PDA

View Full Version : If I ship to an FFL, is it still a PPT?


civilsnake
11-17-2009, 9:19 AM
Trying to sell a pistol to a fellow Californian a couple hundred miles away.

If I ship it to his local FFL, does it still count as a PPT? If so, dealer fees don't apply and $35 is all the dealer can charge. That's what I'm hoping for...

leelaw
11-17-2009, 9:27 AM
No, it's not a PPT. It's a dealer transfer, and the FFL can charge whatever he wants.

ke6guj
11-17-2009, 10:39 AM
correct, it is not a PPT, and as such, the handgun in question must be on the Roster to be transfered. Its not a PPT, so no roster-exemption.

Dr. Peter Venkman
11-17-2009, 11:39 AM
Kind of hard to be a person to person transfer when there are not two people at the gunshop.

civilsnake
11-17-2009, 1:55 PM
Kind of hard to be a person to person transfer when there are not two people at the gunshop.

I don't think I agree with that logic; ownership is being transferred from one person to another person. At no point does the dealer own the gun. I think "PPT" could still apply in general terms.

curtisfong
11-17-2009, 2:29 PM
I think "PPT" could still apply in general terms.

General terms, yes. Legal terms, no.

Mike's Custom
11-17-2009, 2:50 PM
Yes, it is a PPT. One NON FFL to another NON FFL is a PPT. The PPT is limited to the $10 PPT fee. The way to do this is to do it like a Gun Show Transaction. The seller fills out SELLER portion of a COPY of a DROS and sending that with a copy of his CA DL or ID to the receiving FFL. The receiving FFL then has the buyer come in and do the electronic transfer. This is still considered a PPT. Some FFLs may not want tot do this for only the PPT fee but this is exactly the same thing as a FTF PPT because all the sellers information and signature is provided along with his ID. A FFL I have dealt with asked for the seller to come in and have me scan his CDL onto the DROS and make a copy of it and witness the sellers signature.

So yes, what you are asking about is legal to do.

Shane916
11-17-2009, 2:55 PM
Trying to sell a pistol to a fellow Californian a couple hundred miles away.

If I ship it to his local FFL, does it still count as a PPT? If so, dealer fees don't apply and $35 is all the dealer can charge. That's what I'm hoping for...

It would not a be a PPT.

Dr. Peter Venkman
11-17-2009, 5:49 PM
I don't think I agree with that logic; ownership is being transferred from one person to another person. At no point does the dealer own the gun. I think "PPT" could still apply in general terms.

Never thought I'd see face-to-face transactions being determined over a manner of ownership. If you're NOT next to someone, it's not a PPT. Pretty simple.

Mike's Custom
11-18-2009, 10:34 AM
Never thought I'd see face-to-face transactions being determined over a manner of ownership. If you're NOT next to someone, it's not a PPT. Pretty simple.


Wrong. Call the DOJ

leelaw
11-18-2009, 5:57 PM
Wrong. Call the DOJ

DOJ has said that split PPTs as you described above are not PPTs; they're dealer transfers.

jaymz
11-18-2009, 6:21 PM
Just playing devil's advocate here, but since when does the DOJ SAYING something, make any damn difference if it's legal or not?

davew
11-18-2009, 6:30 PM
I have researched this extensively and cannot find anything in the law that prohibits this or makes it any less of a PPT. The issue isn't really whether it is legal or not it is more of a practical one. The problem is two fold, 1) most FFLs don't want to take the risk of doing a transaction without original documents in front of them for the small fee, and 2) they simply don't understand the law and don't trust our interpretation.

A secondary issue arrises if the transfer falls through or the buyer fails the background check. FFL must then return to seller and cannot do that unless the seller is present.

jaymz
11-18-2009, 6:37 PM
A secondary issue arrises if the transfer falls through or the buyer fails the background check. FFL must then return to seller and cannot do that unless the seller is present.

Why is that? I've sent guns to the manufacturer for various reasons, and they send it back to me. Would an FFL shipping a gun to the owner be any different? He should be able to charge for the service I would imagine. "Pay me for my time & expenses, or you can come pick it up"

leelaw
11-18-2009, 6:42 PM
Just playing devil's advocate here, but since when does the DOJ SAYING something, make any damn difference if it's legal or not?

It doesn't. It just becomes relevent when someone says to "call the DOJ" about it.

jaymz
11-18-2009, 6:45 PM
It doesn't. It just becomes relevent when someone says to "call the DOJ" about it.

You got me there!

jaymz
11-18-2009, 6:51 PM
I can't find ANY reference stating that a person to person firearm transfer must be done "FTF". It's a myth. OTOH, good luck getting FFL's to deal with all of the little extras involved with doing a PPTtransfer in this fashion. Now they need to wait for UPS, need to contact the purchaser to tell them "hey your gun is here", wait for them to show up, hope the seller did his paperwork right, plus whatever I may have forgotten, for 10 bucks? 'Aint gonna happen. Legal or not.

