California FFL Transfer Problem

[mbcris]

I live in Oregon and have agreed to sell a Sig 716 to a friend in Southern California.

Because the firearm as assembled (ambi magazine release) is not legal in California, I disassembled everything and recently shipped the parts (except the Lower Receiver) directly to the buyer while we were awaiting some answers as to the legality of this particular Lower Receiver in California.

I shipped the stripped Lower Receiver to his designated FFL on December 19.

Upon receipt, the FFL left me a message that he had several questions and, you've probably heard this before...that he could only receive firearms from out of state FFL's and required a CA DOJ CFLC Firearms Shipment Approval Number.

He told the buyer I needed to get a letter from my local FFL with a CFLC Firearms Shipment Approval Number and an affidavit of shipment. There wasn't a chance this was going to happen. My local FFL is legit and this was a legal transfer.

I didn't believe his assertion to be true and did my own research. From the California DOJ web site CFLC FAQ #2 (http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcfaqs#2) reads as follows:

Question: I am not an FFL but I want to ship a firearm to a California FFL. Do I have to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number before shipping a firearm to California?

Answer: No. Only shipments from Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) require a Firearms Shipment Approval number.

I brought this to the attention of the FFL...and he seemed to be angry that that questioned his knowledge of the law. He abruptly ended the call by hanging up. It seems that's his MO when he's challenged because that wouldn't be the last time he hangs up the phone.

I talked with him again later that evening. I told him I was reading FAQ #2 (above) directly from the CA DOJ web site and asked what I was missing. Glancing over my question, he claimed he couldn't accept the firearm because he's licensed as a pawn broker. I didn't see how that was relevant as he was being engaged as an FFL. He further asserted I was running afoul of the California Business and Professions Code because I was an out of state resident and didn't possess a business license. So every eBay and Craigslist seller is required to get a business license in order to sell goods into California? Really? And how is an FFL tasked with enforcing the California B&P code? Then he claimed that the firearm was illegal because it was shipped without the CA required bullet button. He just kept throwing up objections that had didn't seem to have any basis in law. He continues...none of this matters because he's already called the DOJ (to CYA) and DESTROYED the firearm. WHAT? I asked if he was serious. I told him if that was the case, I feel compelled to reach out to the DOJ and ATF and perhaps put this in front of a judge (small claims).

And let me say, I'm sugarcoating the tone of the conversation...I've never met anyone in the gun business that was this angry and unprofessional.

What do I do now? He's refusing to send me the lower or the pieces (if it's actually been destroyed). He won't send me anything in writing including an affidavit of destruction and hasn't referenced his authority in law to destroy the firearm.

I recognize if there are any costs to be recovered, this becomes a civil matter.

However, here's my biggest concern...he has my firearm (regardless of its condition/disposition) in his possession with a serial number registered in my name. At what point is this considered a stolen weapon?

Any suggestions on how I should proceed are appreciated.

[Condorguns]

The FFL was within his rights to refuse shipment from a non FFL. Some will some wont.

I can't see a reason to destroy the lower.

I would send a demand letter for the return of the lower. You will need to provide information for your receiving FFL as the CA FFL cannot ship directly to you. If he refuses then I assume you all are headed to court.

Very strange story. Sorry for the mess.

[Guns and guitars]

Ive been dealing with this for the last 3-4 months while sending many of my weapons to myself from Az and Texas.

Perhaps this guy is angry because he started this whole transaction prior to understanding how crappy it is sending anything to this state.
( Ive had multiple shops, alls reputable gun stores, laugh at family members of mine when they mention shipping to Cali )

Maybe have the sender, go online and get his Ca approved number now?
Or if its that much of an issue you might have to have him send it back to your FFL and start again.

This is what happens living, or sending anything behind enemy lines.
Good luck.

[Guns and guitars]

The FFL was within his rights to refuse shipment from a non FFL. Some will some wont.

I can't see a reason to destroy the lower.

I would send a demand letter for the return of the lower. You will need to provide information for your receiving FFL as the CA FFL cannot ship directly to you. If he refuses then I assume you all are headed to court.

