Failed PPT

[drifter2be]

I tried selling a rifle to another member on this forum up in Sacramento. I shipped the firearm to the FFL he chose. I was contacted by the FFL yesterday that he was concerned that the buyer was attempting a straw purchase on another firearm and will not perform the transfer on this one. I contacted a local FFL about receiving the firearm so I can take possession of it.

My question is what is fair as far as payment, considering the inconvenience, shipping costs and cost of getting my gun back? Is it fair to make him eat the costs since all the problem was caused on his end. It seems fair to me that I should not be out any money because of a buyer attempting to do something illegal. My plan was to deduct shipping costs and cost of reacquiring my rifle and return the remainder of the payment. That seems fair in my eyes, I do not believe a seller should have to pay for the repercussions of the actions of the buyer.

I've read similar threads about failed DROS, but I feel that this is a completely different situation and would like some advice on it. Thanks.

[Jeepers]

is there proof the buyer did anything wrong, or is the FFL just Leary of him ? theres always 2 sides to a story and without a contract he could take you to small claims court to recoup any monies you with hold ....if it was me i would just eat the cost and move on and hope for a better buyer to come along

[DVSmith]

If it were me I would only charge my true out of pocket expenses.

I don't know this guy's situation so charging for my "time and inconvenience" seems unnecessary. Just my $0.02.

[CSACANNONEER]

Hard to say. Who knows? The FFL might have been wrong and now both of you have to suffer. Hell, he might have been buying it as a gift for someone else??? There is no law against that but, some FFLs don't seem to understand that. Anyway, that's niether here nor there. To answer your question, I think you're going about it the right way. The buyer chose the FFL, the buyer wasn't able to keep his end of the contract, the buyer should be held responsible for your losses and even something for your time. It is generous of you not to ask for $10 an hour compensation for your time and troubles.

[drifter2be]

In the end all I was going to not refund is the actual cost of getting the gun back such as the cost of getting it shipped and DROSed back to me and I found an FFL that will do it for a reasonable price. (referring to El Dorado's thread from yesterday as he is referring to this deal, mine was the second gun that he was talking about)

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=510944

obvious attempt at straw purchase.

[kemasa]

Well, you could say that he bought the firearm, so he can deal with it. He can find another buyer or ship it to another FFL or whatever as it is not your problem and the firearm is as advertised. Did you give a return policy that allows for him to return it if he is prohibited?

Deducting your costs is appropriate if you want to get it back and sell it again.

Talk to the FFL who has the firearm and see what he wants to do. Perhaps you can make a deal.

The other thread states that he is a prohibited person, which is not a straw purchase.

[BannedinBritain]

In the end all I was going to not refund is the actual cost of getting the gun back such as the cost of getting it shipped and DROSed back to me and I found an FFL that will do it for a reasonable price. (referring to El Dorado's thread from yesterday as he is referring to this deal, mine was the second gun that he was talking about)

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=510944

obvious attempt at straw purchase.

Did you ship from an FFL? You shouldn't be DROSing your own gun...it was never sold...so the gun is still yours.

[Cokebottle]

Did you ship from an FFL? You shouldn't be DROSing your own gun...it was never sold...so the gun is still yours.

That only works for gunsmithing/repairs.
Once he shipped it, the receiving FFL logged it into inventory and it must be shipped back through an FFL.

Ya, it's BS because it takes the gun off the market for an extra 10 days

[paul0660]

Well, you could say that he bought the firearm, so he can deal with it. He can find another buyer or ship it to another FFL or whatever as it is not your problem and the firearm is as advertised. Did you give a return policy that allows for him to return it if he is prohibited?

Deducting your costs is appropriate if you want to get it back and sell it again.

Talk to the FFL who has the firearm and see what he wants to do. Perhaps you can make a deal.

The other thread states that he is a prohibited person, which is not a straw purchase.

It wasn't a PPT, either.

It is in the buyer's court. You have his money.

[jeep7081]

What if the buyer calls his credit card and disputes it? Let's keep it real with the answer. Meaning, I know if I called my bank and said I didn't receive the item, I would get my money put back into my account in 24hrs. My bank would then contact the sellers bank to confirm if I received it. They would say I didn't, but an FFL did. I would then disclose to my bank a copy of the denial letter showing I didnt receive the item. I know my bank after 20yrs, case would be closed. Seller would be SOL on this deal.

With that said, how does a seller protect him self? I am thinking on my next firearm for sale, to post "all sales final" this includes, but not limited to straw purchases, and prohibited persons. Anything else I should ad to protect myself?

Great topic! Something we don't think of until were in that sort of mess.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I tried selling a rifle to another member on this forum up in Sacramento. I shipped the firearm to the FFL he chose. I was contacted by the FFL yesterday that he was concerned that the buyer was attempting a straw purchase on another firearm and will not perform the transfer on this one. I contacted a local FFL about receiving the firearm so I can take possession of it.

My question is what is fair as far as payment, considering the inconvenience, shipping costs and cost of getting my gun back? Is it fair to make him eat the costs since all the problem was caused on his end. It seems fair to me that I should not be out any money because of a buyer attempting to do something illegal. My plan was to deduct shipping costs and cost of reacquiring my rifle and return the remainder of the payment. That seems fair in my eyes, I do not believe a seller should have to pay for the repercussions of the actions of the buyer.

