panoma1 Posted May 24, 2018 Report Share Posted May 24, 2018 22 minutes ago, Wymondley said: A Chief officer of police is not required (or qualified) to interpret medical records, that's why they're asking for a "report" from doctors. Inspector Dibble is not going to want to read through pages of waffle about your bad back and piles! We're not going to get away with just sending (free) medical records. Plod want someone to blame when something goes wrong involving a licensed firearm, and doctors don't want it to be them, (unless they can be extremely ambiguous and non committal for a fat fee). The chief office of police is not required or being asked, to interpret medical records, the issue, according to Lincolnshire police is verification that the applicant has disclosed any reportable relevant medical condition that may impact on their suitability to hold a gun licence, if no such reportable condition exists then an applicants medical records will verify this, likewise if the applicant hasn't disclosed a relevant notifiable medical condition, their medical records will reveal this too! It is the responsibility of the chief officer of police to approve or refuse an application....at some point they may have to defend that decision, but that is what they are paid to do! If the police wish to pass their responsibility onto others, then whosoever they choose should be capeable, agreeable and qualified to do so! And the police should finance it! Under the new 2018 GDPR SAR a patient can apparantly specify what and which part of their medical records they require, if a patient specifies to the GP they require their medical records appertaining to the specified reportable relevant conditions firearms legislation stipulates, then that is what you should receive....for free! If there are none, it should just say "none"...........This would be factual information..........as opposed to unqualified opinion! Plod can only approve or refuse an applicant on facts....they cannot base approval or refusal of an application on either their own, or a GP's unqualified opinion! Neither of them seem prepared to accept responsibility...........The police appear to be chasing the impossible...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted May 24, 2018 Report Share Posted May 24, 2018 4 hours ago, panoma1 said: I dont think this is correct? Lincolnshire police have stated that because some applicants have lied on their application when answering the question appertaining to specified medical conditions, they want GP's to confirm the applicants answer! If this is the case then a copy of an individuals medical records will confirm or otherwise whether the applicant has answered truthfully! A GP is not required (or qualified) to give opinion on an applicants suitability to hold a gun licence! It is for the chief officer of police to determine an applicants suitability! Speaking to a doctor who shoots at one of the clubs I go to on this matter he said remember that the same drug can treat many different conditions. He said you could be given medication that is also used for treatment of depression for things other than that. So if you were to supply a compete medical record and you had at some time been unknowingly had these you may find yourself having problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted May 24, 2018 Report Share Posted May 24, 2018 Quote Plod want someone to blame when something goes wrong involving a licensed firearm, That's it in one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 12 hours ago, bostonmick said: Speaking to a doctor who shoots at one of the clubs I go to on this matter he said remember that the same drug can treat many different conditions. He said you could be given medication that is also used for treatment of depression for things other than that. So if you were to supply a compete medical record and you had at some time been unknowingly had these you may find yourself having problems. Why? The condition, not the medication is the issue. Amitriptyline is used to treat both depression and back pain (for example). What is the specified condition out of those two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, Penelope said: Why? The condition, not the medication is the issue. Amitriptyline is used to treat both depression and back pain (for example). What is the specified condition out of those two? I am not a doctor so do not know the answer to that. Sending a full medical history to someone who is not qualified to interperate it could lead to problems. However a letter from a GP stating you are not being treated for certain conditions is easy for the non medical person to understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 15 minutes ago, bostonmick said: I am not a doctor so do not know the answer to that. Sending a full medical history to someone who is not qualified to interperate it could lead to problems. However a letter from a GP stating you are not being treated for certain conditions is easy for the non medical person to understand. Back pain wasn't a specified condition when I last renewed. It is all very simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, Penelope said: Back pain wasn't a specified condition when I last renewed. It is all very simple. Well if its all so simple there should be no problems with this new requirement by some forces. And basc are right to ignore it. We shall see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 25 minutes ago, Penelope said: Back pain wasn't a specified condition when I last renewed. It is all very simple. This is the issue; it should be very simple. I have never had any of the specified conditions (and declared as such on my renewal form). I do take regular medication (statin, precautionary blood pressure control, aspirin), but according to every Doctor to whom I have spoken these carry no risks in respect of shotgun/firearm ownership. Indeed I was taking the same medication at my last renewal. However Mr Plod is requesting "factual details of (your) medical history" from my Doctor. My Doctor (and this is a quote from the letter requesting a fee from the surgery) "Please be advised that the Police are not asking your GP to advise whether or not a certificate should be issued, this responsibility rests entirely with the Police" 11 minutes ago, bostonmick said: And basc are right to ignore it. We shall see I am currently following BASC's advice - and will keep the forum informed, but I suspect this will drag out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salopian Posted May 25, 2018 Report Share Posted May 25, 2018 This is absolutely ludicrous, it now appears that The Chief Constable of Lincolnshire has no really justifiable reason to take the action that he has done and thus contributing to the unnecessary delays and wastage of numerous peoples time , and an association with allegedly 150,000 members choose to sit by and do very little . It really leaves me with little option but not to renew my membership of any shooting association if they are not prepared to represent me when matters like this arise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 Thinking about this...........the chief constables of Lincolnshire and Police Scotland have turned citizens rights and UK law on its head......rather than someone presumed innocent (not to have lied on your certificate application) until proven guilty..........now you are presumed guilty until you have proven yourself innocent! Plod and politicians have been after this turnaround for some time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wb123 Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 On 22/05/2018 at 