FAC conditions Metropolitan Police - Accompanied for rimfire

[Scully]

Don't phone up, always write

And keep a copy for yourself.

Thanks Pob.My shooting organisation didn't want to get involved,but suggested any mentoring condition probably wouldn't be for too long.Nephew wasn't too chuffed!

[Raja Clavata]

Post DSC1 I had an accompaniment condition on my .308 and not on .243. I wrote a pretty robust letter in to the manager requesting removal of the condition and got a load of twaddle back in retort. Shortly afterwards I sold the .308 setup and during the 1 for 1 variation process I casually mentioned the condition on the .308 to a different FEO during a telephone call. No problem he said and duly removed.

[JonathanL]

Good afternoon all. I am wondering if anyone has specific experience with the Met Police that might assist me in resolving an issue with my FAC.

 

I have already spoken to BASC firearms team who seemed completely exasperated with the Met, and told me that, basically, I am screwed. Their advice is to send the FAC back and ask for the "error'" to be corrected. They also advise not to hold my breath.

 

The specific condition states (This is an exact reproduction):

The .22, .17hmr Rifles(s) & Sound Moderator(s) and Ammunition shall be used for shooting vermin and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area were the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot. Whilst Accompanied by an experienced shooter with an FAC conditioned for the type of shooting being conducted.

 

I have a similar condition on the 6.5X55, which I am happy to accept. I've only shot 15 deer and I'll continue to take paid for accompanied stalking for some time to come. I discussed this with the FEO. It is not limiting and the condition was not a surprise.

 

This accompanied condition on rimfire though is something else. It basically stops me taking up any of my permissions to shoot vermin. If I knew someone suitable, who might inexplicably want to come with me to bag a couple of rabbits, the landowners wouldn't like it. The actual sentence seems like an added afterthought; it doesn't even make sense. However, it's clear what the police intend and not worth risking a breach.

 

I am an experienced shooter and I showed the FEO service records to prove it. It's a real shame because I was otherwise very happy with the service from the Met, to my surprise frankly.

 

What is my best line of argument to get the condition removed? Anyone in the Met area with specific experience or knowledge?

 

You cannot appeal a condition at court as there is no provision in law to do so. However, I think you could bring an appeal on the ground that the condition is so onerous that it amounts to a constructive refusal to grant the certificate as it means that in practice you cannot actually use the firearm.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

I dont want to be pedantic but the mentoring requirement starts, if its exactly the same, .Whilst blah blah. In English there is no object to this sentence and it is not related to the previous sentence, because a full stop separates them. It simply isnt understandable as it stands. I would ring your FEO and say the mentoring bit is meaningless as it stands - you presume its a mistake as its not English and to apply a retrospective mentoring condition is also illogical. It might simply be a mistake, a part sentence added in error here's hoping !!!!

 

I tend to agree with this. It is similar to the debate we were having on another thread. The actual meaing of these conditions seems to be that you must so what the condition tells you to do but you are not restricted to doing only that. Hence, if he goes out with soemone else at least once then he has satisfied the condition but there isn't anything stopping him doing anything else with the firearm as long as it's legal to do so.

 

J.

[David BASC]

Dear All,

 

I am pleased that the situation is resolved, as our firearms team said, send it back and ask for it to be corrected…

 

As some may be aware, there is no statutory right of appeal against certificate conditions (Buckland v Cambridgeshire Constabulary) although unreasonable additions may be challenged by way of Judicial Review.

 

Never the less, Judicial review will be expensive and with no guarantee of success, and also to all intents and purposes uninsurable though a legal expenses policy.

 

So, simply expecting BASC or any other organisation to be able to call up the FEO and get conditions removed is, I am afraid, just not going to work.

 

If your licence has a condition that you do not agree with, first port of call if you are a member will be give is a call for advice. We will always try to give you the best advice on what to do, but will also be realistic about your chances.

 

Writing to, or calling your licensing team is often a very good bet, and this is what we will often advise and will often work too, just as you have found out. If not call us back and we will discuss what we can do next

 

If conditions are daft, service poor etc and calling / writing simply does not work then please make a formal complaint.

 

Time and time again we will meet with senior officers to complain about the poor service etc just to be faced with them falling back on the fact that there are no formal complaints on this issue so evidently there is not a problem!!

 

David