Scully Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 well that has surprised me scully does not agree.atb as for medical reports I believe that nowhere in the home office guidance does it state the applicant has to pay for this.and as the shooting organisations have repeatedly said don't do it.so no problem there. You never surprise me either Mick. At least your sarcasm is consistent, unless you're displaying your other trait for being contrary. Nowhere does it state in HO guidance that the applicant shouldn't pay either, yet you have repeatedly stated in other threads on the subject that you believe it is ok for some licensing authorities to request that they do. Under what authority? It is a non-stautory request often delivered with the inferred implication that it will have a detrimental effect on an application if not complied with. Hence we have chaos, resentment and distrust. 'No problem'? Now who's been naive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 blimey I didn't expect that response, I only posted it to be light hearted, I still have some coffee and biscuits left Sorry for hi-jacking your thread, but some folk just can't see the wood for the trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyo Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Bet the general public would be too happy knowing that shortcuts in licencing are being made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 You never surprise me either Mick. At least your sarcasm is consistent, unless you're displaying your other trait for being contrary. Nowhere does it state in HO guidance that the applicant shouldn't pay either, yet you have repeatedly stated in other threads on the subject that you believe it is ok for some licensing authorities to request that they do. Under what authority? It is a non-stautory request often delivered with the inferred implication that it will have a detrimental effect on an application if not complied with. Hence we have chaos, resentment and distrust. 'No problem'? Now who's been naive? I have in the past said I would pay for report if it meant my renewal would go through quicker and smoother.never have I said I believe it right that they ask for this with a misleading attachment with the forms saying it is the rule.So again you missed interpreted what I have said on different threads.But as is your way.You say sarcasm I say straight talk.We differ again.atb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 I have in the past said I would pay for report if it meant my renewal would go through quicker and smoother.never have I said I believe it right that they ask for this with a misleading attachment with the forms saying it is the rule.So again you missed interpreted what I have said on different threads.But as is your way.You say sarcasm I say straight talk.We differ again.atb There you go again Mick. Ah well, never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Bet the general public would be too happy knowing that shortcuts in licencing are being made. You seem not to understand the law. Security and safe storage of your guns is your responsibility and yours alone. Just because the police check security when they visit once every 5 years at most does not mean that firearm security rests with them. Even the ACPO have said that renewal "visits" may be done over the phone where circumstances permit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyo Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) You seem not to understand the law. Security and safe storage of your guns is your responsibility and yours alone. Just because the police check security when they visit once every 5 years at most does not mean that firearm security rests with them. Even the ACPO have said that renewal "visits" may be done over the phone where circumstances permit. Sorry mate please don't patronise.I do understand it's my responsibility and comply fully,you don't understand what I am saying.Its the Licencing responsibility to make sure we are complying and to reasure the general public.I just find it alarming that some forces are not doing these checks as part of the renewal procedure.You go and announce this cost cutting exercise to the general public in Horden where the Atherton incident occurred or Cumbria and see what happens. Edited February 23, 2015 by Davyo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 Sorry mate please don't patronise. I do understand it's my responsibility and comply fully,you don't understand what I am saying.Its the Licencing responsibility to make sure we are complying and to reasure the general public.I just find it alarming that some forces are not doing these checks as part of the renewal procedure.You go and announce this cost cutting exercise to the general public in Horden where the Atherton incident occurred or Cumbria and see what happens. I understand what you are saying to a point.However I doubt the vast majority of the public have any real knowledge of the firearms laws and if you were to say to them that holders are only checked once every five years they may also be very alarmed.And if you were to also tell them how against random security checks some holders are that I am sure would cause them concern.thankfully in this country we still have reasonable laws on firearms how long it lasts is largely up to the attitudes of certificate holders.atb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 This country? Reasonable laws on firearms? It is my understanding that the UK has amongst the tightest firearm laws in the world? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHE Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 My own take on this is that the visit is necessary, not just to check that the security is adeqate, but also for the FEO to assess whether or not the certificate holder is displaying any indicators of unfitness. For example, in the 5 years since the last visit, s/he may have become alcoholic, or there may be evidence of drug addiction, extremist political views etc, or significant other may be covered in bruises... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hedge Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 A lot can happen in 5 years. Imagine if we MOT'd cars every 5 years. I have moved house twice in the last 12 months and not had a visit. I was asked over the phone: Was I using the same cabinet? Where was it stored/attached? How was it attached to the wall (and what sort of wall)? I sent back my licence and had a new one back within 72 hours. When it was renewed 2 years ago - I sent my licence back and was without it for about 4 weeks and was not sent or offered an S7 - I didn't know at the time but would insist of an S7 next time. I did ask about not having my licence and being able to go shooting and was told "your details are on PNC as a SGC holder under renewal so if anyone checks we know who you are". Thanks to BASC I now know that it actually against the law for me to be without any sort of licence/certificate and I should have been given an S7. I didn't get a home visit for that either. I think home visits should be compulsory for renewals and most definitely if you move house. This was all done with Leicestershire who claim that they are "under-resourced". I sympathise but shouldn't we be tightening the process not leaving big holes in it? We only need a couple more high profile firearms incidents and "the police didn't do their checks/home visits properly" for there to be more pressure on an already restricted `sport` (or pest control). