FFL

[CHS]

cool story bro....post the statute. It wasnt given to the FFL, the FFL was to facilitate a transfer. He puts it on his books to track it in and out as per the ATF and I am sure CALDOJ. Ownership never transfers to the FFL. Then, the FFL was paid money to ship the gun back. Lying about shipping the gun back numerous times sure sounds like deceptive practice to me. What is the definition of refusing to return property that doesnt belong to you?

There's actually prior federal law that says something about stuff being shipped to you being your property.

I guess it was passed in the 60's or 70's when marketers would ship an item to someone, and then attempt to collect a debt against that item.

The law was brought up about 10 years ago when Radio Shack started sending out those CueCat things to people and the license agreement said something to the effect that the CueCat still belonged to Radio Shack and would need to be turned over at any time should RS require it.

[kermit315]

There's actually prior federal law that says something about stuff being shipped to you being your property.

I guess it was passed in the 60's or 70's when marketers would ship an item to someone, and then attempt to collect a debt against that item.

The law was brought up about 10 years ago when Radio Shack started sending out those CueCat things to people and the license agreement said something to the effect that the CueCat still belonged to Radio Shack and would need to be turned over at any time should RS require it.

I cant think that would apply here, the state forces the dealers to facilitate the transfers. That would mean that any FFL across the country could just decide to keep whatever gun they wanted that passed through their books. I could see that applying to unsolicited, not required shipments.

[B Strong]

cool story bro....post the statute. It wasnt given to the FFL, the FFL was to facilitate a transfer. He puts it on his books to track it in and out as per the ATF and I am sure CALDOJ. Ownership never transfers to the FFL. Then, the FFL was paid money to ship the gun back. Lying about shipping the gun back numerous times sure sounds like deceptive practice to me. What is the definition of refusing to return property that doesnt belong to you?

Deceptive business pratice isn't a criminal matter for the most part, it's civil.

He isn't "refusing" to return the firearm, he's failing to return it in a timely matter.

dieselpower:

"and if LEA allowed "these are not my pants" possession of drugs would not be a crime either.

You guys don't seem to get the fact that this is only considered a "non-crime" because LEA are lazy. There is NO COURT in the US that wouldn't find an FFL guilty of THEFT if charges where brought against them...once again...this IS THEFT...its just not treated as theft due to donut eating LEO not wanting to be bothered."

1. Possession of drugs is in itself a crime, and possession of a firearm by a licensed dealer is not - bad analogy.

2. Assuming facts not in evidence. Two parties enter into an agreement. The parties end up not being happy. Where does the CPC come in if something isn't shipped in a timely manner?

[stix213]

So did it arrive today? 4 pages of posts I just read through and its like I just hit giant scratch during the last 5 minutes of a DVD

[stitchnicklas]

still hoping for a good update..

[kermit315]

Deceptive business pratice isn't a criminal matter for the most part, it's civil.

He isn't "refusing" to return the firearm, he's failing to return it in a timely matter.

If its so cut and dried, why wont you post the statute? Also, he is patently lying about returning it. He was paid for a service, which he lied about performing multiple times.

Again, what word fits the definition of refusing to return something that is not rightfully yours?

[tenpercentfirearms]

If its so cut and dried, why wont you post the statute? Also, he is patently lying about returning it. He was paid for a service, which he lied about performing multiple times.

Again, what word fits the definition of refusing to return something that is not rightfully yours?

What statute? I do believe you have your burden of proof backwards. It is up to you to prove that the product is stolen by statute, not his job to prove it is not stolen by statute. There is no law that is going to say, "A gun is not stolen if...."

Now where is this update and way to go Oceanbob.

[kermit315]

What statute? I do believe you have your burden of proof backwards. It is up to you to prove that the product is stolen by statute, not his job to prove it is not stolen by statute. There is no law that is going to say, "A gun is not stolen if...."

Now where is this update and way to go Oceanbob.

I asked Ron, and later B Strong to post californias theft statutes. If its so cut and dried, that should have put any debate to bed. I dont think Ron has been back to this thread since then, and all I get from B Strong is a personal story of his.

