Getting a New Gun Delivered RFD to RFD

[ovenpaa]

Your FAC should state:

Guidance to anybody who sells, lets on hire, gives or lends firearms and/or ammunition to the holder of this certificate:

1. You must complete each column of table 1 of firearms or table 2 ammunition.

Seems clear enough to me.

Also, if there are any RFD's unsure of this change I am happy to scan the documentation I have and forward it to them. Additionally and for the record we will no longer release any firearms received as RFD transfers as a result of a sale until the new owner has had the originator complete his table 1 as above. Also I would urge any RFD's to check with their licensing departments if they have any doubts as I would hate to see someone fall foul of the law over such a transfer.

[dromia]

On the guidance to anyone who sells etc on my certificate No4 also says:

" 4.If you are selling a firearm and/or ammunition which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person, you should complete the table(s) and notify the police of the transaction concerning the firearm (as in 2 above). The dealer who actually hands over the firearm and/or ammunition should not complete the table(s) or notify the police except in circumstances which may require police investigation as above)."

This guidance is now being implemented as the legal interpretation has been decided to agree with this method of selling, to do otherwise is therefore illegal.

[bigfathairybiker]

But that is incorrect. An Rfd transfers the firearm to the new owner by filling in the fac and notifing the police that the transfer has taken place.

It is quite simple and has been for a long time, we don't need our fellow shooters destroying what has been good for us by collaborating with the powers that be to make it more difficult. As I've said before, people from within our shooting community are tearing down our system from within.

I wouldnt be surprised of the police etc got the idea to change what was working fine from the shooting community and forums like this where we constantly repeat over and over again that although the system works, we should all now bow down and take it up the pooper.

And this is the reason wh guidance is being made law.

Shoot ourselves in the foot.
I'm surprised we have any feet left.

What's the code for the grumpy smiley.

Mark

[Christel]

But that is incorrect. An Rfd transfers the firearm to the new owner by filling in the fac and notifing the police that the transfer has taken place.

Mark

It is not incorrect, the scenario you outline only applies to a firearm that the RFD owns.

[Tony-c]

I know that as far back as 2008 and most likely before, the FAC I had clearly states that in the event of shipping via RFD, the RFD does not enter it onto the FAC and does not notify the police.

[dromia]

BFHB

You are reading this all wrong, all we are doing is reporting to you what we as RFDs and FAC holders are being told to do by our certification authorities and by our trade bodies.

We have not instigated this or expressed views on the rights or wrongs of it. It is disingenuous of you to suggest that the shooting community are the instigators of this.

The firearms acts are the firearms acts and we all have to abide by that legislation, much of it needs legal interpreting of the acts as to what they actually mean on the ground in practice, this evidently has been sought and the certification authorities and the trade organisations seem to been in agreement on this legal interpretation.

If you have contrary legal interpretation then share it and challenge theirs, if they disagree then the courts will decide which view is right.

As has been already pointed out this is not new and has been around for years what is new is the insistence of compliance.

To say that we are driving this is doing this forum a great disservice, we are seeking to help our members avoid trouble you actually seem to be suggesting that I as an FAC holder should not abide by the conditions and guidance on my FAC, that I think is totally irresponsible of you.

[Tony-c]

and transferring ownership of a gun to the RFD's bring out the can of worms.

customer buys a gun from a dealer miles away, correct protocol is that he posts his FAC to that dealer, they enter it onto his FAC and then return it securely, I post special delivery to the FAC address.

then the firearm is shipped to the dealer, new owner goes to dealer, shows FAC with firearm already entered onto it, and takes it away.

if the gun is technically changing ownership and then sold to the end buyer by the receiving dealer, what about in the event of a warranty claim??

someone comes to me and wants a gun, but can find it cheaper elsewhere, has is shipped to them using me, and transferred the old fashioned way, (ie sold to them) am I then legally liable for any warranty or failures??

[bnz41]

On the guidance to anyone who sells etc on my certificate No4 also says:

" 4.If you are selling a firearm and/or ammunition which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person, you should complete the table(s) and notify the police of the transaction concerning the firearm (as in 2 above). The dealer who actually hands over the firearm and/or ammunition should not complete the table(s) or notify the police except in circumstances which may require police investigation as above)."

This guidance is now being implemented as the legal interpretation has been decided to agree with this method of selling, to do otherwise is therefore illegal.

Ok then that means the RFD who hands over the firearm to the new owner (me) soon should not charge any fee for doing the paperwork, cos he aint done any.... result... but what if he does thats not playing fair...

[dromia]

No quiet so if you read the interpretation of law the dealer still has to enter the firearm on his register and then record the transfer and to whom at the time.

At the end of the day regardless of what is entailed, a lot or a little, if a dealer wishes to charge "x" amount for doing the transfer then they can and people can either choose to pay it or not. Fair doesn't really come into modern business practice, if you don't think it "fair" then don't pay it.

[bigfathairybiker]

It seems to me that when the word guidence suits some people to say that it is only guidance that is what they say, but when they want ,guidance must be followed as the law!

What is happening there?

Is it guidence or isn't it?

Mark