$100 Storage Fee in Addition to PPT Fee?

[cmart357]

This has been going on forever as far as "extra fees" on ppt transfers. There are a few I have encountered in the Sacramento area that charge 70+ dollars for a ppt and there reply to questioning the legality of it is along the lines of "go elsewhere if you don't like it" or during covid "if you can find another store to actually do the transfer these days". I end up avoiding those places but sometimes when a seller picks a certain place due to time or location etc. it's like surprise!

[Quiet]

You can report/notify CA DOJ BOF of CA FFL dealers that are violating CA laws by emailing firearms.bureau@doj.ca.gov

Applicable CA laws.... (they were amended in 2021 and were effective 07-01-2022)

Penal Code 28055
(a) For a sale, loan, or transfer conducted pursuant to this chapter, 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.
(b) For temporary storage of a firearm pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 28050, the seller, transferor, or person loaning a firearm may be required by the dealer to pay a fee not to exceed ten dollars ($10) per firearm.
(c) No other fee may be charged by the dealer for a sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm conducted pursuant to this chapter, except for the applicable fees that may be charged pursuant to Sections 23690 and 28300 and Article 3 (commencing with Section 28200) of Chapter 6 and forwarded to the Department of Justice, and the fees set forth in Section 31650.
(d) The dealer may not charge any additional fees.
(e) Nothing in these provisions shall prevent a dealer from charging a smaller fee.

Penal Code 28070
A violation of this chapter by a dealer is a misdemeanor.

Penal Code 26800
(a) A license under this chapter is subject to forfeiture for a violation of any of the prohibitions and requirements of this article, except those stated in the following provisions:
(1) Subdivision (c) of Section 26890.
(2) Subdivision (d) of Section 26890.
(3) Subdivision (b) of Section 26900.
(b) The department may assess a civil fine against a licensee, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), for any breach of a prohibition or requirement of this article that subjects the license to forfeiture under subdivision (a). The department may assess a civil fine, in an amount not to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000), for a violation of a prohibition or requirement of this article that subjects the license to forfeiture under subdivision (a), for either of the following:
(1) The licensee has received written notification from the department regarding the violation and subsequently failed to take corrective action in a timely manner.
(2) The licensee is otherwise determined by the department to have knowingly or with gross negligence violated the prohibition or requirement.
(c) The department may adopt regulations setting fine amounts and providing a process for a licensee to appeal a fine assessed pursuant to subdivision (b).
(d) Moneys received by the department pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the Dealers? Record of Sale Special Account of the General Fund, to be available, upon appropriation, for expenditure by the department to offset the reasonable costs of firearms-related regulatory and enforcement activities related to the sale, purchase, manufacturing, lawful or unlawful possession, loan, or transfer of firearms pursuant to any provision listed in Section 16580.
(e) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2022.

[Gryff]

Penal Code 28055
...
(b) For temporary storage of a firearm pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 28050, the seller, transferor, or person loaning a firearm may be required by the dealer to pay a fee not to exceed ten dollars ($10) per firearm.

And note that $10 storage fee only pertains to the situation where the transfer recipient fails DROS and the seller asks the FFL to hold the gun while a new recipient is found. It does not mean that a slimeball FFL can charge $10/day during the 10-day wait period.

Section 28050 - Completion of sale, loan, or transfer of firearm through licensed person; delivery; return of firearm
...
(f) If Commencing July 1, 2024, if the dealer cannot legally return the firearm to the seller, transferor, or person loaning the firearm, then the following procedure shall apply:
(1) The seller, transferor, or person loaning the firearm may request, and the dealer shall grant, that the dealer retain possession of the firearm for a period of up to 45 days so that the transferor or seller or the person loaning the firearm may designate a person to take possession of that firearm in accordance with Section 27540. This 45-day period shall be in addition to the waiting period described in Sections 26815 and 27540, and any time necessary to process a transaction.

[mdr110]

deleted

[The Gleam]

Illegal. There are no other words to describe it.

What Quiet posted has been around for 23 years, it's not new or confusing because this has been discussed on Calguns hundreds of times since year 2000, and Bill Lockyer gave explicitly detailed legal opinion several months after the law went into force, in the form of both an open letter and DOJ/BOF bulletin to FFLs clarifying the REQUIREMENTS to conduct PPTs, how to go about it, the maximum cost that could be charged, what could NOT be charged, and why.

Of particular explicit commentary was citing that 'storage fees' charged during the 10-day waiting period were illegal.

B&B in North Hollywood was trying to be cute with testing that limitation charging a 'storage fee' during the 10-day wait, and CA DOJ paid them an aggressive visit over it, shutting them down for a day or so - which was the very incident that gave cause for Lockyer to release that bulletin.

The FFL you indicated is breaking the law.

Just as most FFLs are sticklers to the point of FUD for the legal process and paperwork required of buyers of firearms, so it is that they must follow the LAW about private party transactions.

---

[CharlieBrown911]

I realize the above quote from Librarian, tacked on to The Gleam's post is entirely rhetorical, but I'll state what is obvious to me only now after completing a career in LE, and not at all obvious to me when I was attending a liberal college or to the majority of Americans who consume the spoon-fed rhetoric of "common-sense gun control."

