SACS. What do they support in England?

[JR1960]

Well, i've been considering this for some time now as my BASC membership expired a while ago. I was made redundant last year so funds are relatively tight;

 

BASC membership £62 + (2 x £20) = £102,

 

SACS (with debatably better legal cover) £30 + (2 x £0) = £30. (if memory serves me correctly, I haven't checked)

 

You do the maths.

 

Yes, i realise there are other issues involved, and if i had the cash i would probably not be part of this debate as i would have renewed with BASC straight away, but maybe BASC, with, i assume, a much larger membership to cover the larger personnel costs involved, should look at their funding. After all, if SACS can do it then it strikes me a much larger, and therefore supposedly more efficient, organisation should at least be competitive on their membership fees.

[hodge911]

joined s.a.c.s last week got card/info pack yesterday

[sirusman]

I joined today if you join the sacs forum first you get first year for £22

Edited October 17, 2008 by sirusman

[paul hart]

I am going up to scotland in morning with my SACS membership

[winchester]

I have posted threads about sacs before on here I am the liveing proof when the chips are down, your banged up in a 6x4 cell accused of something YOU didnt do, guns taken, cert revoked. A load of advice over the phone dont mean squat, you NEED A GOOD BREEF AND FAST

BASC SAID THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE A COMITTIE to fight my revoke SACS just appointed the breef and bobs your uncle.

I know if it was not FOR SACS & Ian ,and the team i couldnt afford to fight it,

No disrespect to BASC but there like an old lion with no teeth or claws just make a lot of noise,

SACS BITES AND SCRATCHES TO BOOT sorry about the spelling.

£30 to have the £100,000 piece of mind is a no brainer for me

 

are you a basc member please, and if so how long have you been a member.

I was a BASC MEMBER FOR 6YEARS BUT NOT ANYMORE

[V8landy]

I joined today if you join the sacs forum first you get first year for £22

 

Where is the forum mentioned on their web page? I can not find it!

[V8landy]

Found it, by a google search.

 

http://www.sacsforum.com/

[Tam]

QUOTE (webber @ Oct 16 2008, 07:17 PM) *

BASC do not offer specific legal cover insurance, but they can and do take legal action on members behalf when necessary.

 

Their approach appears to be to advise, and where necessary lias with the members police force, usually with an amicable outcome, without the need for legal action. Therefore building a bridge with a police force and hopefully an allie, rather than taking an aggressive stance and rushing to court.

 

 

 

I have posted threads about sacs before on here I am the liveing proof when the chips are down, your banged up in a 6x4 cell accused of something YOU didnt do, guns taken, cert revoked. A load of advice over the phone dont mean squat, you NEED A GOOD BREEF AND FAST

BASC SAID THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BEFORE A COMITTIE to fight my revoke SACS just appointed the breef and bobs your uncle.

I know if it was not FOR SACS & Ian ,and the team i couldnt afford to fight it,

No disrespect to BASC but there like an old lion with no teeth or claws just make a lot of noise,

SACS BITES AND SCRATCHES TO BOOT sorry about the spelling.

£30 to have the £100,000 piece of mind is a no brainer for me

 

are you a basc member please, and if so how long have you been a member.

I was a BASC MEMBER FOR 6YEARS BUT NOT ANYMORE

 

 

I have been a BASC member for probably 5 years & am in the same unfortunate situation as Winchester :good: unfortunatly I was not a member of SACS at the time you just do not want to know how much a Lawyer would cost you BASC are not interested Luckily SACS are fighting the revokation side :blush:

[Dave-G]

Divided we fall has been said on this thread: I'm thinking that if people could work out their differences better there would be fewer breakaways in almost every organisation going. Take forum's for example, how many people feel a particular stance causes members to start an alternative. Together we have a stronger presence.

 

Tam, this is very worrying, and makes me feel that I have done the right thing, thats two current court cases forum and BASC members have SACS defending them in court?

 

I've only had my FAC for three years but until recently felt safe in the knowledge that BASC would be there for me if needed. I wonder if there are any more instances where members needed more help than BASC were giving.

Edited October 18, 2008 by Dave-G

[Bazooka Joe]

I wonder if there are any more instances where members needed more help than BASC were giving.

