New rules on sending/recieving firearms via rfd I just found out!

stratts

Well-Known Member
I just took a rifle to my rfd to send that I have sold and they informed me of some changes that are being enforced after being sent a gun trade notice. It is also something that has now been put on the new firearms certificates which I doubt many of us know about or realise!!

Basically the receiving rfd cannot write on the cert of the person who has bought the rifle. They need to send their cert by recorded delivery to the seller, ie, me, then I fill it out and return it recorded delivery. The buyer then takes the filled out cert to the rfd their end and collects the rifle!

By all accounts this is how it should have been done for a while but rfd's have been filling out peoples certs when they shouldn't!

So in a nutshell the powers that be are making it more difficult and expensive to buy and sell firearms and shotguns long distance,

Cheers

Stratts
 
I just took a rifle to my rfd to send that I have sold and they informed me of some changes that are being enforced after being sent a gun trade notice. It is also something that has now been put on the new firearms certificates which I doubt many of us know about or realise!!

Basically the receiving rfd cannot write on the cert of the person who has bought the rifle. They need to send their cert by recorded delivery to the seller, ie, me, then I fill it out and return it recorded delivery. The buyer then takes the filled out cert to the rfd their end and collects the rifle!

By all accounts this is how it should have been done for a while but rfd's have been filling out peoples certs when they shouldn't!

So in a nutshell the powers that be are making it more difficult and expensive to buy and sell firearms and shotguns long distance,

Cheers

Stratts

I wonder how many people will just choose to sell their guns to the rfd then..........
 
I think that these rules very much depend on which RFD or Firearms licensing area you're dealing with.
 
I bought a rifle from a place in in the far Southwest a few years ago.

I sent my FAC and cheque in payment for the rifle to the seller (who was an RFD).
Once he's had the payment, I have in law purchased the rifle - so that's the point at which it goes on my FAC, and as the seller he's the one to enter it.
He then sent the rifle with my FAC to my local RFD, who entered it into his register as my rifle, and then out again to me when I went to collect it and the the FAC.

That is as far as I'm aware the right way to do it - and always has been.
However, I didn't send my FAC by recorded delivery and the seller just packed the FAC in with the rifle, so he didn't need to either.

I guess if the prospective purchaser's RFD actually buys the rifle and then sells it on the the purchaser, it would be done differently - but if the buyer pays the distant seller for the rifle directly, then the buyer has purchased the rifle and the seller has to write it on the FAC before it is sent to the receiving RFD. The receiving RFD then risks ending up with a rifle that he's paid for, the prospective buyer doesn't like and the seller won't refund.
 
Last edited:
I never let my FC out of my sight unless it is when handing in at Police HQ for alteration/variation, recorded or not !!
Whenever I sell a Firearm it is sold twice between me and the original person that wants to buy it off of me.
Me to local RFD,
My local RFD to RFD in the area of my end purchaser.
End purchaser visits his local RFD and pays any monies due to enter it on his FC and he then collects it and walks away.
 
Last edited:
Regardless of the rules, I think most transactions will continue to be carried out as per EMcC's post #9.

It ain't rules, but Law. And done strictly as EMcC describes (Seller sells to RFD1, RFD1 sells and posts to RFD2, RFD2 sells to Buyer) there seems to me no infringment of the law.
However, if Buyer sends the money to Seller, Buyer has at that point bought, and the seller must therefore write the transfer on Buyer's FAC.
 
+1
You're a bit behind the times, Stratts old boy!

Regardless of the rules, I think most transactions will continue to be carried out as per EMcC's post #9.

Well that's how I thought it was tbh and how I've done it before too but my rfd is insisting on doing it this (new to me) way!!

When you read the FAC though it clearly says in line number 4 that the rfd passing on the firearm should not fill in the buyers cert? I think this is a bit that's been added since the change of cert format but I may be wrong!?

I also did a quick search and couldn't find anything on this topic so I don't see where it's been done to death!!!

Stratts
 
Something I forgot to add is the guidelines that the rfd has been sent says that the seller should notify the buyers force of the sale as well as their own! They printed me a copy so I'll scan it and post over the weekend,

Stratts
 
nothing new about these rules, just that some forces are starting to be more stringent about implementing existing rules
 
Something I forgot to add is the guidelines that the rfd has been sent says that the seller should notify the buyers force of the sale as well as their own! They printed me a copy so I'll scan it and post over the weekend,

Stratts

That does sound odd. AFAIK seller should tell his FLD he's sold, and buyer tells his FLD that he's bought.
Can anyone see why that should be different when the coming-into-possession of the rifle is via an RFD?
 
It ain't rules, but Law. And done strictly as EMcC describes (Seller sells to RFD1, RFD1 sells and posts to RFD2, RFD2 sells to Buyer) there seems to me no infringment of the law.
However, if Buyer sends the money to Seller, Buyer has at that point bought, and the seller must therefore write the transfer on Buyer's FAC.

not sure about that, payment or sending of money has little to do with it. Surely passing posession and resposiblity and ownership of the firearm is the key action.

It totalky works:
seller into RFD system / RFD to RFD / RFD signs on to purchaser. At all times the firearm is recorded as being the reponsibility of an approved party.
 
not sure about that, payment or sending of money has little to do with it. Surely passing posession and resposiblity and ownership of the firearm is the key action.

It totalky works:
seller into RFD system / RFD to RFD / RFD signs on to purchaser. At all times the firearm is recorded as being the reponsibility of an approved party.

It's the payment that has everything to do with it, I think, because that is what makes the purchase, and it is the purchase that has to be recorded by the seller on the buyer's FAC. And that, as far as the law goes, is it.
 
It's the payment that has everything to do with it, I think, because that is what makes the purchase, and it is the purchase that has to be recorded by the seller on the buyer's FAC. And that, as far as the law goes, is it.

ok, so tell me this, forget travel distances/logistics, which is why we use the system i described.

Example: I put my rifle into an RFD for sale. It sits there for 3 months then some lucky punter buys it. When i drop the rifle off, the RFD writes it onto his books.

Surely, i dont ever have anything to do with the transfer paperwork to the purchaser? The RFD has acted as agent and takes a fee.
 
Back
Top