Donate
Basket
Login
Readers will now be well aware that police licensing departments conduct suitability checks on new applicants and on existing certificate holders and RFDs at every renewal. This exercise is largely ‘paper based’ – the police simply make a decision on the documentation and information that is available to them. Up to now this has been how most forces would reach their decision.
In our experience the majority of forces continue to operate in this way. Often no opportunity is given to the applicant or existing certificate holder to address or explain adverse information that is being used against them as a basis to refuse a certificate.
What the statutory guidance says about untested allegations
This is contrary to the Home Office statutory guidance to police on firearms licensing, which provides:
“3.16 Where information has not resulted in a conviction, chief officers should consider the credibility of the information, recognising the potential for malicious, but unfounded, allegations being made about the applicant. The applicant should be given the opportunity to comment on information about them which has not been tested by the courts, unless doing so may compromise an ongoing investigation, give rise to a risk of retribution, disclose confidential information about an individual other than the applicant, or reveal the identity of someone who has given information in confidence.”
In simple terms, the police do not need to ask further about previous convictions, but if there is other information they are relying on to refuse an application or renewal, they should give you an opportunity to explain it. This section of the Guidance is not new; the same wording appears in the first edition published in 2021 (then in 3.14).
When police may not seek an explanation
There will be situations when there is justification for not seeking an explanation. The most common being where it is a partner or another person close to the applicant who has made a complaint, and the police revealing such information might place that individual in potential danger. There are, however, many other situations where giving the applicant an opportunity to explain past events might result in the concerns no longer being valid.
An abiding complaint from applicants going to appeal can be summarised as ‘This decision has been made by someone who I have never met, they do not know me, and I have never been asked about any of this by anyone’. It is now required for all new applicants to be interviewed at home by an FEO, and usually on renewal. All concerns should be discussed. The FEO will sometimes record this interview. There is no reason for the applicant not to do the same. It saves disputes about what was said.
Refusal letters must give full reasons
Those forces which continue to take into account unproven allegations without seeking an explanation are failing to comply with the Statutory Guidance. The only valid grounds for not giving the applicant that opportunity are set out in the paragraph quoted above.
This ties in with another widespread failure to provide detailed reasons in the refusal letter: paragraph 3.48 of the Guidance provides: “in all cases the applicant must be notified of the reasons in the case of a refusal or revocation with as much detail given of the reasons for the decision as is possible to reasonably provide.”
If an applicant receives a refusal or revocation letter and it does not provide full reasons, they should be requested promptly. It is worth pointing out that a failure to do so could result in the police being ordered to pay costs. If reasons are provided, and they include untested allegations on which the applicant has never been asked for an explanation, similarly the police should be invited to discuss the concerns with the applicant and review the original decision. In our experience it is common for both of these failures to occur, often in the same case.
Suitability review interviews: a decision already made
We have also noted another practice being adopted which we believe may be unlawful. One police force has taken to reaching a decision to refuse or revoke without seeking any explanation from the applicant. However, the applicant is then invited to a ‘suitability review interview’ in a police station. The interviews are recorded, apparently because of the bad handwriting of the officers conducting the interview. The applicant then has put to them concerns which the police have about them. On the face of it, this might sound like this police force are actually following the Guidance. So why is this unlawful?
It is because at the end of the interview the applicant is handed a pre-prepared refusal or revocation letter, often dated the day before the interview. In reality, the decision had already been made. We are aware of half a dozen or so cases where this has been done. Police have a statutory duty to consider applicants fairly and in accordance with the Guidance.
It appears that the actual purpose of these interviews is not to allow the applicant to provide an explanation for any concerns, it is simply to establish if more evidence can be gathered to bolster what might be considered weak reasons for the decisions that have already been made. Applicants who ask to bring a friend or a legal representative along are discouraged from doing so. Given the formal nature of these interviews, that is also unfair.
What to do if you are asked to a suitability interview
If you are asked for such an interview, ask what subjects are to be covered; seek advice from a shooting organisation or a lawyer, take someone with you or make sure you record it yourself.
Frequently asked questions
Do police have to let firearms applicants respond to allegations?
Under paragraph 3.16 of the statutory guidance, applicants should be given the opportunity to comment on information that has not been tested by the courts, unless doing so may compromise an investigation, risk retribution, disclose confidential information about someone else or reveal a confidential source.
What must a firearms refusal letter contain?
Paragraph 3.48 of the guidance says the applicant must be notified of the reasons for a refusal or revocation, with as much detail as is reasonably possible. If full reasons are not given, they should be requested promptly.
Can I record my interview with a firearms enquiry officer?
Nick Doherty says there is no reason not to. The FEO will sometimes record the interview, and recording it yourself saves disputes about what was said.