 

I would be interested to hear if any member on this, or any other forum, has had BASC stand up for them in court?

 

BJ.

[dazza]

Yes SACS is the one to go for.

 

BASC needs to change just because they got the biggest number of members doesnt mean they the best to go with. Or is it because they got bigger firearms department?

 

SACS looks after its members as well as the shooting and well worth the money you pay.

 

You get more and better service for your money with SACS.

 

Have you used SACS for anything? What makes you rate them so highly?

[markbivvy]

In 2005, Martin Eccleston found himself involved in a fracas with violent hunt saboteurs. As a result he was convicted of a minor public order offence. When he came to renew his shotgun certificate - some 16 months later - Sussex Police refused on the grounds that this made him a danger to the public safety and to the peace.

 

After careful consideration, BASC decided that Mr Eccleston had been treated unfairly and funded his appeal to the crown court. The judge at Chichester County Court found that Mr Eccleston's action had been an isolated incident that was wholly out of character and although the police had to exercise preventative justice it was wrong and unfair for them to have done it in this manner.

 

BASC director of firearms, Bill Harriman, said: "BASC gave Sussex Police every opportunity to reconsider its decision which we believed to be unreasonable from the outset. It is reprehensible that the papers which confirmed that the recommendation of the firearms enquiry officer to grant the certificate were not included in the court bundle. Sussex Police should review its internal procedures in the light of this case."

 

found this one doing a quick search.

but what is alarming is the amount of basc members who think any shooting related court apperance will be sorted out by them.

[becassier]

For our Northern Ireland member who posted here and for the others. I was a BACS Committee member here in N. I. for a number of years. That organisation simply lost the plot here and, in turn, lost its membership.

 

SACS offers me as a N.I. shooter everything I need and much more. BASC simply paid lip service in my opinion. Sure they talked big but when the chips were down they vanished like snow off a ditch in the spring time.

 

SACS may only have five staff as oppossed to the hundred or so BASC has. Are they any less effective for having more? I think not! Does the staffing reflect on your annual fees? I think so!

 

Becassier

 

PS SACS NI website is sacsni.org

Edited October 20, 2008 by becassier

[webber]

Becassier

 

"SACS may only have five staff as opposed to the hundred or so BASC has. Are they any less effective for having more? I think not! Does the staffing reflect on your annual fees? I think so!"

 

Are they any less effective? I think so. Virtually one week ago Ian Clark invited questions on this forum, I obliged and posted what I felt were a few pertinent questions with regards to SACS members based in England and Wales. I think that I know the answers, but had a wish to be sure. I'm still waiting. I do appreciate that Ian does a good job for his members, and that he may be busy, but he wasn't too busy to post and request questions.

 

 

"Does the staffing reflect on your annual fees? I think so!"

So do I, but with respect, its a no brainer for me. SACS membership would buy me valid insurance, and 5 staff to promote and protect shooting in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Now, I do shoot in Scotland for 1 week each year, so maybe I should join SACS, but why when BASC seems to have an effective team based in Scotland.

 

My BASC membership buys me valid insurance, ready access to recognised firearms specialists, and around 100 personnel working to protect my sport. I appreciate that I have to pay around double the SACS membership, but the maths stack in a ratio of around 10:1 in favour of BASC, in terms of bang for your buck, that's a no brainer!

 

I do appreciate that not everyone can afford the difference, and I would much prefer to see people shooting with insurance than without, and to that end maybe SACS and the other ex BASC splinter groups fulfill a role. I do however also strongly feel that shooting in Britain needs a unified voice, both on a national and European level if shooters are to be given any degree of credibility by government. With respect, SACS and others fall way short of this goal by my yard stick. For me SACS seems to do what it says on the tin. PW members would be well advised to read the label carefully, and decide if they wish to see shooting in Britain protected as a whole, or use their hard earned cash to protect shooting soley in the more geographically challenged areas of Britain, to which few have ready access.

 

webber

[markbivvy]

Good post Webber, and you should be applauded for your support.

But if you where to find yourself in a court room on charges

what good would this do.

