PPT Transfer Fee Overcharge

[Exiledviking]

It's not greed. If you know anything about FFLs, you'd know it's a very tough business and in many cases they don't make much money at all while assuming a lot of liability.

They are not anti-2A either. They are being squeezed by our anti-gun politicians out of existence. If CA politicians can't ban guns completely, they will work on FFLs and shooting ranges. And unfortunately many pro gunners will turn on each other in the process. I won't be part of that - I may not shop there but I won't report anything.

That's my personal take on the situation. I don't blame anyone for having a different opinion though.

A lot of has to do with the attitude of the owner and crew of this particular gunshop when it's brought up that charging $50 for a PPT is against the law. I fully appreciate someone trying to make a living but they should abide by the law. All of the other FFLs in the area that I've dealt with do PPTs for $35.

[Exiledviking]

Got a phone call from the DOJ when I couldn't answer and they left a message that was little more than referencing the code sections we're all familiar with.

I called back and managed to talk with someone from the compliance division by selecting the phone tree option claiming to be an FFL. He confirmed again what we all know, the max fee for a PPT Transfer of a single rifle is $35. He gave me an email address to submit copies of my paperwork to and I sent that off on Friday.

When I hear back, I'll update this thread again.

Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

Hear anything back from the DOJ?

[hoystory]

Hear anything back from the DOJ?

Not a peep. This week is really busy, I'll try reaching out to them again next week.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Lex Talionis]

We already receive so much negative sentiment in regards to gun ownership that this should not be happening from an entity that is supposed to be aligned with our values. I get it, FFLs have to make money, at the same time, they need to do right by the customer; if they don't, they need to be held accountable.

Good post. Legit FFLs make their money on the retail margins they sell their products for and by establishing a great customer base and not by illegal fees.

We need to out these FFLs and steer business away from them and to the hard working men and women who deserve our support.

[E Michael]

I always thought as long as it was posted and not represented as a state or federal fee they could charge more. I avoid business that do it, but never thought it was illegal.

[Calguns77]

I always thought as long as it was posted and not represented as a state or federal fee they could charge more. I avoid business that do it, but never thought it was illegal.

Thats only for regular dealer sales.

[Cokebottle]

I always thought as long as it was posted and not represented as a state or federal fee they could charge more. I avoid business that do it, but never thought it was illegal.

Not for PPT.
Limited to no more than DROS+$10 by law.

[Redeyedrider]

I will add them to my Boycott thread.

Where's the boycott thread? Looked, didn't see it.

[Redeyedrider]

EDIT

[enegue]

If it wasn't profitable they wouldn't be in the business

No one claimed they were not profitable - that's a straw man fallacy. Not sure how long you've been into shooting but there we're a ton more gun shops 10-15 years ago. If you're looking to invest a few hundred thousand dollars, a gun shop would be one of the last businesses you'd want to buy. The profit margins are very slim.

This is not in support of a shop over charging for PPTs and breaking the law, but instead just against reporting anyone to the DOJ - they do not care about anything except removing all guns from every Californian's hands.

[Duesenberg]

Range Master of San Luis Obispo is the FFL.

Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

RM of SLO is a rather interesting business. A wealthy guy, Leland O'Reilly, bought a building that used to be a chrome shop (with plenty of contamination) for a good chunk of change and spent a huge amount of money rebuilding the structure from a completely stripped frame. They sunk a ton into this building.

I really couldn't figure out how the owner of RMSLO was paying their rent until I learned RMSLO is owned by O'Reilly's daughter and her husband.

They have a very interesting business model. They clearly aren't in business to sell guns. They seem to make their money with their indoor range, renting handguns to Poly and Cuesta college students, selling high-priced ammo and selling uniforms to local law enforcement and corrections personnel.

Thankfully their stressed/arrogant attitudes have changed since things have slowed down a great deal.

The sad thing is, 4 Seasons Outfitters right up the street would have been the same price. You'd have to go over the hill or maybe Los Osos to find a shop that follows the law on this one.

[Calguns77]

No one claimed they were not profitable - that's a straw man fallacy. Not sure how long you've been into shooting but there we're a ton more gun shops 10-15 years ago. If you're looking to invest a few hundred thousand dollars, a gun shop would be one of the last businesses you'd want to buy. The profit margins are very slim.

This is not in support of a shop over charging for PPTs and breaking the law, but instead just against reporting anyone to the DOJ - they do not care about anything except removing all guns from every Californian's hands.

It's pretty simple. They own a profitable business which has the stipulation that they do background checks on ppts for a small fee, they know this before becoming ffls in CA. Can't make enough profit to your satisfaction? Then get out of the business. If you instead choose to defraud honest people then enjoy getting reported to the DOJ, and ideally sued. It's that simple.

You claim these shops break the law because the profit margins are so low. Where is your evidence?

[Duesenberg]

I remember the first Rangemasters of SLO a LONG time ago. A guy named Tony owned it. His father was a gun dealer in the San Joaquin Valley. He came to the coast to go to school and opened-up RMSLO on Granada Drive.

He charged a flat $10.00 to receive any legal gun through the mail. He was in business to run a range and the ten bucks/gun was gravy.

I miss those old days and that old shop...

[Duesenberg]

If it wasn't profitable they wouldn't be in the business.

Malarkey. It's highly doubtful the income from that store is paying the rent. The building (owned by the shop owner's wealthy father-in-law) is a real estate investment and a monthly "contribution" by its owner.

The building's owner is quite elderly and not doing so well these days. It will be interesting to see what happens to the shop (if anything), once he passes.

[Exiledviking]

This is not in support of a shop over charging for PPTs and breaking the law, but instead just against reporting anyone to the DOJ - they do not care about anything except removing all guns from every Californian's hands.

While I agree with you to an extent about not reporting them to the DOJ, this business has brought it upon themselves. Numerous times they've been called out on their illegal $50 PPT fee and yet they continue to do it. The "F U" attitude of the owner and crew of this particular gunshop when it's brought up that charging $50 for a PPT is against the law is what got them reported.

Come to think of it, how do you propose we deal with this gun shop and its owner regarding their illegal $50 PPT fee since explaining to them and showing them the law on paper (that they themselves printed out) does not work?