Very strange story. Sorry for the mess.

THIS.

Can he also contact the ATF directly as well?
Ive read that they can get involved rather quickly if they feel there has been a firearm that is stolen by an FFL...

[mbcris]

The firearm has been destroyed. Neither the buyer or myself were given notice, consulted, or offered any opportunity to remedy whatever this FFL claims was a problem. All he's told us is that he called the CA DOJ and the firearm has been destroyed. He should have just sent it back to my local FFL. But it seems he was so angry we challenged him on the law, that he's destroyed this firearm our of pure spite.

Here's the thread of a conversation from yesterday:

From FFL:
You don't seem to understand, There is not receiver anymore. It's chucks of cut up metal.

My Reply:
Then that's what I need returned...whatever you have in your possession that belongs to me. And, since chunks of "cut up metal" no longer meets the definition of a firearm, you can send the package directly to my return address.

From FFL:
Because of your threats of a law suit, nothing will be returned, On advise of counsel, if you both sign notarized affidavits releasing me of all liability. I will release the metal.

My Reply:
Unfortunately, you may have assumed the financial responsibility unless we can more fully understand the law that you relied upon to destroy the Firearm. And since you supposedly followed the law that authorized you to destroy the Firearm, it shouldn't be difficult for you to put together a cogent summary that both the buyer and I can understand.

I as a nonlicensee and you as an FFL are required to follow certain state and federal law when transferring a firearm to another party.

Generally speaking, when laws are not properly followed, there are a whole host of remedies, and one of those remedies may in fact be the necessary destruction of the firearm. But that is as yet undetermined.

As the transferor, I believe I've followed the law. And, after being falsely accused of illegally transferring the Firearm (across state lines from a nonlicensee to an FFL), I've successfully demonstrated that you as an FFL were misinformed on both state and federal law regarding the interstate transfer of firearms by nonlicensees.

So it stands to reason that by carrying out the destruction of the Firearm, that you may have relied on misinformation, your own misinterpretation or fabrication of the law in your timely pursuit of a remedy.

I intend to get to the bottom of this and the law that you ultimately relied upon to destroy the Firearm. And, if you didn't follow the law, then you should bear the financial responsibility.

Because you have not provided any proof that the Firearm was destroyed, other than your word, I have questions and concerns about its disposition and that it could ultimately fall into the wrong hands. You have now assumed possession of a registered Firearm without authorization. If you don't return the Firearm or its pieces (as the case may be) than we will ask the DOJ and ATF for guidance in classifying it as stolen.

From FFL:
You have no worries. I followed the law correctly. I had two choices, destroy or turn over to law enforcement for destruction. I didn't want to disclose your name and the serial number. So I destroyed it. I cited the business and profession code explaining second hand dealers, you elected not to listen to me. I'm done explaining.

My Reply:
Thanks for the reassurance but based upon our brief interaction, I've come to the conclusion that your word cannot be relied upon.

Which code are you relying on to justify the destruction of the Firearm?"

From FFL:
LMAO!

We done discussing this. I'm not wasting anymore time with this.

My Reply:
As I see it, you have two options to make this go away.

You can either a) produce a check made payable to me in the amount of $2,500 and send it along with the pieces of the firearm to my return address, or b) you can put together a cogent summary of the facts with any reference to the law you relied upon to justify destruction of the Firearm, along with the names and contact information of any DOJ or ATF personnel to whom you discussed this matter.

If you fail to demonstrate that every "i" was dotted and every "t" was crossed in accordance with the law, and that there was no other remedy other than the destruction of the Firearm, then you should be held financially responsible.

If you choose option "a" the buyer and I will not pursue this matter any further and we'll relieve you from any future liability. But if you choose option "b", we feel obligated to investigate this matter through all necessary channels which include but are not limited to the DOJ and ATF.

From FFL:
Call ATF and CA-DOJ yourself.