 

My BASC membership buys me valid insurance, ready access to recognised firearms specialists, and around 100 personnel working to protect my sport.

 

 

as has been stated by one chap on here who was a member for 5 years basc was no help what so ever.

What ever the outcome of the case sacs are at least trying to keep this man shooting in England.

[dustyfox]

And I am sure that if more members from England and Wales join up they will spread out and have a branch there.

 

Edit: I mean BASC has been around for decades and it takes time to build a organisation. BASC was previously called WAGBI if I right. Im sure SACS can become BACS or something in the future.

 

Ian had stated that they split from BASC because they wasnt doing enough. And instead of just trying to protect the sport SACS also protects the shooter if it goes to court, cause I wont be able to afford to go to court if it happens and I am sure many others cant. What use is Information from BASC when you wont be able to use it.

Edited October 20, 2008 by dustyfox

[webber]

Mark

 

My scepticle nature, especially where insurers are concerned tells me that all policies have limits, so do insurers and underwriters. My fear is that the actual premium for the legal cover can only be quite small per member. Assuming around 10,000 members, that's not a massive premium. I recall that Ian Clark advised that each case cost around £10,000 to take on. Fine if costs are awarded, but what if they are not?

 

Ian was proud of the 100% success rate, but thus far has declined to advise as to the number of cases actually taken up. My concern is that if SACS are too keen to jump into court, the law of averages will dictate that some losses will occur, and the insurers will not be too keen to take on more cases too quickly, which could result in a sharp increase in premiums and possibly a withdrawal of cover.

 

BASC fund any court cases from its own reserves, which I guess is the reason why they will try all avenues to avoid court, just in case they lose!

 

webber

[IanClark]

Hi again guys - sorry about the long absence, but as I said, I really don't have a lot of time to spend on forum postings - I'm too busy doing my job, which is to protect all country sports and sportsmen, not only the shooting population.

 

Sadly, that means I'm still in the office working at nine o'clock on a wet Monday night, and I decided to take a minute to try to clear this up.

 

First of all, I'm delighted with the support shown on this thread for SACS, what we do, and me personally - that makes it all worthwhile - even on a wet Monday night! (I wonder how many of the 140-odd BASC staff are still working.... )

 

I think that most of the issues are being raised by you, Webber, so maybe if I deal with them, that will put your mind at rest.

 

Firstly, on the questions you raised last week - I have to make value judgements on every action I or SACS takes. That is my responsibility as Director, and I do it to the best of my ability.

 

I have found from LONG experience (38 years!)working within Government circles, that a great deal of the so-called lobbying that goes on is a complete waste of time and money. Public petitions, while emotive to those involved, are almost entirely useless, as are time-consuming and expensive public demonstrations - as the Countryside Alliance have proved.

 

I have also found that, where there are other organisations making sensible representations on a particular topic, there is no need to me to waste our members' money and my time producing exactly the same representations on different headed paper.

 

In simple terms, that means that there are cases where there are public consultations to which SACS does not publicly respond. That does not mean we are not involved - merely that we are content that someone such as BASC will get it right without our help, or that we are speaking quietly to the politicians in the background, which is how the REAL battles are won.

 

Make no mistake, though - if we think BASC or someone else is getting it wrong, we will wade in and lay about us. That's why we don't have the stupid and unrealistic lead shot ban that you poor souls do in England. If SACS had been involved at that time, we would never have rolled over and allowed that to be imposed.

 

In Northern Ireland, as we speak, their lead shot regulations are being considered, and I'm proud to say that, based on our recommendations, it looks as if the regulations will follow our Scottish model. What a pity we didn't have members in England when your regulations were being discussed!

 

I have a wide range of personal contacts in all areas of government and officialdom throughout the UK, and of course I have 'stool pigeons' in ALL of the organisations which seek to cause trouble for sportsmen. For obvious reasons, I am not prepared to name these people, and I'm sure you will agree that this is (sadly) a part of the dirty game of politics and accept that.

 

I use these people regularly to feed the information I choose to wherever it will do most good - and when the correct result is achieved, I have no need to trumpet about the fact that I was in some way resopnsible. In fact, to do so would compomise some of the people I have in place helping.

