. You ever noticed they all drive around in BASC 4wheel drives all or most expenses paid blah blah! turn up at the road shows all paid for by members & they get complementary shooting thrown in when they get there ! dont they av a jolly old time & get paid while they are at it ! . It must be 2years ago now they turned up in Orkney for a meeting & orkney shooters thought this will be the perfect time to tell the MIGHTY BASC ! WHO REPRESENTS IT MEMBERS ABOUT THE AWFUL CARRY ON BY VISITING ITALIANS !. When we did & told them about them shooting geese by the truck load laying into Redshanks & other prtected birds & using electronic callers ! . This was the answer , Really ! , great too hear you boys are keeping an eye on things !, Next SUBJECT ! . THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED ! The British Association for Shooting & CONSERVATION ! WERE NOT INTERESTED ! & what happened the other day see my post ORKNEY POLICE & RSPB QUESTION ITALAIAN SHOOTERS ! . Well we were let down & I could say more but see what happens . Pole Star Edited November 1, 2011 by Pole Star Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) Polestar you're like a stuck record. As someone pointed out on your other thread which the mods closed, the BASC are not the police, what exactly did you expect them to do about the illegal activity you reported? It's like expecting the AA or RAC to deal with speeders or drunk drivers. Edited November 1, 2011 by Blunderbuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artschool Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I agree with David that if a person does have comprehensive primary cover that suits their needs they may not need additional insurance, and that every-one should be aware of exactly what cover they have within any given policy. Its likely, how-ever, that many HH policies etc will not have the full extent of cover contained in specialist policies designed for specific purpose. Third party liability cover inside a HH policy may not have the same geographical extent, or the same limits of cover. It may have excesses etc. Legal cover may not be bundled. PA is almost certainly not covered although separate stand alone PA covers can be obtained. Claims on specialist "follow" policies simply top up the cover not contained by default in other policies the individual may hold. The point was simply that policies that follow any existing cover are not "last resort" as expressed by another forum contributor as they still perform in full if no other cover exists, and should not be disregarded because they only respond to a claim if no other cover exists. The shooter wants to know they are covered to, say £10m for stalking, and whether this is a split of £2m on their HH and the remainder on their other P/L hunting policy is not relevant in my view. Its standard practice in the insurance industry to mitigate risk and include clauses in policies that say, in effect, we top up any shortfall of cover that may exist elsewhere. All claim forms I'm familiar with ask if there is any other cover that may respond to the claim, and Loss Adjusters would investigate this and join other insurers who have joint or underlying liability should a claim arise. boy oh boy insurance is complicated. I am glad other businesses don't work in the same manner. imagine booking a 5 star hotel over the Internet then arriving and being told of course you can stay but only if there aren't any free beds in the travelodge next door. I know it's not an exact comparison, but how many people would pay for insurance if they knew that their hh insurance would be expected to pay out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Its not really about insurance but this is right some will ask if you have household insurance that covers you etc and if not they will pay out. Fundamentally who cares as long as someone pays, The CA is trying hard to appeal to shooting and does seem to be offering more help to shooters, one things for sure is it is nice to have a choice. The other choices are SACS and personally I don't trust blokes in skirts and the NGO who would probably be my choice if I wasn't with BASC. What I don't like about BASC is the price and the fact it keeps going up I'd be happier if they got a bit of commercial reality about them and worked out if they dropped the price membership would go up so their turnover would go up and they would be no worse off, but there is about as much chance of that as me going to the moon. The CA have run an introductory rate for new members and really for most it will be absolutely fine and they will save enough for a half decent evening out, You missed a few S,R,A, N.R.A these are working away for shooters but dont blow their own trumpet £36 with legal cover up to £250,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Star Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Polestar you're like a stuck record. As someone pointed out on your other thread which the mods closed, the BASC are not the police, what exactly did you expect them to do about the illegal activity you reported? It's like expecting the AA or RAC to deal with speeders or drunk drivers. Its all a sad & very sad state of affairs Blundebuss its not just me who has been let down its a whole load of other shooters & part of that wording I used in my post was from 4 wildfowlers who come from your neck of the woods " Gloustershire " & they left ages ago . I have 2 fowlers from down south with me at the moment who same the same thing ! . A few years ago myself & 3 other BASC members had a sand grouse shooting trip mucked up big time by British Airways ! & we could not take our guns ! . So how can we shoot sand grouse with out guns ? you think we had a magic wand to produce more guns when we got there !. Cut a long story short , this cost us a fortune ! so I said to my shooting buddies " chaps I am going to get straight on to BASC about this ! ". When I did Blunderbuss all we got was Really oh thats awful ! Good bye ! now what would have been wrong with a Stinging letter from the MIGHTY BASC to BA complaining about the way its members were treated ! , NO Blunderbuss ! that would have taken up too much of their time & cost them too much money to give BA a mouthful ! . Remember this we & other members were paying the BASC payroll ! & they had no interest , now that is sad ! & they wont get another penny from me & a whole load of others who have left !. Ear defenders Blunderbuss ! you forgot to take em off ! I & others no longer think BASC is value for money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Star Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Its all a sad & very sad state of affairs Blundebuss its not just me who has been let down its a whole load of other shooters & part of that wording I used in my post was from 4 wildfowlers who come from your neck of the woods " Gloustershire " & they left ages ago . I have 2 fowlers from down south with me at the moment who same the same thing ! . A few years ago myself & 3 other BASC members had a sand grouse shooting trip mucked up big time by British Airways ! & we could not take our guns ! . So how can we shoot sand grouse with out guns ? you think we had a magic wand to produce more guns when we got there !. Cut a long story short , this cost us a fortune ! so I said to my shooting buddies " chaps I am going to get straight on to BASC about this ! ". When I did Blunderbuss all we got was Really oh thats awful ! Good bye ! now what would have been wrong with a Stinging letter from the MIGHTY BASC to BA complaining about the way its members were treated ! , NO Blunderbuss ! that would have taken up too much of their time & cost them too much money to give BA a mouthful ! . Remember this we & other members were paying the BASC payroll ! & they had no interest , now that is sad ! & they wont get another penny from me & a whole load of others who have left !. Ear defenders Blunderbuss ! you forgot to take em off ! I & others no longer think BASC is value for money PS if you look about I think you will find better insurance deals else where . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I was also let down by them in time of great need after 5 years full membership Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huntsman Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 NGO all the way for me, National Gamekeepers Org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts