FAC conditions for competitions

[Lewiscooke]

Everyone interprets different so wanted to ask what people's thoughts on this are. These are the conditions on my FAC. I interpret them as I can shoot targets on police rated land (for my calibre), not just home office approved clubs. I don't want to get into trouble with the old bill if I enter a competition that's on land rated but not HOA. 

I.e I shoot PRS competitions but some may not be on club grounds but on land rated to say 338 (I have 6.5 creedmoor). And I have my own ccc3 insurance. 

Whats your thoughts? And any questions I should ask my FEO.

 

Thanks 

[Roy W]

Why not ask your FEO?

[Lewiscooke]

3 minutes ago, Roy W said:

Why not ask your FEO?

I will when I can get hold of him, but for now I'd like to know what people's thoughts are. And questions I should ask, incase there's something I haven't thought of. 

[Popsbengo]

You can shoot on a range that has adequate insurance.  Your personal insurance is not relevant to that aspect, it covers you but not the range.  Shooting over land that is not a proper range is not covered by your FAC conditions.

Home Office approved is relevant to permission for clubs to train others and is not limiting in the sense you ask your question.

If you attend an event "over land" it must be a field firing range properly set up and insured not just a field with "shooting over" permissions.

For example, Eskdalemuir is a field firing range with a certificate and insurance organised by Gardners Guns.

But do ask your FEO with specific examples.

[Lewiscooke]

2 minutes ago, Popsbengo said:

You can shoot on a range that has adequate insurance.  Your personal insurance is not relevant to that aspect, it covers you but not the range.  Shooting over land that is not a proper range is not covered by your conditions.

Home Office approved is relevant to permission for clubs to train others and is not limiting in the sense you ask your question.

If you attend an event "over land" it must be a field firing range properly set up and insured not just a field with "shooting over" permissions.

For example, Eskdalemuir is a field firing range with a certificate and insurance organised by Gardners Guns.

But do ask your FEO with specific examples.

Thanks for the info. I did assume my insurance didn't cover anything but me, but never hurts to ask. I'm hopefully going to the SIS next month, and have already asked Helen the question about whether I'm covered or not. 

[Popsbengo]

6 minutes ago, Lewiscooke said:

Thanks for the info. I did assume my insurance didn't cover anything but me, but never hurts to ask. I'm hopefully going to the SIS next month, and have already asked Helen the question about whether I'm covered or not. 

Sensible to ask and not assume.  I occasionally shoot at Esk. T4 with Marc & Helen  and I've actually met the chap that assessed their range.

[Adam SInfield]

Apologies but there is a bit of misinformation here. There is no legal definition of a ‘range’. It is up to the landowner/operator to determine if safe to use, and then, there must be insurance (which can be commercial for all users or individual) in the case of any loss.

This has been confirmed to me by my FEO, who had guidance from the Home Office, and is confirmed in HO Circular 031/2006 (available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/firearms) following the refusal of both the MoD and NRA to certify ‘ranges’.

The position is therefore that you need target conditions (as 100 rounds at steels is hardly “zeroing or practice” for quarry) on land that is deemed safe by the operator, complies with any planning law (which often the 28 day rule applies) and you (as the FAC holder) are content there is adequate insurance in place for the activity (you or the ground).

[Popsbengo]

2 hours ago, Adam SInfield said:

Apologies but there is a bit of misinformation here. There is no legal definition of a ‘range’. It is up to the landowner/operator to determine if safe to use, and then, there must be insurance (which can be commercial for all users or individual) in the case of any loss.

This has been confirmed to me by my FEO, who had guidance from the Home Office, and is confirmed in HO Circular 031/2006 (available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/firearms) following the refusal of both the MoD and NRA to certify ‘ranges’.

The position is therefore that you need target conditions (as 100 rounds at steels is hardly “zeroing or practice” for quarry) on land that is deemed safe by the operator, complies with any planning law (which often the 28 day rule applies) and you (as the FAC holder) are content there is adequate insurance in place for the activity (you or the ground).

What is the misinformation you refer to?  Your own I would suggest.

I quote from the HO circular:  "The responsibility will now be placed more firmly on range owners/operators to ensure that their range is constructed and maintained safely. Failure to do so will leave them liable to sanctions under a range of legislation, such as the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, the Occupiers’ Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 and the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. See Annex A for further details. The criteria for club approval and affected certificate conditions have been revised to remove references to Ministry of Defence safety certificates (see Annex B)."

To say "It is up to the landowner/operator to determine if safe to use.."  is correct but there's an assumption the operator has set up the range to meet standards and cite the NRA/NSRA standards.