 

Still on your original post - I have PERSONALLY run events and training courses, at the rate of about ten per year, since 1994. These are invariably local-based for groups of local members, although I am always happy for non-members to come along. I am always very conscious of the fact that our members are not all well-off - and I keep the cost of these events to a minimum for that reason.

 

As a guide, at today's prices I would charge around £30 for a one-day course - and that would include morning tea/coffee and lunch. I have no idea what BASC would charge, but I expect it would be rather more.

 

Please don't concern yourself about our insurance premium - since we win all the cases, costs are awarded against the police, and the net cost to our insurers is almost zero. I have just received our renewal premium, in fact, and I am still smiling gently at your comments.

 

I think it is important to explain that neither I nor anyone else in SACS would dream of restricting the cases which are referred to our insurers in any way - the prospect of me having to grovel to a 'board' for the authority to do something for our members would fill me with revulsion.

 

Our insurers accept all claims where there is 'a reasonable CHANCE of success', and in my view, that is as it should be.

 

I quite understand that BASC will fund the occasional appeal - if they think that it would set a bad precedent for future cases that might affect their members. We do exactly the same, and we have a number of cases currently in the system which WE will finance for this reason. This usually occurs when someone gets into difficulties before they become a SACS member - otherwise they would have been covered.

 

One of the most notable cases I have live is the distressing case where a disabled man had his shotgun certificate maliciously revoked by a police officer who has since been sac... Well, perhaps I should say he has left the service as a result? Our member was at that time a member of the NGO, who do not provide the legal fees insurance we do, so SACS is funding the appeal from membership funds.

 

I could go on indefinitely about this subject, but I prefer to spend my time more usefully in doing REAL work for our membership.

 

Could I just finish with one point, again to Webber?

 

Two phrases from your posts have given me some amusement - "the other ex-BASC splinter groups" and "more geographically challenged areas of Britain, to which few have ready access"

 

This is EXACTLY the kind of attitude that made us set up SACS in the first place, and the reason why former BASC members are flocking to join SACS - it shows an incredible arrogance about anything other than the Home Counties.

 

I have enjoyed reading your posts - they are very cleverly written - tell me, my friend - are you a BASC employee or active volunteer?

 

I do hope you enjoy your sport in the week when you come up to poor underprivileged Scotland - if you give me a ring, I'll gladly fix you up with some decent insurance

[webber]

I have enjoyed reading your posts - they are very cleverly written - tell me, my friend - are you a BASC employee or active volunteer?

 

Ian

 

For the record, I am neither, just a reasonably satisfied member of BASC, and I live no where near the home counties. Search back a little on PW and you will learn what I did for a living. I've spent the last 6 months learning to walk and talk again, my recovery is continuing.

 

Thank you for taking the time to make such a lengthy reply, but I would be most obliged if you would address the questions raised by myself. What work does SACS actually do in England and Wales?

 

You are obviously in the driving seat at SACS, but I am pleased to learn that you do vet the cases put before your insurers, which I guess ultimately will mean that someone may be refused legal representation, which is what some of the posts have been about BASC doing, albeit via a committee.

 

At least your members now know that you are quite happy for BASC members to pay for the spade work at various levels. Its easy to cherry pick, and that doesn't sound like fair representation or value for money to me.

 

My wish is to see shooting in Britain have one voice that government will recognise in a similar manner to NRA in America. It is my opinion that "splinter groups" seriously detract from this aim. In an ideal world maybe shooters should join more than one organisation, but when cash is tight its not likely to happen. From what I have read, there are around 1 Million shooters in Britain? if this is true, only around 20% are represented, and I guess by implication insured.

 

webber

[IanClark]

Sorry Webber - I can only deal with things as they come up. I assume that you have had some kind of accident - for which I am genuinely sorry - I hope your recovery continues apace, and that you get back to full health and strength soon.

 

My assumption that you had some involvement with BASC was based on the fact that some of your wording was exactly the same as I have seen in official BASC dogma pronouncements elsewhere, which may have been coincidence.

 

The answer to your question is that I do whatever is required for our members - wherever they live and whatever it takes. SACS as an organisation has been involved in negotiation with government and official bodies eveywhere, including Westminster, over the years, although prior to my appointment as Director.