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hedge Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 My own take on this is that the visit is necessary, not just to check that the security is adeqate, but also for the FEO to assess whether or not the certificate holder is displaying any indicators of unfitness. For example, in the 5 years since the last visit, s/he may have become alcoholic, or there may be evidence of drug addiction, extremist political views etc, or significant other may be covered in bruises... Sorry GHE - a very valid point but I couldn't help but laugh. If my FEO was coming round I'd make sure my gin/syringes/UKIP posters and battered wife were all locked safely in the sound-proof dungeon. Not sure an FEO could pick up on any of that during a brief 10 minute visit (I'd probably hide my `anger management for beginners` book as well) Having said that - a face to face of some sort is preferable to none at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 Sorry mate please don't patronise. I do understand it's my responsibility and comply fully,you don't understand what I am saying.Its the Licencing responsibility to make sure we are complying and to reasure the general public.I just find it alarming that some forces are not doing these checks as part of the renewal procedure.You go and announce this cost cutting exercise to the general public in Horden where the Atherton incident occurred or Cumbria and see what happens. I agree that home visits are beneficial, particularly for us as it helps build a raport with the FEO lack of one is hardly something to get our knickers in a twist over. We must not forget that prior to any home visit the following checks will have already been made and a letter will have been sent to your GP asking him to comment should he have any concerns. Renewal of Firearm Certificate. All renewals will be processed in the same way as grants a) Checks required on applicant; • PNC/CRO • DVLA, (Where there is cause for concern which dictates this is appropriate) • Criminal Intelligence, • Domestic Violence/Child Abuse, (where there is cause for concern which dictates this is appropriate • Complaints and Discipline (where there is cause for concern which dictates this is appropriate) • Special Branch (where there is cause for concern which dictates this is appropriate) • Checks should also be made with any other area within the force which may hold information in respect of the applicant. • Check of firearms department files for any information about the applicant (e.g. the existing firearm/shot gun/dealer’s files etc.), and any additional information held elsewhere. • Consider character and third parties (family, friends, associates, other residents) and where appropriate conduct PNC/CRO and criminal intelligence checks. Considerable care must be taken when conducting these checks as there is likely to be an infringement of Article 8 of ECHR. The Family, Friends and Associates of the individual applying have a right to respect for their privacy and family life and Firearms Control legislation makes no provision for this right in respect of these persons to be interfered with. Any such interference must be shown to be necessary in the interests of public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others If applicant resident in force area for less than five years, check previous force’s intelligence records. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 That's interesting Charlie T, thanks for posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 That's interesting Charlie T, thanks for posting. Also as a matter of interest, the following appeared in recent ACPO minutes.............. 15. HOME INTERVIEWS 15.1 Peter Taylor (Hertfordshire rep on FELWG) requested a suggested national consistent approach to the renewals procedure and where appropriate, replace the home interview with a structured telephone interviewl. 15.2 The Home Office do acknowledge a telephone call could be an acceptable approach within the guidance. It is more cost effective. 15.3 There is no policy on this at present. Regions to ensure chief officers are aware of the correct practices. Once the IPCC report has been published, CC Marsh will present this as an item at the next Chief Constables’ Council. Action: CC Marsh to submit Home Interviews as an APP to be presented at a future Chief Constables’ Council meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 You're right, that is interesting. It would be very cost effective; not least of all on the cost of Hobnobs, the FEO's favourite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 blimey I didn't expect that response, I only posted it to be light hearted, I still have some coffee and biscuits left That's how all the best threads start Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AULD YIN Posted February 24, 2015 Report Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) Up to now the FEO has always checked my shotgun /rifles ID numbers tally with the numbers on the certificate and on their paperwork on my renewal visit, (thats lothian and borders) five visits so far and assumed it was the norm to visit to check security and to verify the id numbers are correct. johnnie Edited February 24, 2015 by AULD YIN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 24, 2015 Report Share Posted February 24, 2015 Up to now the FEO has always checked my shotgun /rifles ID numbers tally with the numbers on the certificate and on their paperwork on my renewal visit, (thats lothian and borders) five visits so far and assumed it was the norm to visit to check security and to verify the id numbers are correct. johnnie Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to continue this practice, or if the interviews are to be conducted over the phone then the applicant could give all the relevant info' that way. It isn't exactly unknown for licensing records not to tally with what people actually own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadeye18 Posted February 24, 2015 Report Share Posted February 24, 2015 Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to continue this practice, or if the interviews are to be conducted over the phone then the applicant could give all the relevant info' that way. It isn't exactly unknown for licensing records not to tally with what people actually own.your not wrong scully,derbyshire force missed 2 of my 6 guns last year and sent me 2 licenses,they were very good and quick at sorting it out when i phoned them though.youd think the licensing system should work the same across the country but from reading different threads while ive been on PW for a few months it seems like the police cant make their minds up what to do half the time. 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.