It's yet to be tested in law but I think any operator that doesn't have a properly certified range (ie built to a recognised standard) is asking for trouble should issues arise and most importantly their insurance company will certainly kick off should a serious claim be brought.

An individual's personal insurance is not adequate - the range must be insured.  If in doubt try asking your insurance provider.

Planning is not an issue for the shooters - it's likely any ad-hoc range will incur noise abatement pressure from Planning irrespective of the 28 day rule.

[Adam SInfield]

Sorry, didn’t want to sound argumentative. The point I was making was simply the assertion one must open an ‘approved range’ or ‘range’ to allow target shooting is not correct as this has no definition in law. There are no official bodies that will certify a ‘range’ anymore as the NRA have also stopped. They may provide guidance if you push, but will not certify any piece of land.

Insurance is another matter, but having recently spoken to several, they do not ask for any form of certification. Again, others may ask but I haven’t spoken to any that do. Yes, should the worst happen they may try and argue negligence invalidating the policy, but that’s a very high threshold - so as with all policies, the devil is in the detail (I.E. the terms and conditions). In fact, the NRA have confirmed to me that my personal NRA cover through membership covers me for shooting targets over land - which I asked for specifically for, what I believe the OP was asking for, for PRS shooting at farms etc. 

I have been running PRS matches at a local farm, and both the relevant police force and the NRA have confirmed all is well in doing so - and under our club insurance through the NRA - so long as participants have target conditions based on the membership of a HO approved club.

[Popsbengo]

3 hours ago, Adam SInfield said:

Sorry, didn’t want to sound argumentative. The point I was making was simply the assertion one must open an ‘approved range’ or ‘range’ to allow target shooting is not correct as this has no definition in law. There are no official bodies that will certify a ‘range’ anymore as the NRA have also stopped. They may provide guidance if you push, but will not certify any piece of land.

Insurance is another matter, but having recently spoken to several, they do not ask for any form of certification. Again, others may ask but I haven’t spoken to any that do. Yes, should the worst happen they may try and argue negligence invalidating the policy, but that’s a very high threshold - so as with all policies, the devil is in the detail (I.E. the terms and conditions). In fact, the NRA have confirmed to me that my personal NRA cover through membership covers me for shooting targets over land - which I asked for specifically for, what I believe the OP was asking for, for PRS shooting at farms etc. 

I have been running PRS matches at a local farm, and both the relevant police force and the NRA have confirmed all is well in doing so - and under our club insurance through the NRA - so long as participants have target conditions based on the membership of a HO approved club.

I am very surprised you are operating as you state. Where's the safety design template? How do you control the safety area?  You have risk assessments ?

The advice you say you have received is contrary to the written HO advisory you cited.  I'm very surprised you have NRA approval in principle, setting up a shoot "on a field" given their published position.

The NRA have recently published their Range Design Handbook,  within the first pages they state:

"The NRA is a charity whose objectives include promoting the efficiency of the armed forces through combined military and civilian marksmanship activities. The NRA has no legislative power to regulate range design or operation. It has published this Handbook in order to assist civilian range operators in applying best practice to the operation of civilian rifle ranges, as part of pursuing its charitable objectives. Commercial advice on the design of specific ranges, as well as range inspection services, are available from National Shooting Centre Limited, the wholly-owned commercial subsidiary of the NRA."

While agreeing that the NRA don't have legislative power they do represent best practice and any deviation from that will be very difficult to explain should the men & women in wigs get involved following an incident.

[Jim DiGriz]

Unfortunately since Frank Compton retired there is no longer anyone within the NRA who could be deemed to be competent (using the MoD definition of competent contained within PAM 21) to assess a range that is not a gallery range.

This is why we ran a huge amount of ballistic simulation followed by practical testing with witness screens to prove the safety of our range.

 

[Popsbengo]

2 hours ago, Jim DiGriz said:

Unfortunately since Frank Compton retired there is no longer anyone within the NRA who could be deemed to be competent (using the MoD definition of competent contained within PAM 21) to assess a range that is not a gallery range.

This is why we ran a huge amount of ballistic simulation followed by practical testing with witness screens to prove the safety of our range.

 

for understanding - what range is that ?

[Jim DiGriz]

FCSA HQ at Over Cassock

[Popsbengo]

9 hours ago, Jim DiGriz said:

FCSA HQ at Over Cassock

cheers and lets hope the planning sails through this time 

[Jim DiGriz]

6 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

cheers and lets hope the planning sails through this time 

Thanks, the application has finally gone live and the adverts go in the local paper next week.