The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Here's some background first that should help put this in context:

I've recently been looking to sort out life insurance, given I have my own Ltd company there's a very tax efficient way of doing this via a "Relevant Life" policy that pays benefit via a "Discretionary Trust" which means basically no tax to pay by anyone ever (Yay for capitalism)

Anyway, because of the sums insured (without me the company is screwed so I'm insuring to an amount to pay off the mortgages and provide an income thereafter) - there's a bit more checking involved, a medical and a disclosure of my medical report (much the same vein as my FAC application) - so - to the question:

Given that during the application I was asked did I partake in "Basejumping, splunking, pot holing, mountain climbing" and "Did I ride motorbikes" (Dammit yes) BUT at no time was I asked did I partake of shooting sports (nor should I be given the excellent safety record nationally) - should I be well within my rights | advised - that I should instruct my GP when disclosing my records - to at no time disclose any information as regards my FAC application / grant thereafter as it's not relevant?

In reality I need to (and will) check this with the insurer - as well, I'd be a fool if I staked a million pound policies likelihood of payout on an internet forums advice, but I'm just wondering:

• If anyone has been in this postion before?
  What advice did they receive?
  Did they disclose to the insurer?
  What was the insurers attitude to this?
  Were the premiums loaded as a consequence?

Regardless I'll post back my findings in case it's of any help to anyone in the future.

A forum search didn't reveal much of relevance but I must confess I don't see a way for me to craft a search filter that applies the boolean AND operator to "life" and "insurance" so I get 95 results of posts that include "life" OR "insurance" - I get 95 results using "+life +insurance" or "life insurance" or 'life insurance'!

Unless there is an explicit question on the form to be filled in concerning shooting by your medical practice, it seems unlikely to me that your participation in shooting sports would be mentioned by the practice. It is not, after all, a dangerous sport in any way. Even if they do mention it, I cannot see why it should affect the application, since it is not dangerous, and the insurers will know this.

The fact that you have an FAC is in fact a pretty fair indicator that you are a lower risk than average in certain factors, such as: less likely to be involved with unlawful drugs, frequent excessive consumption of alcohol, or association with the criminal fraternity.

Checking with the insurer might be worthwhile for peace of mind before commencing the paperwork (ask something like: do the underwriters consider participation in shooting sport XYZ to be high risk, along the lines of spelunking, and is it therefore necessary to declare it on my application?)

If you are really concerned that they would not pay out in the extremely unlikely event of you being involved in a fatal incident whilst shooting, declare your participation in shooting sports on the application form, AND KEEP A COPY OF THE COMPLETED APPLICATION FORM with the policy, as and when granted.

Given the importance of this, and the hoops you are having to jump through, I can see why you might worry, but I don't think it is necessary.

I get life insurance through my work pension, when I was flying I declared it as a 'risky' hobby. After asking for more info (aircraft type, no of hours etc), they accepted me with no special conditions attached. I can't see any difference in this instance.

The fact that you are asking the question means you should disclose it (hobby) to your insurer..that way you will KNOW you are insured. The problem is not so much YOU shooting yourself as someone shooting you, however remote.The insurer has to decide if the/any risk to your life is acceptable to them.

The info sent by your doc will probably be in a format sent by the insurers will it not if they are asking for a medical - ask to see the report before it goes, you are entitled to see it.

There is a duty of disclosure involved in insurance contracts and unless the rules have changed (I think there was talk about it) the onus is on YOU to disclose, not to decide if it is a material fact or not. "Duty of disclosure" exists up until first premium paid and policy issued if I remeber right....

Looker -v- Law Union and Rock is about duty of disclosure. There is also GOOD FAITH, insurer must be aware of anything that could affect the risk.

Of course you can just say nowt and hope that you don't get shot! Fact is, if you live to 100 and die on the rilfe range a company could in theory knock back the claim because you didn't tell them about your hobby.

Others may have more up to date info on insurance these days...just my understanding of it.

Cheers gents, I spoke to the two firms yesterday - neither gave a stuff about shooting, and only one of them was concerned about my riding bikes.

I can see the logic behind motorcycles and risk but to my mind there's a world of difference between riding a sports tourer (BMW K1300S) round Europe and broadening ones horizons - and going for a blast on a Sunday morning on a ZX6R - but it's a simple yes | no question with no context offered.

I am an IFA
In 32 years I have never seen any Life Insurance Application form have any question that could rate, or be interpreted that shooting/Firearms as a "dangerous sport/hobby"

My thoughts weren't really around disclosing it for insurance purposes - although that is the direction the conversation took, it's really rather that the Police now as a matter of course inform the FAC holders GP of an initial grant - ergo, what I was originally wondering ie: it's on my medical records that I'm an FAC holder, and would / should I instruct the GP not to disclose that fact to an insurer as it's not medically relevant (being mindful that faceless insurance types now have data with my address and the fact that I'm an FAC holder).

FWIW - I run my own IT consultancy business - so when it comes to matters of infosec I'm both poacher and gamekeeper.

Buck, you will also know that it is not for the applicant to decide what is hazardous or not i.e. the company will decide if it is a material fact or not, there doesn't need to be a specific question. As you know it is better to disclose and be covered than NOT disclose and have the claim refused.

Chuck wrote:Buck, you will also know that it is not for the applicant to decide what is hazardous or not i.e. the company will decide if it is a material fact or not, there doesn't need to be a specific question. As you know it is better to disclose and be covered than NOT disclose and have the claim refused.

Agreed, but we must not be cajoled into describing shooting sports as a "dangerous pastime/hobby! it is not.
Otherwise we should disclose the fact that sometimes we break the speed limits in our vehicles which if prosecuted is sometimes described as dangerous driving!

buck52 wrote:

Chuck wrote:Buck, you will also know that it is not for the applicant to decide what is hazardous or not i.e. the company will decide if it is a material fact or not, there doesn't need to be a specific question. As you know it is better to disclose and be covered than NOT disclose and have the claim refused.

Agreed, but we must not be cajoled into describing shooting sports as a "dangerous pastime/hobby! it is not.
Otherwise we should disclose the fact that sometimes we break the speed limits in our vehicles which if prosecuted is sometimes described as dangerous driving!

The man has a valid point.

Mezzer