--End of Thread

[mbcris]

Conversation thread #2 from yesterday:

From Me:
I am the owner of a Sig Sauer 716 Lower Receiver S/N XXXX (the "Firearm").

I have negotiated the sale of this Firearm to <the buyer>.

As I understand, <the buyer> has previously consulted with you on the legality of this Firearm in the State of California.

As an FFL, you are authorized (and by no means obligated) to receive and transfer firearms to individuals in California (assuming the firearms are legal).

In this capacity, you were engaged by <the buyer> to legally transfer this Firearm to his possession (in accordance with established law).

I initiated the shipment of this Firearm to you (at <the buyer>'s request) on December 19, 2014 via UPS (Tracking #XXXX). The package was received by your office on December 23, 2014 @10:38 a.m.

I received a voice message from you on December 23, 2014 @ 3:43 p.m. stating that you were in possession of the Firearm and had some questions regarding the shipment.

<the buyer> called me later that afternoon and told me your assertion that "you're not authorized to receive the Firearm unless it was sent by another FFL and accompanied with a Firearms Shipment Approval Number from the California DOJ". I didn't believe that to be true and researched this matter through the CA DOJ and ATF web sites to confirm my understanding of the law.

Here's what I found...

Although California has implemented a more restrictive regimen for the transfer of firearms into the State of California (outlined here: http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcoverview), this law is only applicable for FFL to FFL transfers and does not apply to individuals.

Referencing publicly available information on the State of California DOJ web site (http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcfaqs#2) FAQ #2 specifically states "Only shipments from Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) require a Firearms Shipment Approval number"...

Q: I am not an FFL but I want to ship a firearm to a California FFL. Do I have to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number before shipping a firearm to California?

A: No. Only shipments from Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) require a Firearms Shipment Approval number.

The ATF echoes this sentiment as well (http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unli...ensed-transfer)...

Q: May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by common or contract carrier?

A: A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun. In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3), 922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and 478.30]

Regardless of the law, you may have a personal/business policy that you won't receive firearms shipments from nonlicensees...and that's OK. It just would have been nice if this was communicated through <the buyer> before the shipment was made. If this is in fact your policy (with no basis in law), and you're unwilling make an exception, it would seem your only option once the Firearm was received was to "unwind the clock" and return the gun to my local FFL. Case closed.

Unfortunately, for reasons that have not been communicated to <the buyer> or myself, the Firearm has been destroyed? I think <the buyer> and I deserve an explanation why it was "necessary" to destroy a +/-$2,500 firearm, no? Was this an illegal transfer? Was this an illegal firearm? It's important that <the buyer> and I understand what went wrong with this transfer. Is there an Affidavit of Destruction? What law authorized you to destroy the Firearm? Whom at the CA DOJ was consulted? What conditions were presented that were so dire that there was no remedy other than to destroy the Firearm?

In any event, the Firearm (regardless of its condition/disposition) needs to be returned to my local FFL. Throughout this process, you were only authorized to possess the Firearm for the purpose of effectuating its transfer to <the buyer>. This did not occur and now that the Firearm has been destroyed(?), it's incumbent on you to return it to its rightful owner.

Be advised, keeping my Firearm in your possession is no different than you surreptitiously removing it from my control/possession without authorization. You are in possession of a Firearm registered in my name and that is an unacceptable outcome. You have been provided the credentials of my local FFL under separate cover. The Firearm must be returned to my local FFL no later than the close of business @ 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 9, 2015. If you fail to meet the requirements of this deadline or provide a reasonable explanation accompanied by reference to any law authorizing you to maintain possession of my Firearm, then we will be left with no other choice than to declare the Firearm as stolen and report such to those authorities in the proper jurisdiction as required by law.

FFL Reply:
Your information dealing with the gun control act of 1968 and California State law is lacking. The firearm was shipped lacking proper information per federal law. You also fail to understand that the only CA lisc, second hand dealers can only accept no FFL guns, they need to retain them for 30 days pending CA approval on the item. I'm not a second hand dealer.

Legally there is no firearm anymore. Per ATF and CA-DOJ it was destroyed. Go ahead and declare it as stolen.