I've read similar threads about failed DROS, but I feel that this is a completely different situation and would like some advice on it. Thanks.

I would just tell the seller it is his gun and for him to figure out what to do with it. However, you can give him the option of selling it back to you. Of course that should take into consideration your costs and time. So tell him you will give him half for it or he can try and find another buyer.

What if the buyer calls his credit card and disputes it? Let's keep it real with the answer. Meaning, I know if I called my bank and said I didn't receive the item, I would get my money put back into my account in 24hrs. My bank would then contact the sellers bank to confirm if I received it. They would say I didn't, but an FFL did. I would then disclose to my bank a copy of the denial letter showing I didnt receive the item. I know my bank after 20yrs, case would be closed. Seller would be SOL on this deal.

With that said, how does a seller protect him self? I am thinking on my next firearm for sale, to post "all sales final" this includes, but not limited to straw purchases, and prohibited persons. Anything else I should ad to protect myself?

Great topic! Something we don't think of until were in that sort of mess.

Not so fast. When you do a charge back (assuming the seller accepts credit cards, which he probably doesn't so this won't even matter), the person you are charging back has the ability to dispute the charge back. In this case the firearm was lawfully sold and just because the buyer is unable to take possession, doesn't mean the seller did anything wrong.

If neither the buyer nor the seller have a clear contract signed, then how can the buyer say there is not any re-stocking fees? How can the buyer even say they deserve any of their money back? It is their gun even though they don't possess it.

Yes, if you are legitimately getting hosed by a company, the charge back is a wonderful thing. However, don't get over confident in the charge back because there is a process and you could get bit.

[jeep7081]

I would just tell the seller it is his gun and for him to figure out what to do with it. However, you can give him the option of selling it back to you. Of course that should take into consideration your costs and time. So tell him you will give him half for it or he can try and find another buyer.



Not so fast. When you do a charge back (assuming the seller accepts credit cards, which he probably doesn't so this won't even matter), the person you are charging back has the ability to dispute the charge back. In this case the firearm was lawfully sold and just because the buyer is unable to take possession, doesn't mean the seller did anything wrong.

If neither the buyer nor the seller have a clear contract signed, then how can the buyer say there is not any re-stocking fees? How can the buyer even say they deserve any of their money back? It is their gun even though they don't possess it.

Yes, if you are legitimately getting hosed by a company, the charge back is a wonderful thing. However, don't get over confident in the charge back because there is a process and you could get bit.

I am aware how the banks work. Been roaming this earth for awhile . I know if I called my branch manager and said I didn't get the "product" I paid for, and the seller couldn't prove I took possession (key word), I would get a credit in 24hrs. Sure, the seller could dispute it. In the end, the buyer would win. Remember, your quoting "spirit of the law" not "letter of the law" here. I think you were the one who said (another thread), it goes from seller, to FFL, to buyer.

Which (here we actually agree on something) is actually why I am bring this up. Sounds like when I post a firearm for sale next time, I will have those "terms of agreement" posted. With this, you will have a leg to stand on with the bank. Word to the wise, put everything in writing.

[drifter2be]

Well, in this case the buyer wouldn't have much recourse, he used paypal to pay me and its pretty well spelled out in the user agreement that buyer protection does not cover any firearm or ammunition transactions, not to mention that you aren't even supposed to conduct those purchases through paypal, so at best he would just get both of our accounts locked out trying to demand a refund.

I'm not going to give this too much more thought, the rifle will be at my FFL tomorrow, so by Saturday I should know what my out of pocket cost was and offer him the refund, otherwise eff him. He can take me to small claims if he wants, I'm more worried about my reputation being damaged on here with a bad itrader rating than anything else.

This guy pretty much ruined the chances of me ever shipping another firearm for sale, but I will definitely be coming up with a sales agreement for any future FTF transactions that all sales are final regardless of whether or not they do not qualify to own a firearm, and that they can resell it back to me at a reduced price for my inconvenience. (wasted time, cost of fuel, etc)

[hcbr]

yikes

[Oceanbob]

Wow..what a hassle for you...

You do everything right and still get shafted. arrrgg.....

you've probably already talked to the failed buyer. I would have a conversation to agree on a solution:

1. Recover your direct costs.

2. Return what's left of his money.

3. Leave itrader out of this.

Good luck..

Bob

Well, in this case the buyer wouldn't have much recourse, he used paypal to pay me and its pretty well spelled out in the user agreement that buyer protection does not cover any firearm or ammunition transactions, not to mention that you aren't even supposed to conduct those purchases through paypal, so at best he would just get both of our accounts locked out trying to demand a refund.

I'm not going to give this too much more thought, the rifle will be at my FFL tomorrow, so by Saturday I should know what my out of pocket cost was and offer him the refund, otherwise eff him. He can take me to small claims if he wants, I'm more worried about my reputation being damaged on here with a bad itrader rating than anything else.

This guy pretty much ruined the chances of me ever shipping another firearm for sale, but I will definitely be coming up with a sales agreement for any future FTF transactions that all sales are final regardless of whether or not they do not qualify to own a firearm, and that they can resell it back to me at a reduced price for my inconvenience. (wasted time, cost of fuel, etc)