Jump to content

All occupants of the property form


mgsontour
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Who told you this? 


FEO.  
Plymouth has consequences, as no cheif constable wants a repeat on their hands. 

edit to add by which I assume is the reason some have already had certificates revoked as per the fiekfsports tv channel.

 

 

Edited by rbrowning2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, rbrowning2 said:


FEO.  
Plymouth has consequences, as no cheif constable wants a repeat on their hands. 

edit to add by which I assume is the reason some have already had certificates revoked as per the fiekfsports tv channel.

 

 

Time will tell no doubt.
Do you know why tickets have been revoked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 years ago when my sons mum left me she moved a guy in that was clearly on roids . He lost his temper with her and beat her up badly . ( I still supported her as mates) 

The following year when my renewal came up . I was warned by my feo if I ever moved her back in , I would loose my sgc . 
I never mentioned a thing to my feo about her or the situation  . They already knew . 
I can’t see why they need to know who’s living there as they’re fully aware anyway. 

11 hours ago, rbrowning2 said:


FEO.  
Plymouth has consequences, as no cheif constable wants a repeat on their hands. 

edit to add by which I assume is the reason some have already had certificates revoked as per the fiekfsports tv channel.

 

 

I had follow up interviews after Plymouth as I’d only had my tickets back for 5-6 months at the time following my false arrest of assault. 
my feo was golden tho 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I never have, but a mate in Durham was queried about his sons ‘iffy’ acquaintance. 

Perhaps they have nothing on you or your family?

I would assume it is more of a confirmation of what they already know, unlikely that someone might give the game away during a grant or renewal chat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/02/2022 at 21:21, rbrowning2 said:


FEO.  
Plymouth has consequences, as no cheif constable wants a repeat on their hands. 

edit to add by which I assume is the reason some have already had certificates revoked as per the fiekfsports tv channel.

 

 

It wasn't the Licensing process at fault just gross negligence from the Police.  I am suprised the families of the dead are not taking legal action against the Police.

Edited by Weihrauch17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Scully said:

I never have, but a mate in Durham was queried about his sons ‘iffy’ acquaintance. 

I'm sure they are picking up the iffy mates via Facebook as I know they use it to get up to date pictures/profiles of persons they have lost/can't find

8 hours ago, Eaf70 said:

Thanks for pointing this out !! I'd printed the renewal pack but not even noticed the co-occupants form. 

It ain't obvious is it! Glad you read this post tho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, mgsontour said:

I'm sure they are picking up the iffy mates via Facebook as I know they use it to get up to date pictures/profiles of persons they have lost/can't find

It ain't obvious is it! Glad you read this post tho

To be fair if they can find my ex, then can they get me the £500 she owes me :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HantsRob said:

 

Yes, what part do you think isn't?
I'm not debating the "is this fair", just the legality side. I'm curious what part you think may not be legal? (not looking for an argument just curious)

See the rest of my post re the gdpr. Policy document requirements, clear open and honest process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, oowee said:

See the rest of my post re the gdpr. Policy document requirements, clear open and honest process. 

They are asking due to a request for a firearms/shotgun licence, and as such it is part of their diligence and checks for persons that may have access to the cabinet within a property. I think that's fairly open and honest? GDPR isn't that strict that it needs to be so prescriptive of the checks that would be done.

In addition you are welcome to not provide details under GDPR, but then they have a right to refuse a licence on the basis of insufficient evidence. GPDR is still fairly new and is a framework rather than heavily detailed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HantsRob said:

They are asking due to a request for a firearms/shotgun licence, and as such it is part of their diligence and checks for persons that may have access to the cabinet within a property. I think that's fairly open and honest? GDPR isn't that strict that it needs to be so prescriptive of the checks that would be done.

In addition you are welcome to not provide details under GDPR, but then they have a right to refuse a licence on the basis of insufficient evidence. GPDR is still fairly new and is a framework rather than heavily detailed.

Does it say that this is the reason for the request? Where is the policy document that sets out the reason for this, how the information will be used stored and evaluated?

Of course thats why they want it and of course they could refuse a licence if its not provided. My point is simply that GDPR is an important protection of personal data and when I get my renewal I will push for clarification of these issues. Why would anyone allow the different forces to just do what they like? they should be held to account. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Does it say that this is the reason for the request? Where is the policy document that sets out the reason for this, how the information will be used stored and evaluated?

Of course thats why they want it and of course they could refuse a licence if its not provided. My point is simply that GDPR is an important protection of personal data and when I get my renewal I will push for clarification of these issues. Why would anyone allow the different forces to just do what they like? they should be held to account. 

To be fair when I get asked personal data it is usually obvious most of the time, and if I ask they will tell. I am sure the police will happily give you a reason and how it will be processed, GDPR doesn't stipulate that every single bit of justification of asking is published for every request otherwise it would become cumbersome.

I look forward to seeing the reply you get from your force area though, to see how they have documented this request. I'm not fighting against you even if it looks that way, I just see it differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, HantsRob said:

To be fair when I get asked personal data it is usually obvious most of the time, and if I ask they will tell. I am sure the police will happily give you a reason and how it will be processed, GDPR doesn't stipulate that every single bit of justification of asking is published for every request otherwise it would become cumbersome.

I look forward to seeing the reply you get from your force area though, to see how they have documented this request. I'm not fighting against you even if it looks that way, I just see it differently.

Fortunately I have a few years to wait until the next renewal. :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

Fortunately I have a few years to wait until the next renewal. :good:

Hopefully someone else can challenge it then! I hope they have a good reasoned reply written by someone with GDPR/DPA/PII knowledge, rather than a standard "we require this to process your application".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HantsRob said:

Hopefully someone else can challenge it then! I hope they have a good reasoned reply written by someone with GDPR/DPA/PII knowledge, rather than a standard "we require this to process your application".

I am guessing that standard response is more likely the answer. I had no end of disagreements over land appraisals when I started out. I had different forces applying different standards and ended up with issuing a formal complaint. They tried to get it withdrawn by giving a verbal response but I insisted on ia response in writing (so that is recorded) and then received a standard response. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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...