California Penal Code Section 12082

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 in
accordance with this section in order to comply with subdivision (d)
of Section 12072. The seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain
possession of that firearm. The dealer shall then deliver the firearm
to the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the
firearm, if it is not prohibited, in accordance with subdivision (c)
of Section 12072. If the dealer cannot legally deliver the firearm to
the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the firearm,
the dealer shall forthwith, without waiting for the conclusion of the
waiting period described in Sections 12071 and 12072, return the
firearm to the transferor or seller or the person loaning the
firearm. The dealer shall not return the firearm to the seller or
transferor or the person loaning the firearm when to do so would
constitute a violation of subdivision (a) of Section 12072. If the
dealer cannot legally return the firearm to the transferor or seller
or the person loaning the firearm, then the dealer shall forthwith
deliver the firearm to the sheriff of the county or the chief of
police or other head of a municipal police department of any city or
city and county who shall then dispose of the firearm in the manner
provided by Sections 12028 and 12032. The purchaser or transferee or
person being loaned the firearm may be required by the dealer to pay
a fee not to exceed ten dollars ($10) per firearm, and no other fee
may be charged by the dealer for a sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm conducted pursuant to this section, except for the applicable
fees that may be charged pursuant to Sections 12076, 12076.5, and
12088.9 and forwarded to the Department of Justice, and the fees set
forth in Section 12805. Nothing in these provisions shall prevent a
dealer from charging a smaller fee. The dealer may not charge any
additional fees.
(b) The Attorney General shall adopt regulations under this
section to do all of the following:
(1) Allow the seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm, and the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned
the firearm, to complete a sale, loan, or transfer through a dealer,
and to allow those persons and the dealer to comply with the
requirements of this section and Sections 12071, 12072, 12076, and
12077 and to preserve the confidentiality of those records.
(2) Where a personal handgun importer is selling or transferring a
pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon
the person to comply with clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) of
paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 12072, to allow a
personal handgun importer's ownership of the pistol, revolver, or
other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person being sold
or transferred to be recorded in a manner that if the firearm is
returned to that personal handgun importer because the sale or
transfer cannot be completed, the Department of Justice will have
sufficient information about that personal handgun importer so that a
record of his or her ownership can be maintained in the registry
provided by subdivision (c) of Section 11106.
(3) Ensure that the register or record of electronic transfer
shall state the name and address of the seller or transferor of the
firearm or the person loaning the firearm and whether or not the
person is a personal handgun importer in addition to any other
information required by Section 12077.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a dealer who does
not sell, transfer, or keep an inventory of handguns is not required
to process private party transfers of handguns.
(d) A violation of this section by a dealer is a misdemeanor.

ZirconJohn
11-18-2009, 7:11 PM
I can't find ANY reference stating that a person to person firearm transfer must be done "FTF". It's a myth. OTOH, good luck getting FFL's to deal with all of the little extras involved with doing a PPTtransfer in this fashion. Now they need to wait for UPS, need to contact the purchaser to tell them "hey your gun is here", wait for them to show up, hope the seller did his paperwork right, plus whatever I may have forgotten, for 10 bucks? 'Aint gonna happen. Legal or not.

California Penal Code Section 12082

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 in
accordance with...

Touche!

Look... I'm all for doing a guy a favor, messed-up situation... a mom, friend, or anyone caught in a legal proverbial red tape from our Red Gover-nator State!!! I will, and have gone pro-bono just to right a wrong and get the gun back home where it belongs! Family style, 'country style!'

However, you just a guy wanting to buy a firearm and you expect me or any other dealer to do all this stuff for you... use of my License will cost you, not much... but will be more than 10$

And I not playing tough guy here... I want you to buy firearms, I want to do for you, that's why I'm in the business I am in..., and, and... AND I have a full time job at Home Depot where I make 23$ per hour.

I'm a dealer, and I have traveled LONG distance to get what I want..., what I really want... drive many miles to do it the right way. Now if you want what you want, then you will drive, if you don't want it that bad... then you won't.

It's just that simple.

Quser.619
11-18-2009, 7:32 PM
I'm a dealer, and I have traveled LONG distance to get what I want..., what I really want... drive many miles to do it the right way. Now if you want what you want, then you will drive, if you don't want it that bad... then you won't.

It's just that simple.

Simple & sweetly put!

bodger
11-18-2009, 7:35 PM
Touche!

Look... I'm all for doing a guy a favor, messed-up situation... a mom, friend, or anyone caught in a legal proverbial red tape from our Red Gover-nator State!!! I will, and have gone pro-bono just to right a wrong and get the gun back home where it belongs! Family style, 'country style!'

However, you just a guy wanting to buy a firearm and you expect me or any other dealer to do all this stuff for you... use of my License will cost you, not much... but will be more than 10$

And I not playing tough guy here... I want you to buy firearms, I want to do for you, that's why I'm in the business I am in..., and, and... AND I have a full time job at Home Depot where I make 23$ per hour.

I'm a dealer, and I have traveled LONG distance to get what I want..., what I really want... drive many miles to do it the right way. Now if you want what you want, then you will drive, if you don't want it that bad... then you won't.

It's just that simple.


Dang, I didn't know HD paid that much to anyone.

ZirconJohn
11-18-2009, 8:47 PM
Dang, I didn't know HD paid that much to anyone.

Flooring Specialist... 30 years experience, not an easy job... I should be making more! But in this economic gang bang... I take it, and do my best.

Mike's Custom
11-18-2009, 11:55 PM
Like I stated in my first post, PPTs do not have to be done FTF. But it is up to teh dealer if he wants to do it this way. It is the same requirements as doing a Gun Show PPT when the FFL does not have a computer to swip the CA IDs. Myself, I require the seller to go to a FFL and have them swipe the CA ID into the DROS form along with his thumb print and have the seller sign it and a copy his CA ID on the back of the DROS. That DROS and the firearm are then shipped to me by the seller or the FFL dealer. The other FFL may charge a fee but it will still be cheaper the making 2 trips of any distance.

This is how the DOJ told me to do it. I asked them if it was possible and that is how I was told it could be done. Same as a Gun Show DROS.

navyinrwanda
11-19-2009, 4:03 AM
According to California law, a PPT is a private party transfer.

Not a "person-to-person" transfer.

liketoshoot
11-19-2009, 6:38 AM
Like I stated in my first post, PPTs do not have to be done FTF. But it is up to teh dealer if he wants to do it this way. It is the same requirements as doing a Gun Show PPT when the FFL does not have a computer to swip the CA IDs. Myself, I require the seller to go to a FFL and have them swipe the CA ID into the DROS form along with his thumb print and have the seller sign it and a copy his CA ID on the back of the DROS. That DROS and the firearm are then shipped to me by the seller or the FFL dealer. The other FFL may charge a fee but it will still be cheaper the making 2 trips of any distance.

