Dan. Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 When does this officially come in? As I have sent in my application and it's currently going through the process :S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Thank you Simon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Clarke Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) Dan - your application should be unaffected. This consultation runs until 29 December and we hope the changes can be introduced in this parliament. Edited November 27, 2014 by Simon Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetter Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) n Fruitloop seems to have misread the paper, which actually states "Variation (not like for like)" There was, a little while ago, talk by ACPO to amending the rules so that like for like's could be done without the need for a variation, perhaps the above wording suggests that it is in the pipeline It would be fantastic if it got sorted its a pain in the bum if you fancy something nicer in the same cal but currently have to flog yours, wait for 1 for 1 and then finally get it. I speak as someone in TVP area who generally only take a couple of weeks to do it if I was in some of the other regions I read about I dont think I would bother ever swapping. Edited November 27, 2014 by Zetter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 David, have you heard anything about how this might affect licencing in Northern Ireland? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Clarke Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Cannon, this is for GB but could be an important marker for NI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenwolf Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) . There is a short section in the consultation asking: The fees and costs for firearms licences administered by the police have to be reviewed annually. Do you have any comments on how the review process should be taken forward? BASC recommends: An annual inflation-linked review with a five year full review of police costs, procedures and service delivery." I think people should answer no to this question. It will give the govenrment the excuse to hike the fee on a yearly basis. Edited November 27, 2014 by Steppenwolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Cannon, this is for GB but could be an important marker for NI That's what I'm thinking. The licencing over here is obviously considerably different, but my concern is that this will be used as an excuse to hike the fee without providing transparent cost evaluations, or increasing the licencing process efficiency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
das Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I look back fondly to the days of my first shotgun licence, bought across the Post Office counter for 10/6p. No police involvement then, no Hungerfords, Dunblanes or Cumbria. No problems then but time marches on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitebridges Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Looks good to me. Any idea what good old Nigel Farage and UKIP boys stance is on licensing costs? Afterall they will be in power after the next General election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Looks good to me. Any idea what good old Nigel Farage and UKIP boys stance is on licensing costs? Afterall they will be in power after the next General election. Now she has opened her gob, Yvette Cooper may just be responsible for her party's demise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Can't grumble at that really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenwolf Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I think also the shooting organizations like BASC and CA should really push on our behalf some things which will also cut costs like 10 year licences and allowing dealers to do 1 to 1 variation. This can be marketed to the Home Office as reducing workload for the police while cutting red tape, no real concern that it's a loosening of security over who gets firearms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossberg-operator Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I think also the shooting organizations like BASC and CA should really push on our behalf some things which will also cut costs like 10 year licences and allowing dealers to do 1 to 1 variation. This can be marketed to the Home Office as reducing workload for the police while cutting red tape, no real concern that it's a loosening of security over who gets firearms. i wrote the same things in the survey... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_b_wales Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 A better result than I expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan. Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Can someone define the like for like 1-1 situation. Does changing say .17hmr to a larger cal count as a 1-1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Hmmm I will reply to the consultation once I have read the full proposals. Annual review worries me! I can see a grant this year at £50 and renewal in 5 years at well over £100 the annual costs are still put of step with car driving licence s and passports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingo15 Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 No issues here i can live with that. Perhaps if they looked at initial applications and didn't bother wasting there time and effort on people that stood no Chance of getting one then surely that would cut costs down a bit for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Can someone define the like for like 1-1 situation. Does changing say .17hmr to a larger cal count as a 1-1? Think of it this way. A variation fee is only payable if you increase the number of firearms you have. Swapping a .17hmr for a .308 would be free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabbiter Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 just filled my questionnaire in from basc email,seems ok to me.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 i doubt anyone can complain about the extra cost,a very small rise.so well done to all concerned.can we now take it that as part of these discussions the question of service levels have also been addressed.will the home office for example be reminding the various counties forces of the current firearms rules and that as this is a full cost rise.and no further pilot schemes will be allowed such as durham medical reports.also the time some forces take for both grants and renew.while I as everyone does welcome any increase being kept to a minimum I think it a false economy if the level of service shows no improvement. I've a feeling FAC/SG license holders in Durham will have no improvement at all for the increase in fees, if anything, the service Durham rolls out ATM is getting worst not better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 I've filled in the consultation and commented that I find the proposals acceptable.........on the proviso that the police agree a service level agreement with the shooting representative organisations to standardise and improve the service. I further suggested that, as the main reason the police gave for requesting an increase in licence fees was because it was not self financing and in these days of budget cuts cost them money! which they can no longer afford, that certificates should be renewable at ten year intervals rather than the current five years!.........simplistically that could cut the financial and administration costs to the police by approx 50%..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 They tried to increase the fees here but it was rejected. Northern Ireland Justice Committee once again rejects increase in firearms licensing fees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 Interesting what did they try and raise them too for NI? the cost of medical reports is potentially a much bigger cost than the cert....I think that needs clarification as does a robust SLA with procedures set in place for adherence an Ombudsman for instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted November 27, 2014 Report Share Posted November 27, 2014 They tried to increase the fees here but it was rejected. Could the change in circumstances across the water add more leverage to the fee increase arguement here, to the point where a compromise is obtained to the detriment of shooters rights? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.