my fac renewal

[markbivvy 6]

Started back in may and it included an application for a 243 and a new slot for a new 223 which i have on my ticket on an open condition..

 

But a good few months before that i had phoned the FLD asking for a form 101,

the female feo who answered asked me what it was for, i told here it was for a 243 for deer and fox.

 

The first words out of her mouth was "you cant have one of them" when i asked her why she asked me "right then when was the last deer you shot" i told her it had been almost 2 weeks ago,

She said "oh right then if you can get that in writing we will consider it but you cant have it for fox as its to much gun".

 

So armed with this little bit of help i contacted Ian Clark of SACS and after a lengthy discussion with him decided to wait until my renewal was due to ask for the 243.

 

Paper work arrived about the middle of may and i phoned Ian for some advise on completing it, Ian took the time to talk me through it and it was filled in as it should be, i also sent with it a letter from a chap who would confirm my experience with a 243 over the last 6 years, i was advised that this was not needed in law but decided to add it any way.

 

I also included written permission from 1 farmer to shoot deer fox and vermin on land that was already cleared for 223.

 

 

A few weeks later i had a phone of the first feo, who told me the was a problem with my renewal paper work

 

first bit was that the land i had submitted in writing was already cleared for a 223 and as such they would not look at it again as it would not pass

second that the contact detail of the chap who would confirm my 243 experience was no good as they did not have the man power or the money to waste on things like this.

it also came out he did not know i had a 223 on an open ticket and told me "no you have,nt" when i said i had.

 

he went onto tell me that if i wanted to be considered for a 243 i must submit land that was already cleared for it,

I told him his information was wrong and everything he had in front of him was all he needed but he told me that if i don't send him what i wanted the 243 request would fail.

 

I asked him if i could phone him back after i had taken advise on it and he told i could take any advise i wanted but if i did not do as he asked the 243 application would not be considered.

A quick call to Ian at sacs and i was told to phone him back and tell him to grant or refuse on how the renewal was presented.

 

this call i did not want to make but i called him told him the above and was told "right i am not even going to consider your 243 application and will only look at the 223 and a mod for a 22 rf.

 

 

Another phone call to sacs resulted in a letter to the firearms department telling them a thing or to.

 

a couple of weeks later a very nice feo phoned to make an appointment for the home visit.

he arrived on time nice and polite did not want tea coffee,biscuits or a sandwich just wanted to get on with it. the interview went on for 1 and 3/4 hours before the 243 got a mention, but in short same story no cleared land no 243 then things got a bit hot i had to produce home office guidance to make him listen,paper work i had keep for 5 year from his department, end result was that he wanted me to ask people who had given me shooting invites if they would put my name down on there land as it would make the grant straight forward, i Refused point blank and had to insist that the land i has submitted was looked at he agreed to this but said it could take 2 years.

more in a sec.

[markbivvy 6]

2 Weeks later i was out shooting when the mobile rang, feo from the visit,

He tells me the chap who would confirm my 243 use would not provide a letter saying i could shoot on his land so my 243 application ended there, i nearly lost it big time here and told him that i did not want land thats was someone Else's i wanted my own land checking, he told me his boss would not give me a 243 unless i sent it cleared land,

i told him i would phone sacs and see what they say, i also told him he had wasted 2 weeks as the chap he had spoke to had been on Holiday, and i would be asking sacs to out in a complaint as the whole renewal was turning into a farce.

he then told me he wouls ask his boss if the land could be looked at, but it was the ARV chaps who do the land clearance not the FLD and as such could take up to 2 years to do and if on the day the ARV lads did not see any deer the land would fail.

 

another call to sacs to be told most of what i knew anyway that some feo,s would be better of employed selling news papers on a street corner.

 

MY ticket was due to run out on the 28 july, 2 week before this i had heard nothing from the FLD so got onto ian clark, which resulted into a phone call from another feo, feo number 3.

she told me not to worry as my ticket would not run out before my new one arrived and she would put a note in it saying the 243 application was still going on if the land check had not been completed.

3 days before my ticket run out my new one arrived with no mention of the 243 and the wrong conditions on my 223.

This resulted in a very strong letter from sacs .

 

more soon.

[markbivvy 6]

a short while after Ian clark had sent me a copy of the letter he had emailed them i had a phone call from feo number 3 saying have perplexed they was and amazed that ian clark had sent the letter he did as the firearms department where doing ever thing they could to try and help me and even the department manager was keen to grant this application

but as there had been legal action mentioned in the letter any more doings i had with the department would be through the manager.

monday just gone 9.10 am a phone call from the man who can tells me the land check is fine, the ticket would be granted for deer fox and vermin, with the condition of use on land deemed suitable by the chief of police

when i asked why the COP condition he tells me i have no experience with a 243 and cant have it on an open.

i asked him to look at my application for the details of the chap who would confirm that i had been shooting a 243 longer than i had owned a 223 and Ian clark would not be best pleased if he was going to partially grant the 243. he found the note but there was no mention at all of the call feo number 2 had made to him, he told me he would phone him himself and get back to me.

