Board licenses

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 07 Dec 2015, 10:43

Guys was looking for some opinions and possibly people who know what they are talking about, a fighter does not renew his license, happens to be ronnie Clark ha, so before his fight he goes to get his license back and is told because he is late he must pay a £50 admin fee, fair enough, then because he didn't renew they then backdate his license 6 months he took off, so he pays an admin fee and his license is backdated also, when asked why he would pay a licensing fee for time he was not active or seeking a service he's told because insurance is backdated? Is that even possible? U can't backdate insurance ha, or maybe I am missing the point? He's told to like it or lump it, surely you wouldn't back date your tv license if you didn't have a tv, you pay for whatever service you receive,

To the morons at the board, you are there to serve the fighters, fighters are not there to serve you, also Robert smith dealt with this issue directly, no blame can be passed, I wasn't gonna post but all the stuff regarding Tyson I think a examples should be released to show that the bbbofc despite very good medical care are clueless

Parson Cross · Post by **Parson Cross** » 07 Dec 2015, 10:49

They aren't clueless mate - they are a law unto themselves.
Read the rule book.
No point getting stoked up about it.

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 07 Dec 2015, 10:59

Not stoked up mate I know there a law unto themselves, maybe need to rethink the wording of licensing tho, can you backdate insurance? They are committing fraud by offering that service, it's a fact

damianhucker1 · Post by **damianhucker1** » 07 Dec 2015, 14:49

Yes thats definately a bit dodgy...

But hey its BBBofC so they must be right .....

Thats how it usually seems on this forum at least

dalcumly · Post by **dalcumly** » 07 Dec 2015, 16:30

Why didn't he renew his licence at the appropriate time , every other boxer has to. The letter that comes out from the Board warns you that if you don't renew within the stipulated period you will have to pay an admin fee. Was he thinking of retiring?

spudder56 · Post by **spudder56** » 07 Dec 2015, 17:00

dalcumly wrote:Why didn't he renew his licence at the appropriate time , every other boxer has to. The letter that comes out from the Board warns you that if you don't renew within the stipulated period you will have to pay an admin fee. Was he thinking of retiring?

Exactly correct mate in this case it is entirely the fault of the boxer not the board

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 07 Dec 2015, 17:40

He was taking a kickboxing fight, can't fight if he has a license, the point isn't the admin fee, the point is back dating it, you pay for a service, he paid 250 for a yearly license and is only getting 6 months, the board dictate to fighters making a living hence why he can't pro kick box yet when he doesn't renew they affect him financially and take money. It's an absolute joke, I just think they have lost the concept of they are there to serve the fighters , not paid enough as it is

spudder56 · Post by **spudder56** » 07 Dec 2015, 17:46

JamieM wrote:He was taking a kickboxing fight, can't fight if he has a license, the point isn't the admin fee, the point is back dating it, you pay for a service, he paid 250 for a yearly license and is only getting 6 months, the board dictate to fighters making a living hence why he can't pro kick box yet when he doesn't renew they affect him financially and take money. It's an absolute joke, I just think they have lost the concept of they are there to serve the fighters , not paid enough as it is

Don't think a boxers licence is £250 mate

damianhucker1 · Post by **damianhucker1** » 07 Dec 2015, 18:11

dalcumly wrote:Why didn't he renew his licence at the appropriate time , every other boxer has to. The letter that comes out from the Board warns you that if you don't renew within the stipulated period you will have to pay an admin fee. Was he thinking of retiring?

I dont care what anyone else opinion is or how they justify it... its bollocks...

Cant be fining people because they didnt buy something at a time someone else wanted them to regardless of any rules... its out of order... as it is also out of order to back date it...

Typical boxrec posters... im beginning to lose faith in this place... really am... cant see the wood for the trees.

If a boxer decides hes going to hang em up and then changes his mind should he be fined.... ffs its daft

leejonesjnr · Post by **leejonesjnr** » 07 Dec 2015, 19:51

I was late sending in my license fee. I wasn't fined but my license was backdated a few months to the correct date, as expected.

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 07 Dec 2015, 19:58

They have a £50 admin fee, and why would they backdate it? A license is your insurance, your can't backdate insurance, your license should start from the date you pay it,

leejonesjnr · Post by **leejonesjnr** » 07 Dec 2015, 20:10

JamieM wrote:They have a £50 admin fee, and why would they backdate it? A license is your insurance, your can't backdate insurance, your license should start from the date you pay it,

THEY DIDN'T FINE ME OR CHARGE AN 'ADMIN FEE' OR ANY OTHER PENALTY.
It is not only an insurance policy, boxers and other license holders are made aware that a license is supposed to be renewed in good time to be continuous.
It seems to me that the board are quite lenient in allowing late renewals rather than requiring a boxer to reapply.