Some politicians and activists on the left have stated on the record that their ultimate end goal of gun control is the eventual removal of all firearms from civilians (non-LE or military), and so I understand the "give no ground" approach of 2nd Amendment supporters.

It seems inconceivable that feds from ATF and FBI, or agents from CalDOJ would execute SWs and seize guns from law-abiding citizens, but the registry does allow the govt to identify, target, and burden gun owners with more and more financial and time-consuming hurdles to the point that gun owners may choose to voluntarily give up their firearms.

There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will always have a strict-constructionist majority. A liberal SC could narrowly interpret the 2nd Amendment to apply only to "militia" (LEOs and the military) so that law-abiding citizens would then lose the best tool for self-defense, not just against criminals but also against a dictatorial government.

[taperxz]

What’s funny about this new law is that it opens up the ability to force a dealer into a straw purchase


Section 28050 - Completion of sale, loan, or transfer of firearm through licensed person; delivery; return of firearm
...
(f) If Commencing July 1, 2024, if the dealer cannot legally return the firearm to the seller, transferor, or person loaning the firearm, then the following procedure shall apply:
(1) The seller, transferor, or person loaning the firearm may request, and the dealer shall grant, that the dealer retain possession of the firearm for a period of up to 45 days so that the transferor or seller or the person loaning the firearm may designate a person to take possession of that firearm in accordance with Section 27540. This 45-day period shall be in addition to the waiting period described in Sections 26815 and 27540, and any time necessary to process a transaction.

[CharlieBrown911]

The statute appears clear on its face that the FFL cannot charge for storage during the 10-day waiting period. But if anyone can point us to the documentation confirming this common sense interpretation - such as the memo from Bill Lockyer to FFLs, referenced by The Gleam, the docs could be potentially helpful in dealing with stubborn FFLs.

Having been through the experience of getting hosed, I don't think I'll face that situation again. But still, the hard evidence is good to have. I would also be able to rely on it in exposing the FFL as having engaged in illegal conduct in my reviews. At this point, my criticism has been limited to the owner's unethical conduct.

[CharlieBrown911]

I did find an article from the LA Times, dated 02-28-2001, entitled "Gun Stores Probed About Transfer Fees," regarding a SW executed at B&B Sales as part of the AG's office investigation as to whether customers were being overcharged for PPT services (incident referenced by The Gleam).

According to the article, the spokesman for AG Bill Lockyer's office said that B&B Sales had regularly overcharged customers for handling firearm transfers. The standard transfer fee at that time was $25. The AG spokesman said that the retailer was charging $50, including a "storage" fee for holding guns for 12 days.

The AG's Office warned B&B Sales that its practices violated the law but did not charge the company.

[taperxz]

The statute appears clear on its face that the FFL cannot charge for storage during the 10-day waiting period. But if anyone can point us to the documentation confirming this common sense interpretation - such as the memo from Bill Lockyer to FFLs, referenced by The Gleam, the docs could be potentially helpful in dealing with stubborn FFLs.

Having been through the experience of getting hosed, I don't think I'll face that situation again. But still, the hard evidence is good to have. I would also be able to rely on it in exposing the FFL as having engaged in illegal conduct in my reviews. At this point, my criticism has been limited to the owner's unethical conduct.

Let?s get something straight right now!

DOJ isn?t going to do squat to FFLs and you know why? If an FFL took the state to court, the state would lose for mandating work on behalf of the state and forcing a business to lose money on a state mandated program.

You guys want better PPT service? Put your money where your mouth is. For those that buy extra stuff? Thank you! For those who use us as a half way point and don?t buy a box of ammo, cleaning brush or target, we do take notes next time you want service

[CharlieBrown911]

Taperxz - I don't think you are going to get much sympathy for your stance. Firstly, I already said in my initial post that I always pick up ammo and/or accessories when at an FFL do to a DROS transfer because I am aware of the minimal amount of money an FFL makes for processing a PPT. You need to be more selective as to whom you vent your anger at.

Secondly, I did not address the legality of the $100 storage fee while at the store because I was unfamiliar with the regulations regarding PPT transfer fees until researching the matter and getting the input of some helpful posts in this thread. The FFL owner made legality his central argument justifying the fee. If I knew that the fee was not legal, as I now know, I would not have let him get away with weaving his web of lies.

When in the store, I solely focused on the ethics of the FFL. For an FFL owner to process the DROS and then demand an extra $100 for storage during the 10-day waiting period without providing prior notification of the fee is completely underhanded. It is a set-up where my only choice was to pay $47.19 for cancelling the DROS or pay another $100 for the illegal storage fee.

If you want to gouge your patrons, at least inform them first so that they have the opportunity to decline your services and take their business elsewhere. If you expect me and others to just suck it up and allow ourselves to be extorted, it is simply not going to happen. This has happened only once to me - it is the first time and last time.