To make thing easy on me and much harder on you. Don't wait till 1/9/15. File your report ASAP.

From Me:
Thanks for your reply.

What exactly was missing from the shipment? What specific section/paragraph of federal law details this requirement of information? What are the remedies when "proper information" is lacking? You must have been following the law when making this determination, so it shouldn't be difficult for you to reference such in writing.

I gather from what you're implying is you are not a state licensed "second hand dealer" and that in the state of California, only a "second hand dealer" can accept firearms from nonlicensees? What section/paragraph of law restricts FFL's that are not licensed as second hand dealers from accepting firearms from nonlicensees?

In summary...what you're saying is that even though you're licensed as an FFL to receive and transfer firearms received from another FFL, state law restricts you from receiving and transferring a firearm that comes from a nonlicensee unless you are licensed as a "second hand dealer"? Is this an accurate assessment?

Furthermore, if you are able to demonstrate this is the law, why wasn't this disclosed to <the buyer>? You certainly knew he wasn't buying a firearm from a dealer, no? And is this the "law" you're hanging your hat on to justify destruction of the Firearm?

As mentioned below, the firearm was destroyed "Per ATF and CA-DOJ". We'll need to know the nature of any conversations, what if anything they sent you in writing and the contact names and telephone number for the ATF and DOJ representatives to whom you discussed this matter.

FWIW, I do think the ATF and DOJ would find it peculiar that you took steps to destroy the Firearm without any notice, communication or opportunity to remedy whatever you determined were legal issues with the transfer/Firearm.

--End of Thread

[Guns and guitars]

File a report for a stolen weapon.

[mbcris]

The FFL was within his rights to refuse shipment from a non FFL. Some will some wont.

I can't see a reason to destroy the lower.

I would send a demand letter for the return of the lower. You will need to provide information for your receiving FFL as the CA FFL cannot ship directly to you. If he refuses then I assume you all are headed to court.

Very strange story. Sorry for the mess.

Local FFL info was sent a few days ago.

[mbcris]

File a report for a stolen weapon.

We're going to seek some guidance from local law enforcement, DOJ and ATF personnel.

[mbcris]

The FFL was within his rights to refuse shipment from a non FFL. Some will some wont.

I can't see a reason to destroy the lower.

I would send a demand letter for the return of the lower. You will need to provide information for your receiving FFL as the CA FFL cannot ship directly to you. If he refuses then I assume you all are headed to court.

Very strange story. Sorry for the mess.

I agree...he's not obligated to accept shipment...even though he knew it was coming. But his only option at that point was to return it to my local FFL. And unfortunately, that's not what happened.

[mbcris]

Some of you may be asking why I'm taking the lead on this as the seller...

The buyer is a close friend. We've negotiated a price but I haven't been paid...it was a priority that I be paid before it was shipped.

So, because the firearm was not transferred and it's still in my name, I feel it's in my best interest to pursue this to the end.

In addition, as the buyer has not written the check, a court may not recognize him as having standing.

This is his firearm. He picked the FFL...he'll bear the costs of fighting this in court if necessary.

[teg33]

Sue him. That FFL think he can get away easily

[multigun]

What FFL is this? Name them.

I think calgunners do best to avoid this particular FFL.

[lorax3]

You need to contact a California lawyer ASAP.

The first thing that a lawyer will advise you to do will be to remove your posts on the matter.

The NRA uses Michel & Associates, P.C. for their California-based firearms litigation. They are located in Southern California and offer free consultations. I would reach out to them for starters. You need to be very careful at this stage. There is crucial evidence at play and you need advice of counsel on how to proceed without tainting that evidence. I would not recommend trying to get the "parts" sent back to you without first retaining an attorney.

Unfortunately you encountered a pretty terrible FFL, hopefully it does not ruin California transactions for you. Good luck.

[mbcris]

What FFL is this? Name them.

I think calgunners do best to avoid this particular FFL.

He's in Orange County...I'll name names if/when the time is right.