16:12, panoma1 said: If under the new GDPR 2018 a patient can have access to their medical records within 30 days for free.....it will reveal to the public the GP's as grasping money grabbers, if they try to then charge for a printout?....and under the worst case scenario....how much can they charge for a printout? How much is a printed page of A4 worth? Speculative I know....but it looks promising! Interesting times! Note that is is not necessarily your full record you have free access to. It has to be vetted for third party information or information they feel you should not see first. The lst dealing I had with a solicitor was £1 a page for printing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 Quote It has to be vetted for third party information or information they feel you should not see first. They can redact a third party's name, but just how would a third party get into your record in the first place? I don't agree with the last part about vetting for information that you should not see. It isn't their decision to make. As for printing charges. They have a choice - provide you with a free copy or let you go through their computer and clerical records. I think they will opt to print it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wb123 Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 4 hours ago, Gordon R said: They can redact a third party's name, but just how would a third party get into your record in the first place? I don't agree with the last part about vetting for information that you should not see. It isn't their decision to make. As for printing charges. They have a choice - provide you with a free copy or let you go through their computer and clerical records. I think they will opt to print it out. The killer example for shooting purposes would be your mother/neighbour/village idiot etc phoning the gp and saying they were worried about your mental health, drinking, etc... potentially decades ago. The information cannot be released to you if doing so threatens the confidentiality of the reporter but ultimately means you can have information in your notes on which concerns have been raised but you cannot be informed about. Obviously this is a big problem which will probably need a test case to sort it out from a shooting perspective, and is also a nightmare for your gp as every set of notes released have to be checked. You can consent for a full version of your notes to be released to a third party, that is still chargeable though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 At the end of the day we will end up paying the doctor. So no point looking for cheap ways around it. None of our so called organisations are going to do anything for us. I wrote to basc with regard to their attitude over this gave them my membership number never even got a curtousy reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 26, 2018 Report Share Posted May 26, 2018 Quote The information cannot be released to you if doing so threatens the confidentiality of the reporter but ultimately means you can have information in your notes on which concerns have been raised but you cannot be informed about. It would have to be disclosed, but redacted to ensure you could not identify the person. The records are yours and you have the right to make sure that they are accurate and have the opportunity to challenge what has been said. I just do not accept that what you allege is correct. The charge for a SAR was £10, but is now free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted May 27, 2018 Report Share Posted May 27, 2018 6 hours ago, bostonmick said: I wrote to basc with regard to their attitude over this gave them my membership number never even got a curtousy reply. I had a reply advising me the same day, so whilst what happened to you is poor, it isn't always what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted May 27, 2018 Report Share Posted May 27, 2018 44 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: I had a reply advising me the same day, so whilst what happened to you is poor, it isn't always what happens. Although last year when I was late doing my renewal I had five phone calls from them in just over a week. Slight case of double standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 27, 2018 Report Share Posted May 27, 2018 3 hours ago, JohnfromUK said: I had a reply advising me the same day, so whilst what happened to you is poor, it isn't always what happens. I also got a reply to a recent late evening enquiry to BASC the next day! But I agree, If a genuine question is asked......it should always get an answer/response! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted May 28, 2018 Report Share Posted May 28, 2018 On 26/05/2018 at 22:31, Wb123 said: The killer example for shooting purposes would be your mother/neighbour/village idiot etc phoning the gp and saying they were worried about your mental health, drinking, etc... potentially decades ago. The information cannot be released to you if doing so threatens the confidentiality of the reporter but ultimately means you can have information in your notes on which concerns have been raised but you cannot be informed about. Obviously this is a big problem which will probably need a test case to sort it out from a shooting perspective, and is also a nightmare for your gp as every set of notes released have to be checked. You can consent for a full version of your notes to be released to a third party, that is still chargeable though. In safeguarding they don’t allow people on most cases to make anonymous tips and anyone can see who has made an allegation against them, if there are genuine concerns and it goes to court the person raising the safeguarding issues needs to be able to stand behind their accusation and may be cross references as to why they had those concerns. You cant just go around tarnishing people’s records and refuse to ever be called to account for those actions. I believe children’s schools are one of the very few organisations that can raise concerns without naming the teacher, although they will normally have a ‘safeguarding officer’ who may be called to account for any concerns raised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted August 1, 2018 Report Share Posted August 1, 2018 On 24/05/2018 at 19:14, oowee said: Good on you John. Keep us up to speed with how it all goes. This has been quiet for a long while ......... because nothing has been happening, but now there has been some interim progress. I took the opportunity to visit the West Mercia licensing representatives on the BASC stand at the Game Fair (27th July). Very pleasant and very helpful. Checked their laptop and my renewal application is currently with the FEO. They would speak to him. I got a call a couple of days later from the FEO and he arranged to visit. As I have always found with past FEOs, pleasant and helpful, and I'm optimistic that progress will continue. I am hoping that my next update will be the arrival of my renewal and bring this to its conclusion. I also note that in another thread, Thames Valley are also causing people issues on this matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 On 01/08/2018 at 16:22, JohnfromUK said: I am hoping that my next update will be the arrival of my renewal and bring this to its conclusion. And indeed it arrived today, so matter closed for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted August 3, 2018 Report Share Posted August 3, 2018 The whole thing sounds like a disaster from start to finish, i hope they learn from it and it doesn't become a requirement in this part of the UK. 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.