BASC to cease legal expenses cover wef 31 July 2020

[mick miller]

Not one question in parliament about the medicals fiasco, not one single word questioning the sense in allowing Chief Constables to dictate 'law' for applicants as they see fit. Nothing about protecting law-abiding citizens from engaging in lawful activities without threat from masked 'vigilantes' and thugs. Zero work on firearms legislation reform, simplification and on and on... Money well spent?

EDIT: Sorry, we did get to keep the .50cal. For now. Yay (said virtually nobody, ever)!

Edited July 6, 2020 by mick miller

[AULD YIN]

20 hours ago, scolopax said:

I think they quietly ditched it , it was their major selling point, nobody said boo. Now BASC do the same, even though it was only in place a few years,  everyone wants out. Strange world.

RE SACS insurance

The insurance also includes full legal defence cover for relevant and approved liability claims.

Just checked on the internet

Edited July 6, 2020 by AULD YIN

[Lord v]

On 04/07/2020 at 08:50, Diver One said:

Bearing in mind I am an engineer and not a lawyer...is what they have done actually legal/allowed?

i know that if for example part of my contract with a company was to ."service machines and attend to repair faults as required,'. And I decided  (without asking the client) that I wouldn't be servicing  their main machine any more there would be a bit of grief heading my way

I imagine yes. 

I haven't seen the small print but I imagine it includes a clause along the lines of.' insurance will provided as long as it is underwritten at reasonable expense to the organisation' 

(if it doesn't then BASC are more idiotic than I give them credit for) 

PI on designs/work in engineering is often caveated this way as well.

Complaints to the FCA or anything like that will be a complete waste as such clauses are very common. 

Far better off voting with your feet. 

Edit: just checked the wording we use and it's 'provided that the insurance remains available to organisations of equivalent size and type of (consultant) at commercially reasonable rates and on commercially reasonable terms' 

Any challenge to BASC would have to be on the word 'reasonable'. (assuming that's what they have, and I imagine they do) 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Lord v

[Conor O'Gorman]

BASC's website briefing and FAQ on this topic has been updated.

Important notice regarding legal expenses insurance

Thank you to the forum members that contacted BASC with queries and feedback about this. 

If you are a BASC member and have any queries or feedback about this please email me at conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk with your membership number and I will ensure that someone gets back to you. 

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

BASC's website briefing and FAQ on this topic has been updated.

I understood it perfectly well the first time.
Nothing has changed in their stance, despite the backlash ?
So what is the update, they are going to continue with removing the legal cover still , are they not ?

[bottletopbill]

Sent Basc a email stating they should look at there members views  on p/w and asking about a full refund and the cost of replacing my membership awaiting a answer

[mossy835]

they will lose a lot of members, if they keep going with this,me for one.ccc looks good.

Edited July 6, 2020 by mossy835

[stagboy]

3 hours ago, AULD YIN said:

RE SACS insurance

The insurance also includes full legal defence cover for relevant and approved liability claims.

Just checked on the internet

I think that means for the liabilities that are covered, ie  accidental injury to a third party. Not legal expenses for challenging your police force for the revocation of a certificate.    

[mossy835]

18 minutes ago, stagboy said:

I think that means for the liabilities that are covered, ie  accidental injury to a third party. Not legal expenses for challenging your police force for the revocation of a certificate.    

 

 

correct.

[Newbie to this]

7 hours ago, mick miller said:

Nothing about protecting law-abiding citizens from engaging in lawful activities without threat from masked 'vigilantes' and thugs.

That is a very interesting point.

The recent case of the bloke being harassed while going about his legal business. I believe he was threatened with revocation by the police (not 100% sure), presumably he used his legal cover to fight the police's totally wrong decision (if he was actually threatened with revocation).

Where would he be if the same happened again once the legal cover is removed??? Without his guns I presume!

[Perazzishot]

The reason so few people use it is simply the fact that BASC hardly ever take on any members cases anymore!

[holloway]

3 hours ago, mossy835 said:

 

 

correct.

correct they have done what i decided to do with my motor policy many years ago ,it is an add on, the rest of the cover is still the same .