This is how the DOJ told me to do it. I asked them if it was possible and that is how I was told it could be done. Same as a Gun Show DROS.

I have done one deal this way with a calgunner and my FFL had no problem doing the transfer, he was(the seller) in CA and the gun in question was not on the list.
It is up to the FFL
it worked for us .

tenpercentfirearms
11-19-2009, 6:40 AM
Like I stated in my first post, PPTs do not have to be done FTF. But it is up to teh dealer if he wants to do it this way. It is the same requirements as doing a Gun Show PPT when the FFL does not have a computer to swip the CA IDs. Myself, I require the seller to go to a FFL and have them swipe the CA ID into the DROS form along with his thumb print and have the seller sign it and a copy his CA ID on the back of the DROS. That DROS and the firearm are then shipped to me by the seller or the FFL dealer. The other FFL may charge a fee but it will still be cheaper the making 2 trips of any distance.

This is how the DOJ told me to do it. I asked them if it was possible and that is how I was told it could be done. Same as a Gun Show DROS.

So the other dealer starts the DROS? Do you start a DROS?

I am not quite sure how I could start a DROS at my shop with my DROS software on a firearm for a person I have no knowledge about. Reading the DROS nothing says I am prohibited from doing this though. It just tells me to swear everything is correct. I personally wouldn't want a DROS form floating around out there that I don't retain in my possession on a firearm that I didn't sell to a guy I never met as I am assuming you couldn't just print out a DROS without the complete information. I guess I could keep a copy to show my auditors, but now this guy is going to have two handguns that are the same DROSed in the system. (I am assuming the receiving dealer would need to run a DROS too, otherwise how are they notified if the person is denied? Do they trust the other dealer?) Second, that would mean I would need to collect a $25 fee as a receiving dealer and also a $25 fee as the delivery dealer. PPTs are limited to $35. Isn't that a violation of the law?

I don't want to turn this into a kemasa style turn anyone in thing. I am just being a devil's advocate.

BigMac
11-19-2009, 6:52 AM
If you ship a gun into my shop, you ship it to me. It enters my books and is now my inventory.
If you want it to be a PPT both parties need to come in and request the service.
Im not sure how your sellers documents are valid since you witness nothing in the scenerio you describe. How are you processing this transactionn?
I can send you a form that says Im friggin Jesus Christ... but it doesn't make it so.

jaymz
11-19-2009, 7:54 AM
Seller fills this (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/dros.pdf) out, ships it with the firearm and a copy of DL, to purchasers FFL. FFL contacts purchaser when firearm arrives. Purchaser goes to FFL, pays PPT fees, and finishes the paperwork that was shipped from the seller (and any other paperwork that needs to be done). Buyer comes back in ten 24 hour periods, picks up firearm and everyone but the FFL is happy, 'cause he only gets paid 10 bucks. Perfectly legal, but in my opinion, not gonna happen unless you and the FFL have a very good relationship & he knows that you will tip well. Too much BS for the amount of money that he will be legally able to charge for the transaction.

liketoshoot
11-19-2009, 8:04 AM
^^^^^^^^Yes my FFL and I know each other well after many years of business, also the seller contacted him too to make sure he was willing to work it as a PPT, not FTF. The FFL did only charge me the 10 fee not the fee for putting it in his book, which would have been much more.

Mike's Custom
11-19-2009, 11:35 AM
So the other dealer starts the DROS? Do you start a DROS?

I am not quite sure how I could start a DROS at my shop with my DROS software on a firearm for a person I have no knowledge about. Reading the DROS nothing says I am prohibited from doing this though. It just tells me to swear everything is correct. I personally wouldn't want a DROS form floating around out there that I don't retain in my possession on a firearm that I didn't sell to a guy I never met as I am assuming you couldn't just print out a DROS without the complete information. I guess I could keep a copy to show my auditors, but now this guy is going to have two handguns that are the same DROSed in the system. (I am assuming the receiving dealer would need to run a DROS too, otherwise how are they notified if the person is denied? Do they trust the other dealer?) Second, that would mean I would need to collect a $25 fee as a receiving dealer and also a $25 fee as the delivery dealer. PPTs are limited to $35. Isn't that a violation of the law?

I don't want to turn this into a kemasa style turn anyone in thing. I am just being a devil's advocate.


At a gun show a FFL has the seller fill out a hard copy (DROS Worksheet) of the DROS. Then once the FFL gets back to his computer the buyer comes and the DROS is filled out at that time on the computer. Then the FFL enters the sellers info into he the DROS and "sends" and the trasnaction is done. In the case of the seller and buyer being in different cities you can do the same thing. The seller goes to a FFL and fills out the seller portion on a copy of a DROS Worksheet and the FFL scans and prints his CA ID info on the back and puts a copy of that ID on the back of the Worksheet. Now all the sellers info is captured. I also want the seller to have the FFL add his thumb print to the form. Then the firearm and the sellers DROS Worksheet is shipped to the buyers FFL and a DROS PPT is done. When the FFL gets to the sellers portion he types in the sellers info and the DROS is done. The FFL keeps the sellers signed Worksheet and info with the printed DROS and all DOJ requirements are met. You have all the buyers info like you would normally capture and all the sellers captured info as required by the DOJ. You are limited to the $10 PPT fee but it really is no more work the doing a FTF PPT. The sellers FFL does not have to enter the firearm into his A&D book because he never had it in his inventory. But, I did have one FFL say he would only do this IF he shipped the firearm so he was sure everythign was kept above board and hten he would have to enter it into his A&D book. But that is up to the FFL and I think it is a good idea as a FFL and ofcourse they will charge something to handle the firearm.

bwiese
11-19-2009, 12:18 PM
Like I stated in my first post, PPTs do not have to be done FTF. But it is up to teh dealer if he wants to do it this way. It is the same requirements as doing a Gun Show PPT when the FFL does not have a computer to swip the CA IDs. Myself, I require the seller to go to a FFL and have them swipe the CA ID into the DROS form along with his thumb print and have the seller sign it and a copy his CA ID on the back of the DROS. That DROS and the firearm are then shipped to me by the seller or the FFL dealer. The other FFL may charge a fee but it will still be cheaper the making 2 trips of any distance.