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 07 Dec 2015, 20:13

Well they fined Ronnie, and also backdated it is which Is what I'm saying, go call up and ask, ronnie asked to re apply for sheer princiciple he would then get his full year and they also refused that. It's a boxers choice wether they renew and should not be held to ransom for it,

digzee · Post by **digzee** » 07 Dec 2015, 20:16

If Ronnie decided to carry on kickboxing for 4 years then come back and renew his licence would they backdate his insurance for 4 years? If yes that is ridiculous and if no then why should they do it if it was for 6 months. They are as bad as the mafia.

davie · Post by **davie** » 08 Dec 2015, 00:38

damianhucker1 wrote:
dalcumly wrote:Why didn't he renew his licence at the appropriate time , every other boxer has to. The letter that comes out from the Board warns you that if you don't renew within the stipulated period you will have to pay an admin fee. Was he thinking of retiring?

I dont care what anyone else opinion is or how they justify it... its bollocks...

Cant be fining people because they didnt buy something at a time someone else wanted them to regardless of any rules... its out of order... as it is also out of order to back date it...

Typical boxrec posters... im beginning to lose faith in this place... really am... cant see the wood for the trees.

If a boxer decides hes going to hang em up and then changes his mind should he be fined.... ffs its daft

This is pretty much how I'm reading this.

I'm no expert on these matter, have never had to apply for a boxing license
But regardless of the "rules" and the accepted norms of British boxing, this reads like a crock of shit to me.

Imagine direct line decided you had to renew your motor insurance on some arbitrary date but your renewal isn't for another 6 months, you go to renew when it's due and they charge you for a service you haven't been using, haven't had the benefit of and couldn't possibly have made a claim against (the very purpose of insurance cover) as you haven't been covered or able to drive under the policy, because it didn't bloody exist.

Direct line - "oh, but sir, we said in the rulebook that you must renew on the 32nd of Julember. so you have to pay for the full year and we'll only actually provide you with cover for 6 months from today"
You - "I don't give a monkeys what the rule book says, that's effing retarded, you know where you can stick your insurance"
Direct line - "Oh sorry sir, did I mention the £50 admin fee for our excellent cover, you need to pay that too"
You - "Why?"
Direct line - "Because there was an arbitrary date we set for you to renew your car insurance, that date happened to be at a time when you didn't need insurance, so because you never renewed at that time we're charging you more for the same service"
You - "Kill yourself!"

The Insider · Post by **The Insider** » 08 Dec 2015, 02:33

So is there now a set date all boxer licences run from and too? What if you do not renew your licence for 10 or 11 months, would you only get 1 or 2 months worth of licence? Why can't the board just issue a new licence from the date you want? Surely that's what the £50 admin fee is for. I presume when your licence runs out your insurance runs out with it.

leejonesjnr · Post by **leejonesjnr** » 08 Dec 2015, 04:18

I don't really see why a boxer being unprofessional means the board is at fault.
Knowing that one must not engage in another combat sport outside of boxing and trying to manipulate a gap in which to do so seems dubious to me.
There are organisations issuing licenses that will allow a boxer to kickbox at the same time if that is the choice one wishes to make.

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 08 Dec 2015, 04:52

Unprofessional? Lee your a moron, always have been always will be, ronnie was taking some time out boxing to reevaluate and wanted to take some kickboxing fights. He then got offered a Celtic title fight and decided to take it. Being unprofessional would be fighting with his license. He's not manipulated anything. He paid for a years long license and got 6 months and paid an admin fee for the privalage.

Your license runs concurrent from the date you first apply. If you don't box for a year and have no license you reapply after a year. Ronnie tried to explain to Robert smith that what was going on actually was fraud as he was saying they were back dating the insurance to which he got aggitated about but it's true, can't backdate insurance, ronnie had no choice but to pay as it was the day before his fight, after his weigh in, both Tommy Gilmour and cyclone would confirm the argument over licenseing. It's ridiculous how these fighters are being ripped off

leejonesjnr · Post by **leejonesjnr** » 08 Dec 2015, 04:54

JamieM wrote:Unprofessional? Lee your a moron, always have been always will be, ronnie was taking some time out boxing to reevaluate and wanted to take some kickboxing fights. He then got offered a Celtic title fight and decided to take it. Being unprofessional would be fighting with his license. He's not manipulated anything. He paid for a years long license and got 6 months and paid an admin fee for the privalage.