 

While I can't be certain, I don't recall any SACS deputations being sent to Brussels, although as I explained, I would much prefer to avoid the expense of sending people there if possible - preferring to get the information to the decisionmakers personally, preferably while they are here, thus avoiding unnecessary expense for our members.

 

I have a private network of committed and well-connected members in Emgland and Wales, and they feed information to MP's and Assembly members quietly for me when needed - again avoiding the expense of sending people on junkets - if I feel that our input would be helpful. I have not personally lobbied in Westminster so far - although of course I will if I feel that is necessary or useful.

 

I agree entirely that it would be excellent if we could have one single organisation to represent country sports, and that unity would give strength - and if the time ever comes when that is possible, I will recommend that to our members. That will only happen when such an organisation is able and prepared to do everything its members need and deserve, and there is no sign of that at present. I also feel very strongly that would be entirely wrong for such an organisation to represent only shooters - who will then speak for the countless thousands of terrier and lurcher men, the fishermen, the falconers....?

 

I have no idea how you took from what I said that there is a vetting process for SACS insurance claims - that is quite the opposite of what I said. For the record, any and all claims made on our insurance are passed to the insurers - and as I said, their decision on claims is based entirely on the validity of the claim, and the decision on whether a case is stateable is made by the solicitor to whom they refer the claim for legal action, not the insurers. I can't think of a more open, transparent and reasonable process - if I could we would be using it.

 

Of course I am happy to see others do sensible work which SACS members don't have to pay for - whether it be BASC, the CA, Songbird Survival or anyone else. I'm Scottish - what did you expect?

 

To be fair though, I am equally happy for anyone who is not a SACS member to benefit from work we do - like the BASC members who can shoot wildfowl in most of Scotland with lead shot perhaps?

 

Finally, and I do mean finally, because I think this matter has been adequately ventilated now, I agree very strongly with the points you make about the small proportion of sportsmen of all kinds who are not members of any Association - we should be trying to pull them in to look after them - which is what I do - rather than trying to convince members of one Association to leave and join another instead.

 

Best regards

 

Ian

[Mungler]

Anyone who thinks you can get anything changed in this Country or exert political influence either "quietly" or "frugally" is deluded.

 

The summary appears to be that SACS are a handful of ex-BASCers who are selling SACS on the basis that they offer legal expense insurance to cover eventualities that are not covered by BASC. A fine point, but insurance cover of this nature is something any high street insurance broker could source for anyone for a lot less than the cost of SACS annual membership. Further it appears that BASC are toffee nosed hoorays who are enjoying the life of Riley on our membership fees. Apparently.

[Willow32]

I agree with some of the above comments, I been to a few game fairs and shows and visited the BASC stand.....never again , if you have not got the right clothing or speak how they speak they dont want to know....thats why the price is high....they might have a 100 + workers..all driving new 4x4's and think they are better than anybody else.

Most of the people on this forum know more than alot of the BASC reps ,but I bet you would not get a job there ........unless your face fits.

Last week went to Rockingham gamefair and saw the SACS stand , went over to have a look and Ian introduced himself to me, he then offered me a seat and we sat talking about how SACS works for ALL FIELD SPORTS.....not just shooting....he made me feel welcome and knows what he is talking about......its more of a down to earth working mans organisation and is still very professional.......

Mind you I expect BASC was like that when if first started.............

Regards

Willow32

[becassier]

"And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales" (Acts Chapter 9)

 

Maybe not like Saul on the Damascus Road but eventually even the most died in the wool BASC members will see the light!

 

Of course they need to examine what is really happening to their subscription fees first....as I did!

 

Becassier

[sirusman]

Well after reading this thread and threads elsewhere i have today signed up with SACS. I feel that Basc has now become just another fat cat organisation

Edited October 21, 2008 by sirusman

[Bazooka Joe]

The recent few posts by Ian made my mind up, so yesterday I phoned SASC & had a pleasant conversation with a Lady at the other end.

 

Looking forward to my welcome pack when it arrives, especially for the price of £22, a third of the price of BASC.

 

Glad a few BASC members incouraged Ian to contribute to this thread.