From: "Alex Hamilton", [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a copy of a letter received by a member of my club in connection with his long outstanding claim for a variety of spare parts for his 1911 and other pistols. Things like ambidextrous safety, replacement recoil springs, recoil buffer etc. The claim has been thrown from Home Office to Thames Valley Police and back again, the argument being that the H.O. refused to pay compensation and the police refused to hand back the parts, so they have the parts and the money and my friend has nothing. Reading the second paragraph, it would appear that Chief Constables can now declare any part of a prohibited firearm also prohibited even though it was not subject to firearm certificate before the 1997 Act! Furthermore, these decisions do not have to be consistent across the Country, but are left at the discretion of each Chief Constable! So, had I removed the wood grips of my late Luger to mount them on a board for display on a wall in my office to remember the age when we had a semblance of democracy and freedom, I could be breaking the law depending on how my Chief Constable views such sentimental rubbish! Perhaps a fellow Cybershooter, better legally qualified than I, would suggest appropriate answer to the letter enclosed below? Many thanks, Alex. Dear .... Thank you for your letter of 23rd May. The compensation scheme does not provide compensation for spare parts of guns, other than for other than for prohibited major component parts appearing on Firearm certificates, namely barrels, slides, cylinders acid frames. The Government announced before the start of the surrender period for large calibre handguns that registered firearms dealers could apply for an ex gratia payment outside the terms of the scheme for their stock of smaller spare parts, such as springs, triggers and hammers, provided they were surrendered in quantities of 10 or more. 'this was done in recognition of the fact that some dealers might hold large numbers of these items in stock, and would no longer have a market for them following the ban on handguns. The arrangement did not extend to individual claimants, who are unlikely to hold these parts in commercial quantities and so no compensation is payable to individual in respect of these items. It is for individual chief officers of police to decide whether a particular part of a firearms should now be regarded as a component part of a prohibited firearm arid thus prohibited in its own right. Where such a view is reached, the police would normally retain the item in question so that it may be destroyed and it would he open to the owner to challenge the police decision through the courts. Whatever the outcome, it does not alter the fact that these items do not qualify for compensation under the firearms surrender schemes, as they were not prohibited parts held on certificate at the time of surrender. I ant sorry I am unable to more helpful, Yours Sincerely Mary Mckenna -- Well, they're both wrong, but like she says the only real course of action is the courts. I do think however if he wanted the parts back it's possible to get the Home Office to convince TVP that they have incorrectly interpreted the law. (The alternative as far as TVP is concerned is that they have to hold onto the parts forever, because the owner is contesting the decision). The Home Office view is that "component part" means a pressure-bearing component of a firearm, and obviously recoil springs and so on are not. Essentially barrels, slides, bolts, cylinders, some frames and possibly a few other bits are covered. The problem is that the FCS knows that no-one is going to sue them over half a dozen small parts that are worth maybe 50 quid at the outside. If Steed is successful I think the plan of action should be to sue the HO for interest and also include a claim for those parts not compensated for at the same time. Steve. -------[Cybershooters contacts]-------- Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website & subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
