View Full Version : Private Party Tranafer Question.
Okay so I am trying to do a private party transaction and I'm a little confused.
I am being told that it is $10 for the transfer and $25 for the background check. If the buyer does not pass the background check there will be an additional fee of $25 because the FFL must perform a background check on the seller before giving them their firearm back. Is this correct?
You are correct the FFL must log the firearm into their bound book so to transfer it back to the seller a 4473 and background check is required.
Zundfolge
07-16-2013, 14:44
You are correct the FFL must log the firearm into their bound book so to transfer it back to the seller a 4473 and background check is required.
I don't understand why this is. Shouldn't the buyer do a background check and if they fail the deal's off and the firearm never leaves the seller's ownership/possession?
If they have to do a background check on the buyer and if the buyer fails then they have to do a background check on the seller...what happens if the seller fails?
For the FFL to perform the background the firearm must be logged into the bound book. Once that happens there is no other option but to do a 4473 and backgorund check to give back to the seller. The ATF released a letter after Newtown instructing FFLs how to handle transfers for private transactions. I know it sucks but that what FFLs are being told they must do.
CBI is charging $10 for the BGC, the dealer is charging the extra for doing the transfer.
If you ask me, in the case of the buyer not passing the BGC, the seller should only be responsable for the extra $10 to get the BGC on him to get his weapon returned. IMHO there really shouln't be a double transfer fee since the orginal transfer never took place and the weapon is still in the ffl's log book anyway. Oh well guess its a way to make an extra buck.
This is the new procedure issued as a follow up to the open letter to FFLs.
http://www.atf.gov/files/regulations-rulings/procedures/031513-procedure-2013-1.pdf
CBI is charging $10 for the BGC, the dealer is charging the extra for doing the transfer.
If you ask me, in the case of the buyer not passing the BGC, the seller should only be responsable for the extra $10 to get the BGC on him to get his weapon returned. IMHO there really shouln't be a double transfer fee since the orginal transfer never took place and the weapon is still in the ffl's log book anyway. Oh well guess its a way to make an extra buck.
I agree it should only be the additional $10 CBI BGC fee to transfer it back to the seller if the buyer fails the BGC.
If they have to do a background check on the buyer and if the buyer fails then they have to do a background check on the seller...what happens if the seller fails?
It depends on the FFl but most will then put the firearm on consignment so it can go to someone that can pass the BGC and the seller will recieve at least some money for the weapon. But thats kind of a grey area and I'm sure there will be the FFL's out there that will disagree.
If they have to do a background check on the buyer and if the buyer fails then they have to do a background check on the seller...what happens if the seller fails?
This is exactly why many FFLs don't want to perform private transfers because they could be stuck unable to transfer the weapon to either party and now have to come to some arrangement with the seller to either buy it or put it on consigment like Mazin said.
Zundfolge
07-16-2013, 14:56
I thought the entire BG proccess was separate from the firearm transaction. In other words you could walk in, pay the fee and have a background check done and then the "passed" BG check was good for X days.
sellersm
07-16-2013, 15:01
Check out this thread, starting at Post #57, which is also from a FFL: http://www.ar-15.co/threads/109009-Background-checks-and-trading
FFL 07/02 here. I want to revise what I said earlier. Looks like ATF has released updated instructions to us, which means as long as a seller does not "relinquish" the firearm, they can leave with the gun at any point. Don't release your gun to the dealer when you're doing the transfer!
A 4473 is required for all transfers, and logging in/out of FFL books is still required before any FTF transfer can proceed. However, the BGC can happen prior to the transfer, and if the buyer fails, the seller can walk out. The $10 still gets charged to the FFL regardless, and you can bet they are going to want their service fee up front too, regardless of pass/fail.
Also, keep in mind the $10 you pay to CBI is not to the ATF. Colorado requires the $10 fee to pay for its own internal check, because "it's better" than the free federal NICS check, I guess. [facepalm]
For your viewing "pleasure":
https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...rough_ffls.pdf (https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/atf_proc._2013-1_-_private_firearms_transfers_through_ffls.pdf)
Short version:
1) Buyer fills out 4473
2) FFL checks and records buyer ID, marks handgun/longgun/other (no SN# yet), and runs the BGC. CBI charges $10 at this point
3) If pass, FFL takes gun & confirms SN, enters gun into books, writes the SN# on the 4473, and logs the book out to buyer. Buyer/seller leave happy.
