FFL won’t hold my firearm anymore.

[raftman]

This very scenario happened to me. I was the seller.

I'm curious, what ended up happening, if you're able to talk about it and such?

 

[FireArm]

It's not the FFL's fault, but they're the ones left holding the gun and the ones who have to deal with the person they just told "we're sorry but you can't have the gun you've already paid $900 for."

What's your point? They knew they couldn't have the gun if they can't pass a Bgc.

 

[raftman]

What's your point? They knew they couldn't have the gun if they can't pass a Bgc.

Do you wanna deal with an irate a-hole who thinks you owe them $900?

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I don't have experience working for an FFL so maybe I'm off base but on the question of holding or not, I think one should consider it from the FFL's side. What happens in this scenario?:

-Seller sells $900 gun to buyer, leaves with the money.
-Buyer goes into queue for 4 days.
-Seller has already spent the money and can't return it even if they wanted to.
-Buyer fails BGC.
-Is the seller legally obligated to return the money?
-FFL has headache of angry guy who is out $900 and can't take possession of gun and a seller who can't/won't return money.
-Law enforcement probably has to get involved in some capacity.

I could understand why the FFL might take the stance that nothing changes hands until and approval.

-FFL offers to sell the gun for the disqualified buyer for a hefty commission.
-FFL sells the gun for $800, and keeps $200.
-Buyer gets $600 back.

 

[aasbra]

-FFL offers to sell the gun for the disqualified buyer for a hefty commission.
-FFL sells the gun for $800, and keeps $200.
-Buyer gets $600 back.

I experienced something like this. I purchased a new handgun from a local FFL dealer (small shop) who had it advertised at a good price. The FFL shared that he had special ordered it for a guy who couldn't pass the BCG once he (the FFL) took delivery of it and logged it onto his books. Not sure whether the guy prepaid prior to him ordering the gun or put down a deposit or what, but the FFL said that the guy who couldn't pass the BGC ended up paying for a portion of the cost of the gun, and he was offering it for sale at a lower price to move the inventory.

 

[arakboss]

It's not the FFL's fault, but they're the ones left holding the gun and the ones who have to deal with the person they just told "we're sorry but you can't have the gun you've already paid $900 for."

In Oregon the FFL will suggest the buyer contact the challenge line to try and resolve the reason for denial.

The buyer could contact the seller and see if they are willing to return some of the money and do the background check to get the gun back.

 

[MikeInOr]

What this does is reduce the amount most people are willing to pay for a used firearm.

I will pay 10% or more for a new firearm rather than go through the hassles of buying a used one. At the same time I am more likely hold on to a gun I don't use much any more rather than sell it for a low price.

The end result is more firearms in circulation and firearm manufactures making more money.

 

[Ginocide]

Because he is charging transfer fees to both parties. While the firearm is in his possession, he has to put it on his books, it's his firearm until someone clears a background check to get it.

That seems strange to me, why does he "have" to do that? Could he not simply start the process and in the case of a hold simply dismiss both parties with the owner taking it home with him? It's not a class 3 item that has to go through two transfers.

 

[raftman]

In Oregon the FFL will suggest the buyer contact the challenge line to try and resolve the reason for denial.

The buyer could contact the seller and see if they are willing to return some of the money and do the background check to get the gun back.

Sure, but they could essentially be told by both to go pound sand.

 

[arakboss]

Sure, but they could essentially be told by both to go pound sand.

If a person is worried about not passing a background check, they might want to try the process with a cheap firearm first and save the $900 one for later. A $30 AR lower would be a good place to start.

Or go to A Cut Above Pawn.

 

[trekkerpaul]

I don't have experience working for an FFL so maybe I'm off base but on the question of holding or not, I think one should consider it from the FFL's side. What happens in this scenario?:

-Seller sells $900 gun to buyer, leaves with the money.
-Buyer goes into queue for 4 days.
-Seller has already spent the money and can't return it even if they wanted to.
-Buyer fails BGC.
-Is the seller legally obligated to return the money?
-FFL has headache of angry guy who is out $900 and can't take possession of gun and a seller who can't/won't return money.
-Law enforcement probably has to get involved in some capacity.

I could understand why the FFL might take the stance that nothing changes hands until and approval.

In my scenario at A cut above, I made the seller hand my money back to me since the SG was going back to his house. Once the BGC was finalized, he got paid. I'm not a fan of the idea of the seller holding until BGC is done regardless. It put the BGC in the buyers name for a firearm that they potentially do not have possession of. I did make a call after this experience and I was told it is legal. I do get why they are doing it. I personally wont do any PP BGC at a FFL that won't hold item until completed. The BS KB emergency SB941 is the real culprit here.

 

[FireArm]

That seems strange to me, why does he "have" to do that? Could he not simply start the process and in the case of a hold simply dismiss both parties with the owner taking it home with him? It's not a class 3 item that has to go through two transfers.

when you leave a firearm at a shop during the background check, the shop then takes possession of the firearm.

 

[raftman]

In my scenario at A cut above, I made the seller hand my money back to me since the SG was going back to his house. Once the BGC was finalized, he got paid. I'm not a fan of the idea of the seller holding until BGC is done regardless. It put the BGC in the buyers name for a firearm that they potentially do not have possession of. I did make a call after this experience and I was told it is legal. I do get why they are doing it. I personally wont do any PP BGC at a FFL that won't hold item until completed. The BS KB emergency SB941 is the real culprit here.

The idiotic laws are exactly where the ultimate blame lies. They really aren't made to work, aren't written by people who know what they're talking about so they create damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situations.

 

[Mikej]

aren't written by people who know what they're talking about

High IQs likely. Not smart, dumb as a box of nails.

 

[Ginocide]

when you leave a firearm at a shop during the background check, the shop then takes possession of the firearm.

So why do that? Seems unnecessary for a local transaction.

 

[aasbra]

The few guns I've sold the last couple years, before the buyer and I agree on a FFL for the transfer, I ask to determine whether the FFL will hold the gun if the buyer gets delayed. Making two trips (especially if not close by) is a deterrent for both buyer and seller. And makes for a cleaner deal, IMO than the seller holding the gun and money, with a BGC in process for the buyer.

On the other hand, I can understand a FFL doesn't have unlimited space to store firearms that are in process, nor want to accept liability for something happening to /with them while in their possession.

The whole situation is a mess, and discourages private party transfers the last couple years.

 

[FireArm]

So why do that? Seems unnecessary for a local transaction.

were going in circles now...
many different reasons to leave a gun at a shop while a background is being completed.
sometimes its the shop policy, sometimes its easier for the buyer and seller to not have to schedule another time they can both be there, many reasons.

 

[arakboss]

were going in circles now...
many different reasons to leave a gun at a shop while a background is being completed.
sometimes its the shop policy, sometimes its easier for the buyer and seller to not have to schedule another time they can both be there, many reasons.

View: https://youtu.be/iAgX6qlJEMc?feature=shared

 

[orygun]

The few guns I've sold the last couple years, before the buyer and I agree on a FFL for the transfer, I ask to determine whether the FFL will hold the gun if the buyer gets delayed.

This has just recently become part of my concern. In the not too distant past, most places would hold the gun, so it was a safe assumption. Not anymore.
I'll admit to feeling better about the FFL holding the gun if I've already paid.

 

[RogerJ]

i got a UPIN from the DOJ to avoid this crap. That's the good news. The bad news is it took them 3 years to process my request.