This is how the DOJ told me to do it. I asked them if it was possible and that is how I was told it could be done. Same as a Gun Show DROS.


Mike can you PM with the DOJ employee that told you that?

Other DOJ folks say this isn't the case. I agree with you that nothing prohibits this, but it'd be nice to nail this down.

Did you manage get anything in writing from DOJ?

Mike's Custom
11-19-2009, 2:54 PM
Mike can you PM with the DOJ employee that told you that?

Other DOJ folks say this isn't the case. I agree with you that nothing prohibits this, but it'd be nice to nail this down.

Did you manage get anything in writing from DOJ?

I did this a while ago and the buyer was a BATFE agent and the gun was down in Calexico CA. I called the DOJ and they told me how to do it and that it was like a Gun Show Transaction. At a gun show and your doing a PPT you have the seller fill out a DROS Worksheet and the buyer fill out his part. Then when the FFL gets back to his shop he enters it all into the system. This can also be done with guns on consignment. The seller pre-fills out the PPT part DROS Worksheet and when the FFL sells the firearm the buyer does the online DROS form and the FFL adds in the sellers information. So the PPT is not a FTF in this transaction is not a FTF either. This would be the same with a PPT in a different city with the seller going to a FFL and filing out the DROS Worksheet and verifing the sellers ID and copies.

The reason I didn't write all the info down was because the DOJ said it was done like a Gun Show Transaction.

1. Can I initiate a DROS at a gun show without swiping the purchaser's DMV issued driver's license or identification card if I am unable to use my DOJ-issued or privately owned PC at the show/event?

Yes. You may initiate a DROS at a gun show using a paper DROS worksheet. Upon return to your business location, you may manually input the information into your DOJ-issued or privately owned PC using the keyboard. Please remember, the 10-day waiting period does not begin until you submit the DROS to DOJ using your DOJ-issued or privately owned PC and receive a DROS number. Additionally, prior to the delivery of the firearm, you must swipe the purchaser's DMV issued driver's license/identification card through your DOJ-issued magnetic card swipe reader. Then, print out and attach the information to the copy of the DROS that is retained in your dealership records. Following this process complies with the requirement as long as the information on the purchaser's DMV printout matches the same information recorded on the DROS. Detailed instructions for this process are as follows:

Click on the Windows "Start" menu located in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen. From the "start" menu choose "Programs" then select "Accessories" then select "WordPad". Next, swipe the purchaser's DMV card through the reader and the information will automatically transfer to the WordPad screen on your PC. Finally, to print the information, choose "File" from within the WordPad program application and select "Print" and then click "ok".

paul0660
11-19-2009, 3:22 PM
This is better than bad TV!:popcorn:

halifax
11-19-2009, 3:41 PM
This is so cool. I hope it's all true.

ZirconJohn
11-19-2009, 5:06 PM
Mike can you PM with the DOJ employee that told you that?

Other DOJ folks say this isn't the case. I agree with you that nothing prohibits this, but it'd be nice to nail this down.

Did you manage get anything in writing from DOJ?

Well, I couldn't decide who (above) to address here, so I'll address bwiese, aint never done me wrong and additionally bwiese very smart guy, if you can overlook how he spells 'wise' wrong:D

I am a Dealer, and I will say this "I don't know everything".

I did call DOJ, just now got off the phone with Rene... she says no.

Oh yaaa..., I explained all the scenario as stated above, this, that etc. The topic here is this; Can a seller ship a rostered or non rostered firearm with a DROS Worksheet - from a Dealer, or private citizen to a Dealer... are you following me here?

The question is 'is this legal?' - the answer for whatever it's worth from the lovely Rene at DOJ... "no". She went on to say; "private party transfer is face to face ONLY, just remember that." The worksheet is for consignment, or DROS Entry System down Dealer use, but NOT ship here from another part of California whether roster or non roster.

I did not ask about gun show use of DROS Worksheet as stated above. This is however about shipping a firearm with a DROS Worksheet for use at destination as Private Party Transfer.

Oh ya, one more thing... she said; "well I suppose you can do what you are saying... just don't let us find out if you can sleep with that."

As for me... I value my sleep, so at my shop... this not going to happen.

Thank you for reading.

tenpercentfirearms
11-19-2009, 6:30 PM
The main problem I have is how do you trust that the other FFL is doing things properly? With a PPT it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is, but still the question remains why is another FFL qualified to do this? Second of all, why can't someone reading this thread duplicate all of this using a card swiper from Radio Shack and claim they are an FFL? Do you also require that the pistol be shipped from the FFL who does your paperwork for you?

There is nothing on the DROS worksheet that states you can't do this. I just am not sure if I feel like I am properly verifying the identify of the purchaser by having another FFL do it. I don't remember if I saw in the PC that I have to verify the identity of the seller, but I know I do for the buyer. I need to pay some bills and I will come back to this later.

RobG
11-19-2009, 6:43 PM
I am in no way educated in this but, this catches my eye...

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 in
accordance with this section in order to comply with subdivision (d)
of Section 12072. The seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain
possession of that firearm. The dealer shall then deliver the firearm
to the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the
firearm, if it is not prohibited, in accordance with subdivision (c)
of Section 12072.