Also, I dont keep the california penal code on my computer, and there is no 'burden of proof' because this isnt a court. Some say its theft, some say it isnt. If they dont want to produce a statute to show why it isnt, why should I go out of my way to post statute saying it is?

[kermit315]

From my reading, there are two ways to look at this.

1: He fraudulently appropriated property that was entrusted to him in that he stated multiple times the gun had shipped when in fact it never did.

2: Fraudulent representation in that he took money for shipping, and subsequently didnt ship the gun, telling the owner multiple times that he had indeed shipped it.

As to deceptive practice being a civil matter (as spoken to by somebody earlier), fraudulent representation is the same thing, different words. I wasnt sure what the california wording for it was.

ETA:

For the purposes of this section, any false or fraudulent representation or pretense made shall be treated as continuing, so as to cover any money, property or service received as a result thereof, and the complaint, information or indictment may charge that the crime was committed on any date during the particular period in question.

Thought this was interesting also.

Here is the link I am referencing. Nobody is perfect, maybe I am reading this wrong, but it seems black and white to me.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/13/5/s484

[dieselpower]

Deceptive business pratice isn't a criminal matter for the most part, it's civil.

He isn't "refusing" to return the firearm, he's failing to return it in a timely matter.

dieselpower:
1. Possession of drugs is in itself a crime, and possession of a firearm by a licensed dealer is not - bad analogy.

2. Assuming facts not in evidence. Two parties enter into an agreement. The parties end up not being happy. Where does the CPC come in if something isn't shipped in a timely manner?

The things people say to make up excuses for others...LOL

Failing to return property in a timely mater is THEFT. If its done under a contract its a breach of contract and is a civil matter...

The OP and the FFL had no contract past the sale of the firearm to the person who flaked out. The FFL asked to buy the firearm. The offer was refused. ANY FAILURE TO RETURN IS THEFT. It would be up to him to prove his side of the story..ie "I didnt receive proper info" ..it would be up to a DA to charge. I am sure they would use any documents LEO had, such as STATEMENTS... and what the DA INVESTIGATORS found through gathering....like phone/fax records I can guarantee the FFLs fax machine has a copy of the received fax on it as well as a time it was printed. Its contained in the HDD buffer and takes effort to wipe.... but only a seasoned INVESTIGATOR knows that....

Like I said. I can investigate circles around many LEA detectives I have met. I could prep this case for a DA in like 3 days of onsite and 2 days behind a desk. Now I am going on one side of the story mind you....I would need to INTERVIEW and TALK to the FFL....

I guess that means I must suck as an Investigator...several of them here have mind reading powers and KNOW what the real situation is without leaving the donut shop...I mean station...

a DA would love this case....but will never see it, since LEO are too lazy to lift a finger and do their job.

[ArinX]

in for updates

[LowSpark]

No offense meant but while everyone is busy pontificating about this, Oceanbob is out there trying to solve the problem for the OP. Reminds me of an old quote "After all is said and done, a lot more will have been said than done". Hats off to Oceanbob - a man of action.

[kermit315]

No offense meant but while everyone is busy pontificating about this, Oceanbob is out there trying to solve the problem for the OP. Reminds me of an old quote "After all is said and done, a lot more will have been said than done". Hats off to Oceanbob - a man of action.

None taken, at least from me. However, I am in San Diego, in a hotel, without a car, or any way to get around right now, and dont have the money to buy the gun (which I would have), or the ability to buy it.

I agree though, hats off to you OB.

Any update?

[thebriarman]

My $.02 worth

A buddy of mine, an FFL, just went through an ATF audit about a month ago and it was very stressful for him. The ATF zeroed in on two items, paperwork and disposition of firearms. What it boiled down to was there were two guns he couldn't locate or the paperwork to show whether they had been sent to another FFL. The ATF, very pointedly, gave him one week to come up with the guns or tracking paperwork--they wanted to know the whereabouts of those guns. They were not very happy. My buddy did locate both one gun still in his possession and the paperwork to show the other gun had indeed been sent to another FFL. Then, the ATF confirmed with the other FFL that they, in fact, had received the gun.

I've got to believe that the ATF would be very interested in this local FFL who is pulling this stuff.

Keep us posted...and thanks to OB for all the work he's done to help...

[kermit315]

OceanBob, got any updates on this?