FAC & SGC Fees

[manthing]

Am I right in thinking that the above fees are Home Office fees and not police.

Are the police expected to do their bit from the monies collected from council tax?

[ElvisThePelvis]

Am I right in thinking that the above fees are Home Office fees and not police.

Are the police expected to do their bit from the monies collected from council tax?

Nope, money goes to police.

[manthing]

Ok.

So we pay for a service over and above what we pay in council tax.

Why then are members of the public that are burgled not charged for the police investigation?

What are the criteria for who gets charged for police time and who doesn't?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Ok.

So we pay for a service over and above what we pay in council tax.

Why then are members of the public that are burgled not charged for the police investigation?

What are the criteria for who gets charged for police time and who doesn't?

 

Where are you going with this?

 

We as shooters have to pay for the licensing process to gain permission for either an FAC or a SGC, do you expect it to be free and/or covered by the Police element of the Council Tax?

[CharlieT]

Historically, the police budget has covered always covered everything to do with public safety and policing. Which is why, for example, we never had SGC's as it was not deemed necessary. Over the years government has deemed that, for public safety reasons, firearms licensing should be more robust and that greater control should be implemented. This however has come at a price.

 

In recent years, the police has argued and put forward the case, that firearms licensing should be self funding and that the fees, set by government, should be set to cover full cost recovery. Government is sympathetic to these views and the Home Office has embarked on implementing a full cost recovery system, this is currently being implemented. Expect further increases in fees.

 

BASC and others have argued that a full cost system should not be in place until firearms licensing is fit for purpose and that certificate holders receive a far better service.

 

I can't think of anything where a member of the public is charged "full cost recovery" for something that is deemed necessary for public safety reasons other than firearms licensing.

 

I do find it strange that the Home Office, driven by the police, continue to come up with more and more hurdles and requirements for certificate holders and applicants to jump, thus increasing the costs of firearms licensing, and then expect us to pay an ever increasing fee without any oversight into their own efficiencies in dealing with us, their paying customers.

[wymberley]

The problem is is that whatever voice we have is no more than the merest of whispers. As it remains highly likely that this will never change into a roar - and even if it did it's likely that it would achieve nothing as our numbers are of little consequence - we'll continue to get the same abysmal treatment regarding cost/efficiencies/hurdles.

[manthing]

Tight choke, not up to anything suspect matey just trying to get things straight in my head.

I understand that if we are requested to produce a CRB check then there's a cost.

I understand that football clubs make a contribution towards the cost of match day policing, is it the full cost.

Do people organising a peacefully demonstration/march have to pay for policing?

Just asking questions and stimulating conversation.

Edited February 6, 2017 by manthing

[Wb123]

I dont object to people paying for the services they use, part of the problem i am told with licencing in one place i lived it that it costs so much more to process than the fees that they desperately want to avoid any increase in the work load. Maintaining a horrendous wait for variations and grants helps put some people off.

 

Would people be prepared to pay a representative rate for a faster service?

 

Supposedly the DBS runs at full cost recovery, assuming an extended check is a reasonable reference point for the police work involved in checking background thats £44, being generous and ignoring the 20% the dbs do for free. Your firearms dept wont have the same huge bank of centre staff.

 

Now ones firearms lot need to visit which wont be cheap, assuming an hour total work time gone per visit lets call that £70 including all related costs, though it would not suprise me if it were more.

 

Total estimate £114

 

Some people will need an extra visit or to walk a permission but the current system only allows for a single fee. Assuming one in seven need another hour we are at £124.

 

We need to build in cost to cover working time on rejections, appeals, revokations, and those incidents where something goes wrong which will be rare but highly expensive in man hours. It is hard to make a good guess but im starting to suspect a total true cost close to £200 is not unlikely.

[phaedra1106]

And of course there's the small matter of the firearms license being for the benefit of public safety, not for the benefit of license holders.

 

Unlike the police presence outside of football grounds or at demonstrations we have to pay for it not the public. In every other instance where the police are tasked to perform duties for public safety the cost is recovered from their annual budget.

Edited February 8, 2017 by phaedra1106

[Westward]

As said above, much of the cost burden is created by the police themselves and their self-determined new priority function of defining and guarding public safety. The days are long gone for those foolish people who mistakenly think the priority of the police is the maintenace of law and order. These days the main purpose of police activity seems to be maximum blame avoidance. A few months ago and elderly man was taken ill whilst driving and crashed into a bridge. He died at the scene and no one else was involved. Anyone with half a brain could see in 10 seconds what had happened. So why did the police deem it necessary to close the road for 5 hours and divert 1000s of vehicles several miles down country lanes? I can only assume it was to ensure that no one could possibly accuse them of not investigating the accident thoroughly.

 

I've lived in the same house with the same wife and the same security for 14 years and I haven't changed into a violent criminal or a terrorist either, so why do they want to waste time and money rechecking all the things they've already checked multiple times? Even the FEO didn't know when I (politely) asked him. "It's just procedure" was the answer.