It does not say via delivery person, UPS, etc.

tenpercentfirearms
11-19-2009, 7:09 PM
I am in no way educated in this but, this catches my eye...

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 in
accordance with this section in order to comply with subdivision (d)
of Section 12072. The seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain
possession of that firearm. The dealer shall then deliver the firearm
to the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the
firearm, if it is not prohibited, in accordance with subdivision (c)
of Section 12072.

It does not say via delivery person, UPS, etc.

It doesn't say how the seller shall deliver the firearm to the dealer either.

"I delivered it to him via Fed-Ex."

halifax
11-19-2009, 7:23 PM
The main problem I have is how do you trust that the other FFL is doing things properly? With a PPT it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is, but still the question remains why is another FFL qualified to do this? Second of all, why can't someone reading this thread duplicate all of this using a card swiper from Radio Shack and claim they are an FFL? Do you also require that the pistol be shipped from the FFL who does your paperwork for you?

There is nothing on the DROS worksheet that states you can't do this. I just am not sure if I feel like I am properly verifying the identify of the purchaser by having another FFL do it. I don't remember if I saw in the PC that I have to verify the identity of the seller, but I know I do for the buyer. I need to pay some bills and I will come back to this later.

At some point we trust other FFLs to abide by the laws that govern all of us. A copy of their FFL and CFLC would need to be included with the handgun, I assume. We are relying on the sending dealer to properly identify the seller, include a photocopy of the sellers CA ID/DL, an electronic scan of the ID/DL, and a DROS worksheet with the seller's info and signature.

If this weren't such a gray area, I'd certainly trust the other FFL to do his job.

jaymz
11-19-2009, 7:33 PM
The main problem I have is how do you trust that the other FFL is doing things properly? With a PPT it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is, but still the question remains why is another FFL qualified to do this? Second of all, why can't someone reading this thread duplicate all of this using a card swiper from Radio Shack and claim they are an FFL? Do you also require that the pistol be shipped from the FFL who does your paperwork for you?

There is nothing on the DROS worksheet that states you can't do this. I just am not sure if I feel like I am properly verifying the identify of the purchaser by having another FFL do it. I don't remember if I saw in the PC that I have to verify the identity of the seller, but I know I do for the buyer. I need to pay some bills and I will come back to this later.

You're confusing me Wes. Or I'm going to confuse you some more! I am not an FFL. I'm mostly just playing devil's advocate. Here's how I understand that a PPT can be done via FedEx, UPS, whatever. I'll give a scenario using you as the FFL, me as the seller, and Mr. X as the buyer.

You are Mr. X favorite FFL. I have a non-rostered whatever - let's say Ruger LCP for sale. I post it. Mr. X says "i'll take it". Mr. X sends me money. I fill out the sellers portion of this (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/dros.pdf) form. Send form, copy of DL, and Ruger LCP to you via any legal means available. In the meantime, Mr. X informs you that a gun is headed your way from me & leaves his phone number. Gun arrives at your shop, you call Mr. X, and you proceed with the PPT as if I was standing there with you and Mr. X. I've not done many PPT's, but I don't think that the seller needs to provide anything other than a copy of his/her DL and signature on the above mentioned form. I'm not sure where your "other FFL" comes into play. Enlighten me if I've only added to the confusion, so that I may try to become less confused myself.:D

navyinrwanda
11-19-2009, 8:25 PM
The main problem I have is how do you trust that the other FFL is doing things properly? With a PPT it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is, but still the question remains why is another FFL qualified to do this? Second of all, why can't someone reading this thread duplicate all of this using a card swiper from Radio Shack and claim they are an FFL? Do you also require that the pistol be shipped from the FFL who does your paperwork for you?

There is nothing on the DROS worksheet that states you can't do this. I just am not sure if I feel like I am properly verifying the identify of the purchaser by having another FFL do it. I don't remember if I saw in the PC that I have to verify the identity of the seller, but I know I do for the buyer. I need to pay some bills and I will come back to this later.

There's nothing in either the California (or, for that matter, federal) Code or Regulations that requires an FFL processing a private party transfer to verify the identity of the seller (or transferor). The entire focus is on the identity and eligibility of the purchaser (or transferee). Other than collecting some basic information about the transferor, there are no other requirements in the California Code or Regulations regarding the seller (e.g., thumbprints, etc.).

In other words, "it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is." This applies no matter what location(s) the seller and buyer occupy in space and time. The question of whether another FFL is "qualified" is pretty much irrelevant as there's nothing to do.

As for DOJ claiming that a "private party transfer is face to face ONLY" that is an opinion not supported in law or administrative regulation. Which, I suppose, would make it an "underground regulation..."

ZirconJohn
11-19-2009, 9:41 PM
There's nothing in either the California (or, for that matter, federal) Code or Regulations that requires an FFL processing a private party transfer to verify the identity of the seller (or transferor). The entire focus is on the identity and eligibility of the purchaser (or transferee). Other than collecting some basic information about the transferor, there are no other requirements in the California Code or Regulations regarding the seller (e.g., thumbprints, etc.).

In other words, "it doesn't really matter as no one really cares who the seller is." This applies no matter what location(s) the seller and buyer occupy in space and time. The question of whether another FFL is "qualified" is pretty much irrelevant as there's nothing to do.

As for DOJ claiming that a "private party transfer is face to face ONLY" — that is an opinion not supported in law or administrative regulation. Which, I suppose, would make it an "underground regulation..."

In theory, the above is correct.

IF; - If the sending FFL Dealer would verify physical features of CDL or CA ID, then provide a legit photo-copy of same, have the private selling party fill out the DROS Worksheet verify signature, ship the firearm CFLC and all... that would suffice the requirement of proof of ID of the selling party, again; 'IN THEORY'.