10 minutes later a young lady phoned me back to ask me to send my ticket in for the addition of the 243 with an open condition.

it got here this afternoon.

I am in no doubt at all if it had not been for Ian clark and SACS i would not have it

there is a lot more i would like to say about how this whole renewal was done

but have been told some things are best left not said.

 

anyone at all having any kind of aggro from firearms departments should consider if £30 for an organization that WILL really fight for your rights, and pay for any court appeals is a very good investment.

[Deker 3,478]

a short while after Ian clark had sent me a copy of the letter he had emailed them i had a phone call from feo number 3 saying have perplexed they was and amazed that ian clark had sent the letter he did as the firearms department where doing ever thing they could to try and help me and even the department manager was keen to grant this application

but as there had been legal action mentioned in the letter any more doings i had with the department would be through the manager.

monday just gone 9.10 am a phone call from the man who can tells me the land check is fine, the ticket would be granted for deer fox and vermin, with the condition of use on land deemed suitable by the chief of police

when i asked why the COP condition he tells me i have no experience with a 243 and cant have it on an open.

i asked him to look at my application for the details of the chap who would confirm that i had been shooting a 243 longer than i had owned a 223 and Ian clark would not be best pleased if he was going to partially grant the 243. he found the note but there was no mention at all of the call feo number 2 had made to him, he told me he would phone him himself and get back to me.

10 minutes later a young lady phoned me back to ask me to send my ticket in for the addition of the 243 with an open condition.

it got here this afternoon.

I am in no doubt at all if it had not been for Ian clark and SACS i would not have it

there is a lot more i would like to say about how this whole renewal was done

but have been told some things are best left not said.

 

anyone at all having any kind of aggro from firearms departments should consider if £30 for an organization that WILL really fight for your rights, and pay for any court appeals is a very good investment.

 

 

Flippen' ek......that was some read!!!!

 

It is more than unfortunate that The Police cannot, and do not, in many circumstances, read or understand applications! It also JUST goes wrong sometimes, and goes from bad to worse, it is unfortunate this developed in the way it did and getting on the wrong side of your Licencing Department seldom does you any good in the long run. Glad you got the result!!

[stealthy1 3,964]

Your perciverence payed off big style

[Mr_Logic 5]

Well I'm glad that got sorted out! Absolutely mad, I am sure you were very grumpy, it was getting me angry just reading it.

 

in short, who the f**k do these people think they are?!

[martin 332]

Lucky you were with SACS,so,everybody .....join up................Martin.

[beagle1812 0]

Nice write-up there, well done for pushing them in to a corner, this Ian chap sounds like a good man.

 

Happy shooting.

[SportingShooter 0]

These people make me angry.

 

I'm glad you got the right result for your circumstances and they finally were coerced into granting your FAC. It shouldn't have to be like this!

[Dan_Smiff 2]

I was just about to choose a membership/insurance provider and SACS have just got them selves a new member off the back of your post.

 

Glad to hear you got there in the end!

[RicW 67]

What bugs me is that these people can't read their own bloody rule book. I know I go on about this but Home Office guidance to FEOS specificaly lists 243 as RECOMMENDED for fox. All the .22 centrefires, 5.56, .243, 6mm PPC, 6mm/.244. I suppose it's too much to expect a Firearms Enquiry Officer (laughingly so-called) to know anything about firearms but why can't they

Ric

[markbivvy 6]

What bugs me is that these people can't read their own bloody rule book. I know I go on about this but Home Office guidance to FEOS specificaly lists 243 as RECOMMENDED for fox. All the .22 centrefires, 5.56, .243, 6mm PPC, 6mm/.244. I suppose it's too much to expect a Firearms Enquiry Officer (laughingly so-called) to know anything about firearms but why can't they

Ric

 

I think they all know the rules, but twist em to try and make you forget the application.

i was told several times "your 243 application ends here"

because once land is passed for a 223 it wont pass for anything larger.

and if the ARV boys dont see deer on the land during the inspection you cant have it.

and if you dont submit land allready passed for 243 you cant have it.

all bolloxs but they must think applicants are stupid.

[JohnGalway 1,043]

Flippin hell Mark, you do like doing things the hard way

[markbivvy 6]

Flippin hell Mark, you do like doing things the hard way

 

no easy way in west yorkshire John.

[SportingShooter 0]

Or West Mercia so I'm told.