4) If fail, seller takes the gun and leaves. FFL did not take possession. FFL does not enter the gun into the books. 4473 gets filed (without SN/gun info).
5) If the seller ever gives "exclusive possession" to the FFL (not a lawyer but you'd probably have to actually leave to do this), then seller has to pass a BCG to get their gun back. Seller still owns it, just can't take possession. If seller fails BGC, you'll have to work something out with the FFL (likely consignment as mentioned above, or find another buyer).
So it could be worse. Could be a LOT better though.
Be nice to your FFL if you found a good one. This stuff is as much BS for us as it is for you. Also, keep in mind not every FFL does it exactly this way. You can certainly direct them to the linked doc, but don't be a jerk about it.
For the FFL to perform the background the firearm must be logged into the bound book. Once that happens there is no other option but to do a 4473 and backgorund check to give back to the seller. The ATF released a letter after Newtown instructing FFLs how to handle transfers for private transactions. I know it sucks but that what FFLs are being told they must do.
This is the new procedure issued as a follow up to the open letter to FFLs.
http://www.atf.gov/files/regulations-rulings/procedures/031513-procedure-2013-1.pdf
Reading that ATF file it says nothing about how the FFL must take possession of the item prior to completing a BGC.
Read this again:
31609
The way I see it, it's perfectly legal to go in with the seller to an FFL that will be willing to do the BGC and transfer (with all applicable fees) you- hereby known as "Seller"- maintain possession and control of the firearm until the result of the buyer's BGC is complete. Upon approval you transfer the firearm to the FFL, they fill out the necessary A&D and remaining 4473 (again, the 4473 for the BGC need not have any more details other than "pistol" OR "rifle/shotgun" OR "other") complete the transfer, seller collects their money, buyer collects their new toy, laws followed, everyone is happy. In the event of a denial of BGC the buyer still pays for the BGC, and the seller, having maintained possession of the firearm, continues on and does whatever they please with the firearm, no laws broken, no transfer made, no harm, no foul. This is the way I'd do it, and if it comes to it, this is the way I will do it. If I can't find an FFL that will do it that way, then I guess I don't sell anything. [Flower]
ETA: Pretty much what sellersm said. [Beer] (I had to do some screen cap cut/paste to get the text from the ATF PDF).
battle_sight_zero
07-16-2013, 15:05
All this nonsense, hoops, bull hokey is why I am not motivated to trade. I have decided that all my extra funds that I normally used on new firearms will go to gear like scopes, aimpoints and ammo plus overturning this crap.
Reading that ATF file it says nothing about how the FFL must take possession of the item prior to completing a BGC.
Read this again:
31609
The way I see it, it's perfectly legal to go in with the seller to an FFL that will be willing to do the BGC and transfer (with all applicable fees) you- hereby known as "Seller"- maintain possession and control of the firearm until the result of the buyer's BGC is complete. Upon approval you transfer the firearm to the FFL, they fill out the necessary A&D and remaining 4473 (again, the 4473 for the BGC need not have any more details other than "pistol" OR "rifle/shotgun" OR "other") complete the transfer, seller collects their money, buyer collects their new toy, laws followed, everyone is happy. In the event of a denial of BGC the buyer still pays for the BGC, and the seller, having maintained possession of the firearm, continues on and does whatever they please with the firearm, no laws broken, no transfer made, no harm, no foul. This is the way I'd do it, and if it comes to it, this is the way I will do it. If I can't find an FFL that will do it that way, then I guess I don't sell anything. [Flower]
ETA: Pretty much what sellersm said. [Beer] (I had to do some screen cap cut/paste to get the text from the ATF PDF).
I stand corrected I must have had not read that part of the regulation and I was basing my response on the original guidance the ATF released in the Open Letter. I am glad they have clarified how to handle that.
Even the ATF note posted says that if the seller never yields possession there are no further fees or checks required. Simple solution, don't yield possession until everything goes through.
ps. I won't be logging any private firearm sales. Bastards.
This is a big win for the Dems. Their ultimate goal was to eliminate Private Party deals and this new law makes everything so complicated no one is going to bother with private party deals anymore.
I buy and sell a lot of guns just because I like to try different guns for a bit and then move on to try something else. This new law is going to make it cost prohibitive to do what I like to do and so much of a pain in the ass it's not worth it.