IF; - If the receiving FFL Dealer would then manually enter the selling party information DROS Entry System, note: the selling party signature on the worksheet meets legal requirements when attached to the DROS Entry System Print-Out... again, all this brainstorm is only 'IN THEORY'.

The buyer will complete the 4473, FFL Dealer will swipe buyers ID etc... the works... what is important here is the buyer completes DROS as required by Law 'hard copy ID scan and all', and seller info on DROS Worksheet varified as he/she would do for their own business. The seller faced the FFL Dealer in another town or city, the buyer faced an FFL Dealer in their town or city... in theory... 'face to face'.

We are all FFL Dealers, and we only want another FFL Dealer to be honest, and forthright with us as we would be with them, shall I add 'IN THEORY?'... it is still a private party transfer, would just cut the longggggggg drive and not to mention the time. In fact I would be willing to bet your average Joe wouldn't mind paying extra for the extra work involved for each FFL Dealer. In other words, don't think how much it costs you, but instead think how much you will most undoubtedly $AVE...!
The question is... is this a good enough loop hole to convince Law (?)

Well...?

halifax
11-19-2009, 9:58 PM
This brings up another issue. Is all this limited to $35? Probably for the buyer but the seller certainly would need to pay the shipping at least.

BTW: the DOJ does care who the seller is since immediately upon a rejection of the buyer the firearm must be returned to the seller. Kind of need to know who it is in order to return it.

RobG
11-19-2009, 10:02 PM
In theory, the above is correct.

IF; - If the sending FFL Dealer would verify physical features of CDL or CA ID, then provide a legit photo-copy of same, have the private selling party fill out the DROS Worksheet verify signature, ship the firearm CFLC and all... that would suffice the requirement of proof of ID of the selling party, again; 'IN THEORY'.

IF; - If the receiving FFL Dealer would then manually enter the selling party information DROS Entry System, note: the selling party signature on the worksheet meets legal requirements when attached to the DROS Entry System Print-Out... again, all this brainstorm is only 'IN THEORY'.

The buyer will complete the 4473, FFL Dealer will swipe buyers ID etc... the works... what is important here is the buyer completes DROS as required by Law 'hard copy ID scan and all', and seller info on DROS Worksheet varified as he/she would do for their own business. The seller faced the FFL Dealer in another town or city, the buyer faced an FFL Dealer in their town or city... in theory... 'face to face'.

We are all FFL Dealers, and we only want another FFL Dealer to be honest, and forthright with us as we would be with them, shall I add 'IN THEORY?'... it is still a private party transfer, would just cut the longggggggg drive and not to mention the time. In fact I would be willing to bet your average Joe wouldn't mind paying extra for the extra work involved for each FFL Dealer. In other words, don't think how much it costs you, but instead think how much you will most undoubtedly $AVE...!
The question is... is this a good enough loop hole to convince Law (?)

Well...?

Originally Posted by RobG
I am in no way educated in this but, this catches my eye...

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Section 12071 in
accordance with this section in order to comply with subdivision (d)
of Section 12072. The seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain
possession of that firearm. The dealer shall then deliver the firearm
to the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the
firearm, if it is not prohibited, in accordance with subdivision (c)
of Section 12072.

It does not say via delivery person, UPS, etc.

It doesn't say how the seller shall deliver the firearm to the dealer either.

"I delivered it to him via Fed-Ex."
This was my above post and reply from Wes. If this was inded the case, a sending FFL isn't even needed, is it? Just box and send UPS/FED EX to the rec. FFL. Correct me if wrong, you do not need to send a handgun through a FFL to mail out of state, say through a Gunbroker deal. As long as it goes to a FFL, correct?

RobG
11-19-2009, 10:05 PM
This brings up another issue. Is all this limited to $35? Probably for the buyer but the seller certainly would need to pay the shipping at least.

BTW: the DOJ does care who the seller is since immediately upon a rejection of the buyer the firearm must be returned to the seller. Kind of need to know who it is in order to return it.

Interesting point. The gun goes back to the seller, what about the money? What if the seller is strapped and spends it right away?

halifax
11-19-2009, 10:18 PM
Interesting point. The gun goes back to the seller, what about the money? What if the seller is strapped and spends it right away?

That becomes a case for Judge Judy between the buyer and the seller. The law requires the FFL to return it to the seller.

(Again, since the seller must not be a prohibted person you'd need to have more than a name.)

12082(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or
transfer of a firearm through a person licensed
pursuant to Section 12071 in accordance with
this section in order to comply with subdivision
(d) of Section 12072. The seller or transferor or
the person loaning the firearm shall deliver the
firearm to the dealer who shall retain possession
of that firearm. The dealer shall then deliver the
firearm to the purchaser or transferee or the person
being loaned the firearm, if it is not prohibited,
in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section
12072. If the dealer cannot legally deliver
the firearm to the purchaser or transferee or the
person being loaned the firearm, the dealer shall
forthwith, without waiting for the conclusion of
the waiting period described in Sections 12071
and 12072, return the firearm to the transferor or
seller or the person loaning the firearm. The
dealer shall not return the firearm to the seller or
transferor or the person loaning the firearm
when to do so would constitute a violation of
subdivision (a) of Section 12072. If the dealer
cannot legally return the firearm to the transferor
or seller or the person loaning the firearm, then
the dealer shall forthwith deliver the firearm to
the sheriff of the county or the chief of police or
other head of a municipal police department of
any city or city and county who shall then dispose
of the firearm in the manner provided by
Sections 12028 and 12032.

ZirconJohn
11-19-2009, 11:41 PM
This brings up another issue. Is all this limited to $35? Probably for the buyer but the seller certainly would need to pay the shipping at least.

BTW: the DOJ does care who the seller is since immediately upon a rejection of the buyer the firearm must be returned to the seller. Kind of need to know who it is in order to return it.