Your license runs concurrent from the date you first apply. If you don't box for a year and have no license you reapply after a year. Ronnie tried to explain to Robert smith that what was going on actually was fraud as he was saying they were back dating the insurance to which he got aggitated about but it's true, can't backdate insurance, ronnie had no choice but to pay as it was the day before his fight, after his weigh in, both Tommy Gilmour and cyclone would confirm the argument over licenseing. It's ridiculous how these fighters are being ripped off

Uh huh. Sure.

Boxerbeetle · Post by **Boxerbeetle** » 08 Dec 2015, 04:58

The backdating really doesn't make sense to me, although everything else seems reasonable.

dalcumly · Post by **dalcumly** » 08 Dec 2015, 05:12

Let me explain the backdating of the insurance. Clark was a professional boxer licensed by the Board. His membership lapsed and was then renewed. If Clark , in the near future, developed a brain injury, linked to boxing,he would get nothing , if he wasn't insured. By backdating his insurance it safeguarded HIM against this unlikely event.
Is this not a sensible thing to do ?

Boxerbeetle · Post by **Boxerbeetle** » 08 Dec 2015, 05:19

dalcumly wrote:Let me explain the backdating of the insurance. Clark was a professional boxer licensed by the Board. His membership lapsed and was then renewed. If Clark , in the near future, developed a brain injury, linked to boxing,he would get nothing , if he wasn't insured. By backdating his insurance it safeguarded HIM against this unlikely event.
Is this not a sensible thing to do ?

No. Especially not when the boxer in question took part in a kickboxing fight in the interim.

olij999 · Post by **olij999** » 08 Dec 2015, 05:22

I'm a bit confused. If the issue arose the day before his fight, why hadn't he dealt with the licencing issue before then if he knew his licence had expired? Appreciate I don't have the facts, so this is simply an open question. If he wanted it to be a new application, wouldn't he have had to go through all his medicals again (as that would be the only way the insurance would be valid if it was treated as a new application), which in turn would have involved making a new application to his Area Council, going through the process, which takes a few months. I'm entirely sympathetic to a boxer wanting it to be treated as a new application starting from a fresh date and not be backdated if he wants to go through all the same hoops and bear all the same costs as a new boxer applicant. I'm also sympathetic to a boxer letting his licence lapse and taking time out to evaluate what he wants to do. But I don't see how you can have a "renewal" without it being backdated - it is either a new application from a new date (with all the hassle that entails for the boxer and the Board) or a renewal from a past date.

As an aside, why do some boxers who hold titles let their licences lapse? If you hold a Board-administered title and don't have a licence, technically you have to be stripped. In those cases, the Board is positively doing a favour to those boxers who want to renew and get their licence backdated (so that there is no period in which they were no licenced).

The Insider · Post by **The Insider** » 08 Dec 2015, 06:21

olij999 wrote:I'm a bit confused. If the issue arose the day before his fight, why hadn't he dealt with the licencing issue before then if he knew his licence had expired? Appreciate I don't have the facts, so this is simply an open question. If he wanted it to be a new application, wouldn't he have had to go through all his medicals again (as that would be the only way the insurance would be valid if it was treated as a new application), which in turn would have involved making a new application to his Area Council, going through the process, which takes a few months. I'm entirely sympathetic to a boxer wanting it to be treated as a new application starting from a fresh date and not be backdated if he wants to go through all the same hoops and bear all the same costs as a new boxer applicant. I'm also sympathetic to a boxer letting his licence lapse and taking time out to evaluate what he wants to do. But I don't see how you can have a "renewal" without it being backdated - it is either a new application from a new date (with all the hassle that entails for the boxer and the Board) or a renewal from a past date.

As an aside, why do some boxers who hold titles let their licences lapse? If you hold a Board-administered title and don't have a licence, technically you have to be stripped. In those cases, the Board is positively doing a favour to those boxers who want to renew and get their licence backdated (so that there is no period in which they were no licenced).

If his license had effectively run out wouldn't he have to have his scan and medical again anyway as his years membership was up?

JamieM · Post by **JamieM** » 08 Dec 2015, 06:26

He tried to start off as new as he had to go through his medicals etc anyways, he made no sense of doing 12 months new for £200 or 6 months for 250, you can be damaged in sparring without a license etc, it's all accumulative, end of day if he had picked up an injury out with the time then his medical would possibly pick it up, do you then believe insurance would back date? Not rocket science it makes no sense

Board licenses

Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses

Re: Board licenses