I told the wife if all this shit passes we were moving elsewhere. All this shit passed and I've been sticking it out because its going to kill her to leave her family. Now that I'm seeing the first hand effects and realizing just how much of an impact it has on something I love my wife is going to have to suck it up because we are relocating.
sandman76
07-16-2013, 15:30
I've not bought or sold a gun from a private party at a gun show for a long time. But, isn't this the way it's been done since the law passed that removed the gun show loophole?
Zundfolge
07-16-2013, 15:30
This is a big win for the Dems. Their ultimate goal was to eliminate Private Party deals and this new law makes everything so complicated no one is going to bother with private party deals anymore.
This assumes that people care about the law ... the more intrusive and stupid the law gets the more people will say "screw 'The Man' I'll buy and sell off paper all I damn well please" of course the first people to do this will criminals, but eventually the other-wise law abiding citizen will also.
I buy and sell a lot of guns just because I like to try different guns for a bit and then move on to try something else. This new law is going to make it cost prohibitive to do what I like to do and so much of a pain in the ass it's not worth it.
I'm in this boat ... I had pretty much stopped looking at guns on GB and other out of state sales because I got tired of the BG check and fee crap, so on the one hand I'll do less trading, but on the other hand I'll probably start looking at out of state deals more.
I told the wife if all this shit passes we were moving elsewhere. All this shit passed and I've been sticking it out because its going to kill her to leave her family. Now that I'm seeing the first hand effects and realizing just how much of an impact it has on something I love my wife is going to have to suck it up because we are relocating.
There's a good chance this and the mag ban will be beat in court so I'm going to wait and see for a while (although the job market sucks here so if I find myself unemployed I'll probably start looking to the Salt Lake City area because you can't swing a dead cat without hitting someone that is looking to hire a Graphic Designer there).
BlasterBob
07-16-2013, 15:41
Where's Jim? Thought he'd be here by now.
RonMexico
07-16-2013, 17:00
If they have to do a background check on the buyer and if the buyer fails then they have to do a background check on the seller...what happens if the seller fails?
If an individual fails the bgc they receive a letter from CBI to appeal the decision or why they failed it. Most people would come back in 5 day with a sheet of paper that said CBI has reversed or made a new decision on the individual ........ When they fill out another 4473 you have to fax that document to CBI and 100% of the time the person was approved( the ones I handled).
So if the store is cool and hold onto the gun for a week or two, most sellers would get their property back.
Great-Kazoo
07-16-2013, 17:43
Where's Jim? Thought he'd be here by now.
Here. This topic has been beat to death ad nausem. WHAT IF MMM, YEAH WHAT IF.
IF YOU ACTUALLY FEEL YOU ARE UNABLE TO PASS A BG CHECK, WHY BOTHER??? If the buyer can't, make them pay all fees incurred.
FWIW: Elk Bomb in Milliken charges $10 for the BGC and $10 for them, bringing the grand total to $20.
mdflem51
07-16-2013, 18:48
if 55 of the states Sheriff`s, have stated they will not or cannot enforce this,why are you discussing it? Is this a gun show hypothetical?
So I spoke to another FFL that's not far from me and he told me he only charges $20. He said it should only be $10 for the background and he can only charge $10 for the transfer under the new law. He also said he does not put the firearm on his books he just processes the 4473.
I'm now wondering if my FFL neighbor puts the transfer on his books as a loophole around the $10 maximum he is legally allowed to charge and considers the transaction a consignment deal.
if 55 of the states Sheriff`s, have stated they will not or cannot enforce this,why are you discussing it? Is this a gun show hypothetical?
Sheriffs are elected officials which IMO makes them politicians. I don't trust anything a politician says and I certainly won't risk my career and everything else in my life because the sheriff (see politician) says he isn't going to enforce the law.
I created a new post based on the info from the last thread, in case someone wants to make it a sticky. Put it in legislation, not sure if it should have gone in general or not. Will try to keep it updated.
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/110807-How-private-transfers-now-work-in-Colorado-(background-checks-FTF-transfers-etc)
mdflem51
07-17-2013, 16:54
Is your sheriff signatory to the lawsuit? if not I can see your concern. If there are any LEO`s reading this thread..What do your bosses say? Bullshit law that can never be enforced,or proven except by entrapment. Aurora? You got bigger problems.
spqrzilla
07-17-2013, 17:48
if 55 of the states Sheriff`s, have stated they will not or cannot enforce this,why are you discussing it? Is this a gun show hypothetical?
