Question on a failed background check **update post 136**

[Dee_Dub]

Technically no, I moved after the paperwork was completed.

Sent from FighterPilot's basement

I'd be careful. 500 bux is alot of money. He may want his money back.

[JDay]

Kemasa, look up the definition of defrauding.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[WinstonMonty]

The lack of moral fiber on this site is shocking.

[ArmedCMT]

I dont get why so many people are trippin on him selling a gun on CL, he did his part by going through an FFL.

I can think of two good reasons to look in place other than calguns for firearm and such.

1) CGN Buyers want too much for their stuff, I found a Norinco SKS in the recycler for $200. I couldnt find anything on CGN for less than $350.

2)Option B Buyers are less likely to see the six other ads for the same gun $20 cheaper.


Option B - Craigslist Armslist Recycler

[teg33]

By sneaking in the back door past the craigslist rules gets you a proven hook up with a felon. Craigslist rule/policy is NOT the LAW so teg, would you attempt that method of selling?

Yes I would, as long as I do the transfer by FFL. Heck I can even post a sale here on Calgun and hook up with a felon.

[RCJeeper]

There are a couple of good reasons to return the money minus a reasonable fee:

1. It's against the law to take money and not provide a promised good or service.
2. The money is significant and most people would go out of their way to get $500 back when it was wrongfully taken.
3. The buyer is a felon and knows your previous address which may put those people in harms way.
4. You owe him nothing if the money is returned. Otherwise you are indebted to him, a known felon. Not a great place to be.
5. It's the right thing to do.

[JDay]

Re: #3 above. The FFL is required to remove the sellers information from the buyers copy of the DROS by law, and vice versa. And that's assuming that the buyer requested a copy.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[stangallmotor]

Keep 40-50 bucks for your time & fuel then give him back the rest. 500 dollars isn't worth the trouble this could cause.

[The Gleam]

Don't be a jerk; was the guy "cool" until the mere issue of failing the background check? OK. So what; that is no affront to you or a right to keep all of his money. Keep $20 for gas, and give him back $480. You'll be glad you did, and rid of him. You have spent more at wasting your time creating and repying to this thread.

Of course, then again, nobody ever makes up a story on Calguns just to create an interesting and captivating thread, right? Yet, farce and sardonic satire seem to be absent here. Schtumping the people?

I can't imagine such a thing.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=815308

[djhall]

I'm curious about the reasoning of those who feel a refund (less expenses) isn't owed in these cases. My biggest problem with keeping the money would be justifying how a "sale" actually happened if I still retain possession and ownership of the property. I can't think of any similar legitimate situation where you can sell an item but keep both the item and the money. All the guns stores I know of refund the purchase price less a handling / restocking fee of around $50.

[kemasa]

Kemasa, look up the definition of defrauding.

Perhaps you should look up the definition or perhaps you should quit before you make yourself look even worse.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/defrauding?s=t

See also:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fraud?s=t

So, please explain where and how the seller used "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage" in this situation.

The seller sold the firearm in good faith, without knowledge that the buyer was prohibited or that the buyer would not be able to transfer the firearm. There is no fraud in that. The seller could agree to consign the firearm to the FFL, then the original buyer would not be due any refund until the firearm sells. it is not the fault or problem for the seller that the firearm can not be transferred. There is NO requirement that the seller just return the money, in part because the seller could lose money due to the buyer not being able to transfer it and will not know the complete loss until the firearm actually sells.

I noticed that you did not address the issues I raised as well.

The law is silent on the issue of a refund. The seller could not pick up the firearm and then the firearm would have to go to the police. In that case, would you say that the seller should still refund the money?

[junior40er]

RIP OP.

[Steve_In_29]

A: BECAUSE IT'S AGAINST THE CRAIGLIST'S RULES.
B: The OP knew it. You can't post a classified ad past the NO FIREARMS FOR SALE statement without first reading that statement.

BFD!! That's just a CL "rule" not an actual LAW. So it's not like the OP needs to worry about LEOs showing up. Or does CL have it's own police force now?

As to the money, I say give the guy his money minus your expenses.

[robcoe]

Personally, I would have refunded the money minus any costs I incurred(gas, new DROS things like that) and a fee for jerking me around(say 10% of the selling price) then given him the rest.

[iron cannon]

A person stupid / criminal enough to buy a firearm when they know they will have background check and then offer you double if you file off the serial and give them the gun anyway will almost certainly come after you for THEIR money.

Good luck.