Good point Jim... thus the dilemma.

Look, I am all for this theory of PPT via cross State transfer and eliminate the travel time and money to purchase a firearm that is LEGAL in my very own RED STATE!!!! - ahhh SHI-OOT...! See there now I'm gettin' all WORKED-UP AND STUFF!!!

Breath deep, in first... hold it, hold it, now out, breath in and out... and again, relax... okay.

DROS gets denied by DOJ in this type do a guy a favor PPT because I wanna be a good person, and now ya gonna have to get the money form the seller back for the buyer, could be a seller to buyer thing... okay, but you the selling Dealer and therefore NOT monetarily involved. True...! However, it's retail and you (selling FFL Dealer) are the last person the buyer sees, the buyer and seller NEVER MET...! Capiche`...?

Hey... maybe the DOJ doing the FFL's a favor here! - Uh... Nawwwwwwww...!

halifax
11-19-2009, 11:53 PM
Good point Jim... thus the dilemma.

Look, I am all for this theory of PPT via cross State transfer and eliminate the travel time and money to purchase a firearm that is LEGAL in my very own RED STATE!!!! - ahhh SHI-OOT...! See there now I'm gettin' all WORKED-UP AND STUFF!!!

Breath deep, in first... hold it, hold it, now out, breath in and out... and again, relax... okay.

DROS gets denied by DOJ in this type do a guy a favor PPT because I wanna be a good person, and now ya gonna have to get the money form the seller back for the buyer, could be a seller to buyer thing... okay, but you the selling transfer Dealer and therefore NOT monetarily involved. True...! However, it's retail and you (selling transfer FFL Dealer) are the last person the buyer sees, the buyer and seller NEVER MET...! Capiche`...?

Hey... maybe the DOJ doing the FFL's a favor here! - Uh... Nawwwwwwww...!

I always try to inform my customers upfront who want to do transfers that if anything goes wrong, they are the ones who will need to deal with it. I'll help if I can but for $25 I'm not going to eat any expenses.

ZirconJohn
11-19-2009, 11:58 PM
I always try to inform my customers upfront who want to do transfers that if anything goes wrong, they are the ones who will need to deal with it. I'll help if I can but for $25 I'm not going to eat any expenses.

Precisely.

Mike's Custom
11-20-2009, 11:52 AM
In this case, no CFLC is needed because it is not coming from the dealer even if the FFL dealer ships it for the customer anymore then UPS shipping station is. He has not added it to his inventory and he does not include his FFL so no CFLC is needed. But a FFL does not ned to ship it anyway, just swipe the sellers CA ID and print it to the back of the DROS Worksheet. Now if the sellers FFL wanted to add it to his inventory and A&D book then he would need to do a CFLC and FFL copy but the DROS Worksheet would still work. The sellers FFL could charge a fee for doing his part but it shouldn't be much.

On the other hand, there is another way that would require the buyer to oly make one trip. If the buyer had a FFL that trusted him he could sign a copy of his FFL and let the buyer go pick up the gun and bring it back with the sellers DROS Worksheet and then do the PPT at his FFL. The buyer would be acting as an authorized person and transport. It would be the same as if UPS shipped it but the buyer would only have to make the trip once.

navyinrwanda
11-20-2009, 5:42 PM
This brings up another issue. Is all this limited to $35? Probably for the buyer but the seller certainly would need to pay the shipping at least.

BTW: the DOJ does care who the seller is since immediately upon a rejection of the buyer the firearm must be returned to the seller. Kind of need to know who it is in order to return it.
As noted above, an intermediary FFL does have the responsibility to follow PC 12072 if it's necessary to return a firearm to a seller/transferor. But 12072 applies to everyone — not just FFLs. Again, the legal sanctions are on the person transferring a firearm to insure that the transferee is not a prohibited person. PC 12072 even go so far as to say that the transfer is prohibited if anyone "has cause to believe" that the transferee is a prohibited person.

So in our hypothetical long-distance PPT where the seller ships a firearm directly to an intermediary FFL (not via another FFL), the seller's identity is important only if the transaction cannot be completed. But if I were the FFL handling this sort of transaction, I'd be disinclined to send a firearm back to someone I didn't know — even if I was in possession of a copy of their ID, thumbprints, or a DNA sample. Per California Code, the firearm goes to local LEO at this point. Instant background checks (like those that occur pretty much everywhere else except in California) could help alleviate this potential problem, which could happen during a face-to-face transaction, too.

The intermediary FFL is in the middle to enforce PC 12072 — to ensure that the buyer/transferee is not a prohibited person. If anything "goes wrong" with the transfer, the FFL has no responsibility other than to not transfer a firearm to a prohibited person. If the firearm arrives not as described, or if the buyer can't complete the transaction for whatever reason, then any dispute is solely between the buyer and seller. This is how it works in the other 33 states where private citizens can conduct free intrastate commerce in firearms.

Sure, it's probably a good idea for a buyer to conduct a PPT face-to-face: then any issues about the condition of the firearm can be resolved before money changes hands. And it's the buyer's responsibility to make sure that he's not a prohibited person. Most transactions between individuals, whether for a firearm or at a yard sale, are "final." I don't know of too many sellers that promise "money back, no questions asked."

These principles about the identity of the seller apply to interstate transfers, too. An individual can ship a firearm across state lines, but only to an FFL (with some limited exceptions). The law implementing the CFLC system in California explicitly allows for this. The second CFLC FAQ on the DOJ's website (http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcfaqs.php) specifically addresses this:

I am not an FFL but I want to ship a firearm to a California FFL. Do I have to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number before shipping a firearm to California?

No. The requirement to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number only applies to holders of valid FFLs.