They never said that they wouldn't enforce the requirement for a background check on private sale. Further, they aren't the only law enforcement with the ability to enforce the law.
If there are any LEO`s reading this thread..What do your bosses say? Bullshit law that can never be enforced,or proven except by entrapment. Aurora? You got bigger problems.
i would love to know this as well
Great-Kazoo
07-17-2013, 18:46
Is your sheriff signatory to the lawsuit? if not I can see your concern. If there are any LEO`s reading this thread..What do your bosses say? Bullshit law that can never be enforced,or proven except by entrapment. Aurora? You got bigger problems.
NO LE will come out, especially on a firearm's forum and say they will not enforce this or any C.R.S, to do so would be job suicide .
SA Friday
07-17-2013, 18:49
So I spoke to another FFL that's not far from me and he told me he only charges $20. He said it should only be $10 for the background and he can only charge $10 for the transfer under the new law. He also said he does not put the firearm on his books he just processes the 4473.
I'm now wondering if my FFL neighbor puts the transfer on his books as a loophole around the $10 maximum he is legally allowed to charge and considers the transaction a consignment deal.
Yep, ten for the bgc, ten for the transfer, any gunstore can charge any service fee after this they deem fit. This has all been danced before. $10 won't even cover the time of the labor involved and the Fn Dem who wrote the law know it. It's another step to stop individual transfers. It's actually pretty smart; either they undercharge and take it in the pocketbook or charge an aditional service fee and have room temp IQ customers throw a fit. Either way they have thrown their wooden shoes into the gear-work every time someone does a private transfer.
BTW, they HAVE to enter the firearm into their bound books. If they don't they are not actually transferring it and not following the ATF guidance previously posted in this and other recent threads.
speedysst
07-18-2013, 15:33
Maybe this has been answered but if I ship a rifle out of state, can I send the mag with it?
Zundfolge
07-18-2013, 15:49
Maybe this has been answered but if I ship a rifle out of state, can I send the mag with it?
As long as its legal where you're shipping to (so no full cap mags to California or New Jersey for example).
The FFL doesn't have to take possession of the firearm... A background check just has to be done on the buyer before they can legally take possession of your firearm as long as it is an in person deal done with both parties at the FFL. They do keep ahold of the paperwork however... I was told that they are *highly recommended* to do the transfer for the people, but they are only required to do a background check. I.E. No transfer through them is actually needed. The gun, in no way shape or form, becomes theirs at any part of the deal.
Circuits
07-18-2013, 23:52
The FFL doesn't have to take possession of the firearm... A background check just has to be done on the buyer before they can legally take possession of your firearm as long as it is an in person deal done with both parties at the FFL. They do keep ahold of the paperwork however...
FFL must log it into and out of his bound book - IF the transaction goes forward. If the transferror didn't relinquish the firearm to the FFL and the transferee is denied, the FFL just has to retain the denied 4473 in his records, like any other, but the firearm never goes into his book. The FFL writes "private party transfer" on such 4473s to distinguish them from acquisitions or dispositions out of inventory.
FFL must log it into and out of his bound book - IF the transaction goes forward. If the transferror didn't relinquish the firearm to the FFL and the transferee is denied, the FFL just has to retain the denied 4473 in his records, like any other, but the firearm never goes into his book. The FFL writes "private party transfer" on such 4473s to distinguish them from acquisitions or dispositions out of inventory.
This was only what I heard... I will get more info tomorrow when I pick up my new baby on their interpretation of everything.....
Honestly though, I thought it only called for a background check, and not a transfer through an FFL?
So I thought I'd provide an update. This new process really sucks.
After figuring out what my neighbor was up to I found another FFL fairly close to my home that's doing them for $20. He does not take possession of the firearm and he's a pretty good guy. His thoughts are that he can use the private party checks to establish a larger clientele for his business, with his customer focused approach I have a feeling he's going to be very successful.
I've had several people express interest and commit to buying a firearm Listed on Armslist. The first buyer decided to flake on me, I drove off after seeing the second buyer and refused to return his calls and last night my 3rd buyer got his background check rejected because his DL expired 3 days ago. I really miss the old way.
Can a mod please edit the title to reflect the correct spelling? Thanks!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.