Legally selling on Gunbroker.com

[Marvinash]

GB. Com offers a venue for those us in CA to sell firearms and accessories.
I've sold AKs, I got a good price for my DR 200 - I'm getting rid of guns I don't shoot, but can't sell in CA. I'm getting old, and I don't want my wife to be left with an arsenal worth thousands of dollars because she won't know how to cash them in after I "cash in."
But I recently listed an item, got good bids, but the winning bidder was a CA resident.
I asked him why he bid on it, and he starts telling me a "secret, legal" way that I can sell it to him. I told him he had wasted my time and cost me a legitimate sale by bidding on something I couldn't sell him.
He went ballistic. Because he was the auction winner, he was immediately given access to all my contact info: phone, address, email address etc. he began making threats (I can handle that), but he goes to my feedback and posts a 'D' and even truly stated that I was a jerk because I wouldn't cooperate with him in an illegal transaction.
I blocked him as a future bidder and relisted the item. But I've got that big red 'D' on the top of my feedback. I doubt that most people will understand what he was complaining about.
I want the unqualified feedback, the 'D' removed. I have a lot of other items listed, and it doesn't exactly attract bidders. But GB.com says I have to file a Non-Paying Bidder report. The 'D' will stay up there while I go thru a 90 day process of recovering my posting and Final Value Fee, then they will review my feedback.
I told them they could keep their commission off a sale that was illegal to make. I told them to read the reason that clown stated for giving me the 'D' - he admits he was attempting to circumvent the law.
But GB.com says it isn't their policy to remove feedback until they've refunded my money. They're protecting him to protect twelve dollars in commission.

 

[deadin]

After he started getting abusive I think I might have called the CA DOJ and asked if they were interested in a sting operation........

 

[Marvinash]

Expecting...

I don't know what I expect to hear on this post, if there is a reply.
I hope tho, that it doesn't refer to"California". Or that it isn't about how stupid this state's laws are: of course they're ridiculous, but we don't get to choose which ones we'll obey.
Reading it back, now, it sounds whiny.
Maybe it is, but it felt good to put it out there.

 

[Marvinash]

I thought of that, deadin. But I've had about as much luck with CA DOJ as I've had with GB.com
...but thanks

 

[dogtown tom]

Marvinash .......But GB.com says I have to file a Non-Paying Bidder report. The 'D' will stay up there while I go thru a 90 day process of recovering my posting and Final Value Fee, then they will review my feedback.I told them they could keep their commission off a sale that was illegal to make. I told them to read the reason that clown stated for giving me the 'D' - he admits he was attempting to circumvent the law.
But GB.com says it isn't their policy to remove feedback until they've refunded my money. They're protecting him to protect twelve dollars in commission.

So you got all mad despite GunBroker telling you exactly how the feedback could be removed?

GunBroker isn't protecting anyone in this case EXCEPT YOU. If you fail to follow instructions you'll have to live with bad feedback.

 

[The-Reaver]

After he started getting abusive I think I might have called the CA DOJ and asked if they were interested in a sting operation

BOOM!

That's what I'm talkin about.

 

[Marvinash]

So you got all mad despite GunBroker telling you exactly how the feedback could be removed?

GunBroker isn't protecting anyone in this case EXCEPT YOU. If you fail to follow instructions you'll have to live with bad feedback.

It aggravates me that in the midst of four other auctions Gunbroker is letting a would-be felon taint my reputation.
"Got all mad?" Did you read the post? I'm following their instructions, I just think its a policy that makes it easier for those who have no integrity in terms of following the law.
They would have no problem with me just selling it to the guy. How far does that go? Can a deranged individual persuade a seller to forgoe the FFL process? Would GB.com care?

 

[mgkdrgn]

GB has a process. Just like everybody/everything else has a process. The process is there to insure that things get done correctly. Just follow the process and it will all work out.

Keep in mind that GB is not the only auction board out there. I have had a lot of luck with GunAuctions.com

If you are selling something that can not be transferred in Calif, just state in the auction "No Calif Sales".

Chill bro, it will all work out.

 

[Marvinash]

Maybe I've overstated how upset I am.
I realize it will all work out; I've - overall - had a positive relationship with Gunbroker.com, too.
I understand the process. It's just that, after this, I'm not going to have that much to sell. The effect of the 'D' won't matter that much in 90 days.
Simply put, here's the issue: GB.com doesnt want to inhibit anybody's right to judge their experience with you, as a seller. I respect that. Overall, it's a good policy.
But when the feedback states that you are being condemned for refusing to partipate in an illegal conspiracy, that's not subjective. Prima facie! a sale was refused because it would be illegal.
It doesn't take 90 days to review that. There's no "two sides to the story".
Among the threats of retaliation that DOES concern me is that a newly registered bidder (NR) is driving up the bidding on a gun that's worth about $300.00 max. - with 7 days to go.
I'm 'chilled', but maybe paranoid. It looks a little like a shill; not commissioned by me, but by a disgruntled buyer as an act of vandalism. Is it paranoia when that's exactly what was threatened?

 

[Marvinash]

Oh Happy Day!

Wow!
Maybe GB.com participates in these discussions!
I just rec'd an email telling me that my vandal's feedback has been removed!
I retract everything I said about the integrity of that fine establishment.
I am going to follow thru with my NPB report. As I said, I don't care about the money, they can keep it, but they asked me to follow thru with it to document their decision to make an exception in this case. And for making that exception, I will be more than happy to cooperate.
I can't help but think that this discussion on THR played a role in their reversal, since they had closed the case prior to me coming here and "whining" about it.
If any of you who posted are affiliated with them or their sudden reversal, I thank you, my wife thanks you!
Carry on, fellow shooters!
Happiness IS a warm gun when it smells like ...victory!

 

[Coyote3855]

Glad to hear GB did the right thing.

 

[henschman]

Good deal... I'm glad it worked out.

I know you might have been a little hot under the collar, but I would never do something like post #2 suggested and try to bring the government into it. Granted the guy was out of line, and no one can blame you for not wanting to risk your liberty by doing something illegal, but the fact is those laws are illegitimate violations of everyone's rights, and I don't think it would be ethical to help bring the coercive power of the state down on somebody for trying to violate a law like that.

 

[mp510]

...

 

[mp510]

I asked him why he bid on it, and he starts telling me a "secret, legal" way that I can sell it to him. I told him he had wasted my time and cost me a legitimate sale by bidding on something I couldn't sell him.

What was the particular gun? Why did he believe that he could purchase the weapon from you?

Depending on exactly what it was, it is possible that you may have been able to lawfully transfer it to him, under a variety of possible exemptions to general provisions.

 

[Marvinash]

Yes, maybe we could have worked out some legal technicality. But someone who wasn't trying to play me for the fool would have run his idea by me before he closed my auction. We had pre-sale correspondence. He could have brought it up. I hate the ban on hi-caps too. I would have listened.

 

[Marvinash]

I have a guy, now, who's trying to convince me that I can sell him my AK modified SKS with a C&R. I can't do it, but at least he has the etiquette to ask. (tho, to be honest, I'm not even listing it right now.) I sold some AKs in front of some glass displays where potential buyers must have blown up the images of my Tanker Garand ("God, I love that gun!" ...digression, sorry). I've gotten a number of requests for things I plan to list, but haven't just yet.
Why there's such a hair in the govt.'s kazoo about modifying the innocuous (relatively) SKS is a mystery.
40+ years ago, I used to fire a 175mm gun, (I said) I was old, didn't I?) I'll bet I could unload one of those with less restrictions than they've put on modified SKSs. I think that's Fed, too, not just CA.