Of course the firearm is entered into the dealer's inventory and bound book in this situation, but the seller's identity is nevertheless not terribly important. And when out-of-state FFLs have transferred firearms to California FFLs on behalf of individual sellers, my experience has been that they do not pay particular attention to the seller's identity (other than what would be expected in the normal course of any business to maintain appropriate records and to satisfy a reasonable person that the item being received was not stolen or otherwise improperly obtained).

The only other purpose that the seller's identity is used for is to maintain California's registry of handguns. Supposedly, the DOJ updates their records to correctly identify the new owner of any handgun. But I've heard that the California handgun registry doesn't maintain a strong linkage on the sell-side... i.e., the likelihood of being able to instantly produce a "title search" or report listing every owner of a particular handgun is quite low.

rbetts
11-20-2009, 11:07 PM
[Sigh], Until the DOJ makes it easier for non face to face PPT's to occur, only a face to face PPT will occur and be accepted at Golden State Tactical.

I bled for my license and I want to keep it.

That being said, ONCE the DROS System can work with a PENDING FILE between dealers, I would be more than happy to be responsible for what happens on my end and get you your gun. Heck I think there ought to be a seperate category for this and that it should be equitable for both sides. Lets say 10 bucks at both ends, buyer pays for shipping and State DROS fees.

All those buyers that want this to happen, get right on it and get your legislators moving to make it easier for us all!!

chiz
11-21-2009, 12:30 AM
I have done this before when I purchased a revolver from another Calgunner. My FFL gave me a work sheet and drew a square on it and asked that the seller make a copy of it with his ID in the box and send it when he sent the firearm. The seller also asked My FFL for a copy of his license so he could keep it with his records. I was only charged for a ppt. Before my 10 days was up I also did a dealer transfer there and I had no problems.

halifax
11-21-2009, 2:54 AM
As noted above, an intermediary FFL does have the responsibility to follow PC 12072 if it's necessary to return a firearm to a seller/transferor. But 12072 applies to everyone — not just FFLs. Again, the legal sanctions are on the person transferring a firearm to insure that the transferee is not a prohibited person. PC 12072 even go so far as to say that the transfer is prohibited if anyone "has cause to believe" that the transferee is a prohibited person.

So in our hypothetical long-distance PPT where the seller ships a firearm directly to an intermediary FFL (not via another FFL), the seller's identity is important only if the transaction cannot be completed. But if I were the FFL handling this sort of transaction, I'd be disinclined to send a firearm back to someone I didn't know — even if I was in possession of a copy of their ID, thumbprints, or a DNA sample. Per California Code, the firearm goes to local LEO at this point. Instant background checks (like those that occur pretty much everywhere else except in California) could help alleviate this potential problem, which could happen during a face-to-face transaction, too.

The intermediary FFL is in the middle to enforce PC 12072 — to ensure that the buyer/transferee is not a prohibited person. If anything "goes wrong" with the transfer, the FFL has no responsibility other than to not transfer a firearm to a prohibited person. If the firearm arrives not as described, or if the buyer can't complete the transaction for whatever reason, then any dispute is solely between the buyer and seller. This is how it works in the other 33 states where private citizens can conduct free intrastate commerce in firearms.

Sure, it's probably a good idea for a buyer to conduct a PPT face-to-face: then any issues about the condition of the firearm can be resolved before money changes hands. And it's the buyer's responsibility to make sure that he's not a prohibited person. Most transactions between individuals, whether for a firearm or at a yard sale, are "final." I don't know of too many sellers that promise "money back, no questions asked."

These principles about the identity of the seller apply to interstate transfers, too. An individual can ship a firearm across state lines, but only to an FFL (with some limited exceptions). The law implementing the CFLC system in California explicitly allows for this. The second CFLC FAQ on the DOJ's website (http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcfaqs.php) specifically addresses this:

Of course the firearm is entered into the dealer's inventory and bound book in this situation, but the seller's identity is nevertheless not terribly important. And when out-of-state FFLs have transferred firearms to California FFLs on behalf of individual sellers, my experience has been that they do not pay particular attention to the seller's identity (other than what would be expected in the normal course of any business to maintain appropriate records and to satisfy a reasonable person that the item being received was not stolen or otherwise improperly obtained).

The only other purpose that the seller's identity is used for is to maintain California's registry of handguns. Supposedly, the DOJ updates their records to correctly identify the new owner of any handgun. But I've heard that the California handgun registry doesn't maintain a strong linkage on the sell-side... i.e., the likelihood of being able to instantly produce a "title search" or report listing every owner of a particular handgun is quite low.

I have had a buyer denied. I called the DOJ and asked if I needed to DROS the rifle back to the seller and was told that in this situation a background check had already been done on the seller based on the information provided with the original DROS.

Mike's Custom
11-21-2009, 10:40 AM
Again, the dealer submitting the DROS is limited to the $10 PPT fee (+$25 DROS) but it is no more work then a FTF PPT. The sellers FFL can charge whatever he wants since he is not doing the PPT.

navyinrwanda
11-21-2009, 4:39 PM
I have had a buyer denied. I called the DOJ and asked if I needed to DROS the rifle back to the seller and was told that in this situation a background check had already been done on the seller based on the information provided with the original DROS.
That's very interesting... on a PPT, DOJ automatically runs a background check on the seller if the buyer fails background? I suppose this makes sense it would be the same principal behind a LEGR.

It's really a shame that there's not a clearer and more explicitly defined method for handling long-distance private sales in California. We're the only state that mandates that all firearms transfers must be processed through an FFL. Other states have a requirement for background checks (Connecticut, DC, and Rhode Island; Maryland and Pennsylvania handguns only), but these can be done by the private party seller without going though an FFL.

So it seems that California is the only state in the U.S. where private party sales are difficult (but not impossible) to conduct if the buyer and seller not face-to-face. I wonder if there's any chance that Jerry Brown might help us solve this problem before he moves back to the governor's mansion?