[holloway]

I have said this many years ago on another forum what BASC really need is a top class public relations officer because year after year they blunder into situations that they could easily avoid .Every time it probably costs them millions a small salary would be money well spent (oh and perhaps a ford Ranger thrown in  and a few driven Pheasant days )the regional officers dont get paid enought to deal with the fallout that some of there decisions cause.

[flippermaj]

Hi Connor,

 

Look i I have always been and still am pro basc although you sure are making my job harder!  I am the secretary of a wildfowling club that at the moment is basc affiliated and has been for decades.   I now have emails from members demanding we part from basc over this.  So at the moment that’s 80 plus membership fees that will go and my club can’t be the only one where members feel the same?

You seem to be shooting yourselves in the foot here.  Could cover be reinstated please?   Could it be made an optional extra for those prepared to pay?

 

Help me help you here!

 

cheers

 flipper

[mossy835]

5 hours ago, stagboy said:

I think that means for the liabilities that are covered, ie  accidental injury to a third party. Not legal expenses for challenging your police force for the revocation of a certificate.    

 

 

correct.

[Conor O'Gorman]

If you are a BASC member and have any queries or feedback about this please email me at conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk with your membership number and I will ensure that someone gets back to you.

[nic]

Asked also in another forum....

Conor In your role do you have access to the number of members that utilise the other sections of the Insurance cover that you mention....

• up to £10 million Public Liability Cover................. how many claims on this, especially as most people have this as part of their house Insurance
• up to £10 million Employer Liability Cover............ what % of the members employ anyone? 
• up to £10 million Product Liability Cover............... What % make an item? if you sell something then its covered by the manufacturers liability
• up to £50,000 cover for personal accidents resulting in the loss of sight, hearing, or limbs............ how many claims on this... if someones eases fault then down to their insurance if the person was negligent.

The whole purpose of insurance is a gamble that hopefully you will not use it, but have it if required....... If it is saving a million quid, why not directly employ a barrister or two full time... what do they earn: 150 grand a year? get a couple and utilise them!

I am the club Secretary of a club and have spent the last 5 years arguing against leaving BASC and no longer being affiliated. As an organisation they are handing out ammo to the nay sayers all the time. You are meant to be an organisation that has a major role in education regarding game and promoting shooting both to the public and politicians..... the standards that you show in putting your point across to your members astound me, you ignore them and treat them like mushrooms!

 

 

 

[Rewulf]

11 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

If you are a BASC member and have any queries or feedback about this please email me at conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk with your membership number and I will ensure that someone gets back to you.

This thread is full of queries and feedback, why dont you try answering some of them here, Flippermaj just asked a simple question 'Is the legal cover going to be reinstated'
Im asking the same question.
If it isnt, then I am leaving BASC , and I suspect thousands of others will too.

Is BASC OK with that?
Are they so disconnected from the membership they A .Dont care,    B. Didnt feel it necessary to consult the membership before implementing the changes ?

I find it staggeringly arrogant.

[mossy835]

they have 3 weeks to change there mine or im off some where eles.

[Teal]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Is BASC OK with that?
Are they so disconnected from the membership they A .Dont care,    B. Didnt feel it necessary to consult the membership before implementing the changes ?

In my opinion, Yes.

Honestly I'm amazed people are giving them more time to get things in order. You are a lot more tolerant than I am!! Time and time again I've been disappointed. I can't stomach paying/rewarding it anymore. You might get some concessionary breadcrumbs, or a few soundbites. But there is not going to be real change unless the membership wakes up, and the truth is for most members their sub it is like a utilities company or a bank provider. So the sleepy majority will stick with, as even though people are aware it's not great they have huge inertia.

Some will say 'change the organisation from within', but they say that because they know 6 months down the line you will have the enthusiasm and stuffing knocked out of you, as you realise for all your good ideas and energy, if your face doesn't fit you won't get in. I've seen it with some on here, and they don't even clear the first hurdle. And if you did get in... well have a look at the sort of things that have happened: https://www.dropbox.com/s/72o8xhzlkif2bsj/170227-BASC-Executive-Summary-final.pdf?dl=0 . No doubt the ones who were kicked out were simply 'bad apples', and in no way representative of culture. But it's pretty disturbing that this behaviour has gone on.

