Gunsmith company would not send FFL so I could ship

[bushmaster1313]

One of the well known gunsmith outfits would not, as a matter of policy, send me their FFL so I could ship a shotgun for service.

This makes no sense. I am not going to send a gun out of state to anyone unless I can document their current status as an FFL.

If I send it to an FFL for repair, the FFL can return it directly to me as a non-FFL. But is there any justification for a gunsmith to say "you are only sending it to me for service, I do not need to send you my FFL?"

I will not do business with that outfit.

 

[Quoheleth]

I can hear them on the other end of the phone:
"What??? Don't you trust ME?"


My dad always said, "Trust but verify."

Q

 

[LeonCarr]

Who are they?

 

[jimmyraythomason]

One of the well known gunsmith outfits

Doesn't this already tell you their status as an FFL?

 

[TexasRifleman]

You could always just check for yourself. Just ask them for their FFL number so you can verify. You don't need the actual paperwork.

https://www.atfonline.gov/fflezcheck/

 

[Nowhere Man]

It never would have dawned on me to ask Glock, KelTec or SA for a copy of there FFL before I sent in my guns for repair.

If you're concerned that the outfit isn't reliable, why would you send him your gun in the first place?


Dave

 

[bushmaster1313]

EZ check says that it is not a substitute for a copy of the FFL.

I am not sending a gun out of state without dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

 

[N003k]

While I think it's odd that they wouldn't send you a copy or give you the number (If you asked for the number), at the same time I find it a bit more odd that if they ARE in fact a 'well known gunsmith [outfit]' then why would you ask for it in the first place?

I could understand if it's some little place you've heard about and aren't sure about, and want to have all the information on just in case, but, I repeat if it really IS a well known gunsmith outfit, well, I think that you'd be pretty safe since, unless they got well known for lieing, and cheating people out of money, or frequently losing or damaging guns, than they're gonna be reliable and safe. (And if those ARE the reasons they're well known, why would you want to send a gun to them? )

 

[bushmaster1313]

A famous Chicago law firm and one of its partners got big time egg on their collective faces 20 years ago because the partner, who did excellent work for the firm's clients, never sat for the Bar exam.

I am not going to risk the BATF's wrath because I was 99.99% sure that the place I was sending something to had a valid FFL.

 

[waterhouse]

Which gunsmith?

Call and ask for the first 3 and last 5 digits of their license number. If the EZcheck page has the same mailing address they have listed, they are legit.

The ATF does not require that a non dealer have a certified copy of a dealer's FFL in order to ship.

Many dealers are hesitant to give their license to non-dealers for fear that a person will photoshop the data on the form and use that license copy to start receiving guns.

This makes no sense. I am not going to send a gun out of state to anyone unless I can document their current status as an FFL.

You can document it. You can print out the results from EZ check.

EZ check says that it is not a substitute for a copy of the FFL.

But you don't need a copy of the FFL. Dealers may not ship a gun without a certified (signed) copy of the other dealer's FFL. This doesn't apply to non-dealers.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

What ever satisfies you I guess. To much over think for me.

 

[NavyLCDR]

What ever satisfies you I guess. To much over think for me.

+1 to that!

And, what good did it do to post this incident on here anyway? Are we a sounding board? Does it make the OP feel better to vent?

 

[auschip]

I am not going to risk the BATF's wrath because I was 99.99% sure that the place I was sending something to had a valid FFL.

If it gives you that much heartburn you could always go to a local FFL and have them do it. Then they run the BATFE risk.

 

[brboyer]

EZ check says that it is not a substitute for a copy of the FFL.

I am not sending a gun out of state without dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

Overreact much in other aspects of your life?

Check here......http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/ffl-list.html

 

[TexasRifleman]

EZ check says that it is not a substitute for a copy of the FFL.

I am not sending a gun out of state without dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

You don't need an FFL to ship a firearm for repairs. That only applies to other dealers.

Your paranoia has carried you to a point where you wont' be able to get anything done even legally. Not sure what to tell you. Sending your gun to a gunsmith is not a "transfer" requiring any paperwork.

Q: Is an ATF Form 4473 required when a gunsmith returns a repaired firearm?
No, provided the firearm is returned to the person from whom it was received.

Q: A firearm is delivered to a licensee by an unlicensed individual for the purpose of repair. Is the return of the repaired firearm subject to the requirements of the Brady law? Would the transfer of a replacement firearm from the licensee to the owner of the damaged firearm be subject to the requirements of the Brady law?
Neither the transfer of a repaired firearm nor the transfer of a replacement firearm would be subject to the requirements of the Brady law. Furthermore, the regulations provide that a Form 4473 is not required to cover these transactions. However, the licensee’s permanent acquisition and disposition records should reflect the return of the firearm or the transfer of a replacement firearm.

[27 CFR 478.124-25]

 

[NavyLCDR]

You don't need an FFL to ship a firearm for repairs. That only applies to other dealers.

However, if he was shipping the rifle to an out-of-state party that truly did not have an FFL, he would have to notify the commercial carrier IN WRITING, of the firearm shipment. Personally, I don't see the problem... I sent a Contender back to T/C for repairs and did not ask for a copy of their FFL.

 

[alsaqr]

What ever satisfies you I guess. To much over think for me.

+1 to that!

Way too much over think for me too.

 

[Bubbles]

ATF has told us not to give copies of our license out to non-FFL's, and to just have non-FFL's use EZ Check to verify our address and that we hold a valid license.

 

[EOD Guy]

EZ check says that it is not a substitute for a copy of the FFL.

I am not sending a gun out of state without dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

That statement is referring to the requirement for a shipping FFL to obtain a copy of the FFL of the receiving licensee. It only applies in transfers between licensees.

There is no requirement for a non-licensee to obtain a copy of an FFL. An eZCheck is more than sufficient.

 

[natman]

If you don't get a copy of the receiving FFL, then what are you supposed to do if the shipping company asks for one?

 

[cologuy]

The shipping company doesn't need a copy of the FFL to ship your gun. They don't have anything to do with FFL's. Check out TexasRifleman's post from yesterday - an FFL isn't required to ship guns for repair.

 

[Bubba613]

ATF has told us not to give copies of our license out to non-FFL's, and to just have non-FFL's use EZ Check to verify our address and that we hold a valid license

That is news to me but makes sense. I am less and less inclined to send my license to non-licensees because they don't need it.

 

[budiceman]

My FFL wont give his out either to non FFLs.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

My FFL wont give his out either to non FFLs.

As well he shouldn't. There is no need to.

 

[RDak]

If you won't accept the ATF site's results of a search, and won't accept that they have an FFL based on their good standing as a gunsmithing business, then I guess you will have to go elsewhere.