35% fee for not passing background check?

[SamsDX]

At the same time, I'm not sure if pissing off a person who can't pass a background check is necessarily a good idea...

[tanks]

At the same time, I'm not sure if pissing off a person who can't pass a background check is necessarily a good idea...

Why would someone be pissed off if the re-stocking fee is up front and not a secret?

[Blacktail 8541]

35% is not outrages. When I sell a firearm, I state up front that if you are turned down it will cost you the fees for the ffl to take it in on consignment + you will have to wait for it to resale before you will receive a refund.

Don't like the terms, find another person to buy from.

[gsxr310]

35% * $2000 = $700. That's a lot.

Then pass the background check!!!

[dozer wright]

Once the Firearm goes to the Fll it's really no longer the sellers .It's also not really the buyers either unless the background check is passed . Depending on where most Ffls charge a restocking fee also . You also need to think maybe seller needs the money for an emergency.
And the 10 to 30 days or longer someone or you as a buyer can't get the firearm released . Now is it the responsibility of the seller to come up with the money ? Some would some wouldn't . I have fortunately never had a this type of situation . But it is the reason I use the Ffl 5 min from my house . Not to waste my time if buyer flakes or is restricted person .

[SamsDX]

Why would someone be pissed off if the re-stocking fee is up front and not a secret?

To you and me? Completely fair.

Maybe this is too much of a generalization, but felons aren't exactly the type of folks who would honor a contractual agreement; they tend to operate under their own notions of fairness and justice that are inevitably selfish and self-centered.

[tanks]

To you and me? Completely fair.

Maybe this is too much of a generalization, but felons aren't exactly the type of folks who would honor a contractual agreement; they tend to operate under their own notions of fairness and justice that are inevitably selfish and self-centered.

The hard core felon you are probably referring to most likely will know he/she is prohibited. I'd wager most people that are clueless about their status are those that had a mutual restraining order from a divorce long ago as part of the divorce decree or similar situation.

[calif 15-22]

I don't understand in this day and age how anyone could possibly NOT know they are prohibited. There is even a form you can fill out with the DOJ to check if you are prohibited.

I checked before I bought my first gun as I had an unfortunate event in my past. Fortunately for me it was not an issue.

If you are not sure check. If to lazy then deal with the 35% restock. Luckily I've never had anyone denied on my PPTs but if they were I wouldn't care. I got my money at the counter and the gun no longer belongs to me. The FFL can turn it in to the DOJ for all I care. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but once the paper gets submitted the gun no longer belongs to me and I can't take it back anyway

[calif 15-22]

And I'll add are you a Troll? Just curious as all your threads ar asking us what's legal or how much ammo to being to CA or AR registration stuff.

Hopefully not, just with Jan 2017 we get a little weary.

If not then welcome

[Cokebottle]

35% * $2000 = $700. That's a lot.

And if I sell you my gun for $2,000 and use it to buy another gun, or maybe to pay off my car, when you don't pass BG... and most people who don't pass have a very good idea why... I no longer have the money to "refund" you.

Personally, I'd tell you "Tough, you bought the gun, if you can't figure it out, the FFL will turn it over to the police. It's not MY problem... it's yours.

Once I have my cash and I've signed the paperwork at the FFL, the gun is legally yours. I'm not going to buy it back, even for $700 less than I sold it to you for.

[Win231]

Why would someone be pissed off if the re-stocking fee is up front and not a secret?

You're assuming that people who have a thug mentality are reasonable & logical. They're not; that's how they became thugs.

[vliberatore]

It seems chicken**** to me, but it's no big deal if spelled up front. At least the buyer gets 65% back, which is more that some people around here would give him.

This.

Considering how many times I've seen people post that they would keep all of the money and the firearm, I see this as up front and honest.

[ronrichards64]

Overhead a conversation at the Army Navy store. Ladies said she had a felony years ago . He is telling her to spend for the fees instead of asking the DOJ for a letter. Both of them were clueless.

[baekacaek]

The question I have is... if you have a record that flags you for a background check, why are you even in the market to buy guns?

[SloChicken]

35% * $2000 = $700. That's a lot.

Pretty simple. Don't be a phuktard.