I'll do my best to spread the word so that others can avoid this POS:

Arcadia Firearm & Security (626-538-4911) (arcadiafirearm.com). The owner is David Liu.

Taperxz - feel free to get together with David and have a good cry with him over a few beers.

For those interested in taking part in a PPT, you can throw your money out the window, burn it in a fireplace, give it to a greedy swindler like David Liu, or just select an honest and principled FFL. The last option is the better one.

[taperxz]

Taperxz - I don't think you are going to get much sympathy for your stance. Firstly, I already said in my initial post that I always pick up ammo and/or accessories when at an FFL do to a DROS transfer because I am aware of the minimal amount of money an FFL makes for processing a PPT. You need to be more selective as to whom you vent your anger at.

Secondly, I did not address the legality of the $100 storage fee while at the store because I was unfamiliar with the regulations regarding PPT transfer fees until researching the matter and getting the input of some helpful posts in this thread. The FFL owner made legality his central argument justifying the fee. If I knew that the fee was not legal, as I now know, I would not have let him get away with weaving his web of lies.

When in the store, I solely focused on the ethics of the FFL. For an FFL owner to process the DROS and then demand an extra $100 for storage during the 10-day waiting period without providing prior notification of the fee is completely underhanded. It is a set-up where my only choice was to pay $47.19 for cancelling the DROS or pay another $100 for the illegal storage fee.

If you want to gouge your patrons, at least inform them first so that they have the opportunity to decline your services and take their business elsewhere. If you expect me and others to just suck it up and allow ourselves to be extorted, it is simply not going to happen. This has happened only once to me - it is the first time and last time.

I'll do my best to spread the word so that others can avoid this POS:

Arcadia Firearm & Security (626-538-4911) (arcadiafirearm.com). The owner is David Liu.

Taperxz - feel free to get together with David and have a good cry with him over a few beers.

For those interested in taking part in a PPT, you can throw your money out the window, burn it in a fireplace, give it to a greedy swindler like David Liu, or just select an honest and principled FFL. The last option is the better one.

There?s no emotion or me caring about the guy you dealt with. What I?m saying is that the State of California is to blame for this stuff.

They also know that if the law went to court, they would lose the mandatory processing and limiting the fee. What other business ever gets that from the state?

The only one crying here is you because you didn?t pay attention or ask first. My stores charge a straight up DROS plus $10 per gun no storage charges. Most consumers love this until gun stores decide to hang it up. Then YOU have less choices.

CA has the highest minimum wage in the country but no cost of living increases for doing PPTs now at a total loss.

Mostly, lots of gun buyers are so cheap they?ll drive 100 miles to pay $50 less on a gun They do this without thinking of gas, tolls and time. It?s hilarious actually

[CharlieBrown911]

There was nothing to pay attention to because the FFL owner never bothered to disclose the fees to me. The FFL owner's only argument supporting pre-processing notification is signage in his store. That argument would never hold water in a civil case. A few signs mixed in with dozens of other signs don't meet the reasonable person standard regarding disclosure.

As far as asking first, a party to a PPT should not have to inquire before DROS, "Please advise me as to what illegal fees you are going to charge me." As I said in my opening post, I would have open to paying a $100 if I did not take custody of the handgun just one day after the pick-up date. So I am open to any legal fees - just not illegal fees.

I find it truly bizarre that you continue to project onto me your frustrations about the minimal dealer fee you make from a DROS transaction. I am in agreement with you that the $10 dealer fee is a money-losing arrangement. I already told you that I always buy ammo and accessories at an FFL in which I conduct a PPT transaction. By tacking on an undisclosed, illegal $100 storage fee (which you have yet to condemn) the FFL owner lost out on whatever profit margin he could have made on ammo and a holster.

Not sure why California, with its gun control obsession, has not raised the DROS fee to over $1K just to end the flow of LE guns to private citizens.

California, and the entire country under the present administration, is horrible for small businesses. I have always voted for candidates supporting deregulation and low taxes on both businesses and individuals. My dad lost his small yacht construction business when Congress decided it was a great idea to impose a 10 percent luxury tax on small boats back in the early 1990s. He was forced close his business and lay off a dozen employees, just a drop in the bucket in the 20-30K boating industry jobs that were lost. Lawmakers should be required to take basic courses in micro and macro economics. So if it is true that the thrust of your posts is to bring attention to the poor business climate in California, you're not going to get any arguments from me.

[nintense]

I think the $10 FFL fee designed to run them out of the business. Some places are so inefficient and they take 2 hours to complete the process, while the fastest ones take 15 minutes. $10 can never cover their costs. With my last purchase I did some calls and I was told anything from $100 dealer fee to 2 months ahead booking- they clearly don?t want to do it. I did fine a nice place in BH that did it for $47, I paid $50 and felt bad they?re out of stock for ammo. I offered to pay a bit more or to come get ammo once they get some, but they didn?t really care, only focused on the great service. I really hope they have other sources of income.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G-forceJunkie]

I think the $10 FFL fee designed to run them out of the business.

It wasn't bad money 30+ years ago, minimum wage was under $4/hr. The problem is they did not plan in any sort of raises over the years.