[Rewulf]

18 minutes ago, Teal said:

Honestly I'm amazed people are giving them more time to get things in order. You are a lot more tolerant than I am!!

I think its like any insurance , people dont like to change things, its the familiarity .

But Ive already made my decision to leave, and the 2 questions I asked were rhetorical , I already know the answers.
I thought maybe someone at BASC would like to try and defend themselves , but they wont care until they take a pay cut or lose their jobs.

Complacency is the downfall of all empires.

[Fatcatsplat]

Rather than just sit and berate BASC (which i did earlier), i did some research and made a few calls as i'm in the, industry and also spoke with BASC.

Without giving away any privileged information, the situation for BASC in this instance is absolutely untenable - Due to claims volume, premiums and self insured retention having risen exponentially over the last 4 years, as well as the personal excess limit and combined with a restricted market and increasingly restrictive exclusionary language, they have genuinely had to drop the coverage. Even with the size of the pot they have to play with, this part of the coverage was by far the largest drain and frankly, they have done a cracking job of managing to get it renewed to this point.

The only fault i can place here is that the press release to members did little to explain the full facts and perhaps, if it had, the members may feel a little less aggrieved. 

 

 

 

[Rewulf]

18 minutes ago, Fatcatsplat said:

Rather than just sit and berate BASC (which i did earlier), i did some research and made a few calls as i'm in the, industry and also spoke with BASC.

Without giving away any privileged information, the situation for BASC in this instance is absolutely untenable - Due to claims volume, premiums and self insured retention having risen exponentially over the last 4 years, as well as the personal excess limit and combined with a restricted market and increasingly restrictive exclusionary language, they have genuinely had to drop the coverage. Even with the size of the pot they have to play with, this part of the coverage was by far the largest drain and frankly, they have done a cracking job of managing to get it renewed to this point.

The only fault i can place here is that the press release to members did little to explain the full facts and perhaps, if it had, the members may feel a little less aggrieved. 

 

 

 

Not really.

One of the main things I valued with being a BASC member, was that if I unfairly had my tickets removed/suspended, then BASC would fight my corner.
Yes theres good public liability and accident insurance, but I can get that (already have that) for far less money.
Im not particularly interested in most of their 'projects' , I rarely read the advert packed magazine, as I find little in there of interest to MY type of shooting.

I liked to think part of my subscription helped support shooting and fieldsports in general, but does it ?
They made a bit of noise about doctors notes, lead bans and the GL issue, (among plenty of other things ) then rolled over and let it happen .

They are powerless against private or crowd funded groups like WJ or LACS, so you have to ask yourself , what is the point of them, with their corporate attitude and logistics ?
They appear to be run more as a business than a serious pro shooting organisation, bloated , arrogant and ineffective .

Whats the point of an organisation that is supposed to fight for the members interests, but at the first sign that it might put a dent in the coffers, it holds its hands up and surrenders.
Time for something different, something non profit, and not scared to get its hands dirty, by doing what its designed to do.
Represent us.
 

[nic]

I have just had an interesting conversation with a lady from BASC, after emailing Conor. This confirmed that the notice has now been changed to be more accurate. It is only the legal cover in respect to firearms licensing queries that has been curtailed (each member had a 500 quid excess to pay and the first 1/2 million legal fees each year had to be paid by BASC before the insurance kicked in) should you have need of legal cover in regards to the other aspects of the insurance, eg personal liability or personal injury, it is there. The number of queries with licencing that the firearms dept deal with and are then brought to resolution FAR FAR outnumbers any dealt with by the legal cover..... 30 went as far as the insurance last year out of about 150 that started towards it..... as with any insurance, they will only take it on when they think they have a good case, (insurance is there to make money for shareholders NOT to be your mate, so will not take on cases they think will lose) my personal view is that yet again, the biggest issue is BASC's inability to do PR! and put things over better to their bosses, the members.  Apparently this has been in discussion for a year in Council.

 

 

[udderlyoffroad]

46 minutes ago, Fatcatsplat said:

Rather than just sit and berate BASC (which i did earlier), i did some research and made a few calls as i'm in the, industry and also spoke with BASC.

Could BASC realistically put the money saved towards a ringfenced 'war chest' for members that require legal aid?  Could they become their own underwriter?