Jump to content

CPSA what's your thoughts..


Will Poon
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I was a full member many moons ago when I shot mostly clays, as I thought it was the thing to do, but let it lapse as I started to shoot more live quarry than clays.

Local ground tried to insist I rejoined when I started to take nephew when he was a lot younger even though we were both insured through BASC at the time, but couldn't tell me why even after trying to persuade me to rejoin as a Clubman member. I didn't rejoin but we stopped going altogether as it was mentioned each time we showed up and is primarily set up for DTL and OT, neither of which interested us.

I've yet to hear of the CPSA taking a stand against any kind of unscrupulous behaviour by licensing authorities, and regardless of which organisation it is, this is a priority for me, and sadly none can live up to my expectations.

The icing on the cake for me was when the CPSA attempted to change their name in order to distance itself from live quarry shooters. All for one and one for all....I think not.

I'm assuming no one on here is employed by them. :)

I would guess if anyone here IS employed by them they'll be keeping their head down..... Edited by Glenlivet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am with them but only as I am a range safety officer and to get the qualification I needed clubman membership. It is part of the clubs constitution and states you must be qualified and insured by the CPSA. I have never really questioned this (I am also a BASC member). If anyone knows if this is right or wrong I would be interested to find out.

Atb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you are an individual, not an organisation. D

 

Do you really expect them to come along to PW and put up with some of the carp that would head their way?

 

I am very surprised David from BASC puts up with so much abuse.

I don't thinks it's so much abuse as criticism albeit sometimes strongly expressed. Unlike this thread which (with just the one exception) is comprehensive in its range of criticisms, anything current only applies to two or three aspects of BASC's work, with in the past one or two others which have caused some upset among its members and had BASC been the topic of this, the thread would have been 'locked' well before now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am with them but only as I am a range safety officer and to get the qualification I needed clubman membership. It is part of the clubs constitution and states you must be qualified and insured by the CPSA. I have never really questioned this (I am also a BASC member). If anyone knows if this is right or wrong I would be interested to find out.

Atb.

Ooh that was another thing,

 

When I took my safety officers qualification I was a member, you didn't need to be at the time but you paid extra for not being a member, there were 3/4 army guys doing there's at the same time and non were members but need the qualification as they were opening a clay club on base,

 

After I left I was still a safety officer but they then changed the rules so that ONLY members could do the course and use the qualification, My safety officers qualification lasts for life but I'm not allowed to use it unless I join them,

 

Same for our club insurance, we used to be an affiliated club, needed to be for the insurance but they kept putting the price up so now thet were no longer the cheapest when you took into consideration the fee tha you had to pay to be an affiliate,

 

So we left.......wasn't long before they were on the phone asking why, I explained everything to them and said if we didn't have to pay the affiliation fee we would still be using their insurance company, oh you can't do that, you have to pay us as well......that conversation soon ended,

 

We now use a cheaper option that suits us better

 

:shaun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shaun, yes, another example of a CPSA "own goal", there have been plenty of those over the years ...

 

I have never been able to fathom out why they are so quick to award " Premier Plus" status to any ground who seems able to pay the fee..? A case in point is EJ Churchill, who cannot shoot on their ground on a Sunday, how odd is that..?

 

I suppose it all boils down to money at the end of the day. ?

 

Cat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shaun, yes, another example of a CPSA "own goal", there have been plenty of those over the years ...

 

I have never been able to fathom out why they are so quick to award " Premier Plus" status to any ground who seems able to pay the fee..? A case in point is EJ Churchill, who cannot shoot on their ground on a Sunday, how odd is that..?

 

I suppose it all boils down to money at the end of the day. ?

 

Cat.

Steve Smiths (Jack Reeds) up here is a Premier Ground,

 

Uses old picked up clays, no score sheets, and you have to trap yourself,

 

You get a pay and play credit card type thing, so if you shoot Skeet or DTL then you get 25 clays put on it,

 

If you get any no birds (and you do because they are pick ups) you then have to go back and tell them how many, if you get another no bird then you have to go back again, it's farcical

 

:shaun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a clay person only ever shooting them for a bit of fun and practice but just saw this on FB - "Joe Kitson has resigned from his post on the CPSA board as the West Midlands regional director over a catalogue of reasons. Read his letter via the link http://2s5yg916ul8n1fjd583jqeof.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2016/03/resignation-Joe-Kitson2.pdf"

 

Seems to tie in with some of the comments in other posts above

 

That resignation letter should be read by every CPSA member, its a cracker, what a shambles of an organisation.

Edited by Cranfield
to correct spelling error, kindly pointed out by dougall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this years published CPSA Accounts it is listed that they have incurred a cost of £35,330 in legal fees, I am led to understand that allegedly they are involved in an ongoing dispute with a member that has already incurred costs in excess of £40,000. Could I ask , is the CPSA actually a Crowdfunding organisation for a Legal Charity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CPSA have responded :-)

 

https://www.cpsa.co.uk/news/cpsa-hq/2016/03/08/west-midlands-regional-director-resigns

 

Last time the CPSA responded in pull magazine stating nothing at fault with the CPSA's dealing with a matter got the criticism of the judge at the subsequent hearing.

 

The quality of the registered shoots is down to the target setters / ground owners so I cannot even credit the CPSA with that, I just wish they would stop with the infighting and put the efforts into running shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this years published CPSA Accounts it is listed that they have incurred a cost of £35,330 in legal fees, I am led to understand that allegedly they are involved in an ongoing dispute with a member that has already incurred costs in excess of £40,000. Could I ask , is the CPSA actually a Crowdfunding organisation for a Legal Charity?

Well we're paying for it Pete! :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myself, I can’t ever see me joining them.
For me they do not offer anything to my shooting requirements etc.
How ever, from everything I have ever seen or herd of them I would be really pained to give them a penny of my money. It’s like the "hot fuzz" film for the clay shooting world, "for the greater good”!

 

The idea of a regulatory body for competitive shooting to give a set of standards across the board that is equal, fair and transparent I think is a good idea. But this organisation would seem to be far from this.

Give them a wide birth is my first thought.

 

Also a well written letter to the CPSA there IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CPSA have responded :-)

 

https://www.cpsa.co.uk/news/cpsa-hq/2016/03/08/west-midlands-regional-director-resigns

 

Last time the CPSA responded in pull magazine stating nothing at fault with the CPSA's dealing with a matter got the criticism of the judge at the subsequent hearing.

 

The quality of the registered shoots is down to the target setters / ground owners so I cannot even credit the CPSA with that, I just wish they would stop with the infighting and put the efforts into running shooting.

Wow,

 

They certainly covered everything in that reply

 

:shaun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...