Variation Problem. Beware!

[Bertie Leblanc]

I am abit confused as to why this is'nt legal what is wrong with having it paid for and with an rfd you cannot get your hands on it so fail to see whats wrong happy for someone to tell me why, atb wayne

​Presumably because your FAC states "Firearms possessed, or authorised to be purchased or acquired"

 

[Bertie Leblanc]

Surely you have only 'purchased' the rifle 'conditionally' - ie you have paid him for it but full ownership and title does not pass to you until you have taken possession of the rifle, under the understanding that this would only take place when your firearm certificate has been varied accordingly.

In effect, you've 'paid him for it', but you haven't actually 'purchased' it until its complete - that was obviously the agreement from the start, although it may have remained an unspoken assumption, but the seller knew you were waiting for your FAC to be varied, and was happy to ship it to the RFD to be held pending completion of the deal.

Edit - in fact, legally, any firearm transfer can ONLY take place face to face, this being the function of the RFD so the purchase of the rifle is not completed until it is handed over, purchase=transfer of ownership - you can't have purchased it yet, as it would be illegal to do so, the purchase can only be legally completed with a face to face transfer:

1997 firearms act:

32Transfers of firearms etc. to be in person.

(1)​

This section applies where, in Great Britain—

(a)​

a firearm or ammunition to which section 1 of the 1968 Act applies is sold, let on hire, lent or given by any person, or

(b)​

a shot gun is sold, let on hire or given, or lent for a period of more than 72 hours by any person,
to another person who is neither a registered firearms dealer nor a person who is entitled to purchase or acquire the firearm or ammunition without holding a firearm or shot gun certificate or a visitor’s firearm or shot gun permit.

(2)​

Where a transfer to which this section applies takes place—

(a)​

the transferee must produce to the transferor the certificate or permit entitling him to purchase or acquire the firearm or ammunition being transferred;

(b)​

the transferor must comply with any instructions contained in the certificate or permit produced by the transferee;

(c)​

the transferor must hand the firearm or ammunition to the transferee, and the transferee must receive it, in person.

(3)​

A failure by the transferor or transferee to comply with subsection (2) above shall be an offence.



There you are - transfer of ownership only takes place when you present your certificate at the RFD and he hands it over, and it has to be face to face by law, so you can't have 'purchased' it yet!

This was my inrepretation and the RFD's it would seem, however the RFD's had also been told that this is naughty and neither bothered to mention this to me before I parted with my cash.

I have not commited the offence above because I have not received it in person (not been in contact with the RFD or seen the rifle for that matter) which presumably is why I am not sitting in a small room with bars at the window waiting to slop out!

I believe also that this conflicts with the sale of goods act and other laws of purchase which states that if you have paid for something you own it.

Ask yourself this - does the RFD now have the right to sell the rifle? if not who does?

If the rifle was now lost or destroyed who's loss, if its not my loss then who returns the money?

The FAC treats possession the same as authorised to purchase.

Bertie

 

[Apache]

Interested on the BASC guys take on this.

I have paid deposits a number of times for guns that I didn't have the variation for.

I also know a chap who has a friend who's an RFD. This chap bought a large calibre rifle for African game that the RFD holds. The chap doesn't have a variation or any plans to put in for one at this time.

 

[nuttyspaniel]

I would be interested in BASC's take on this. I only ever have 1 rifle, so when I change rifles I trade my current rifle in leave it as a deposit submit my 1 4 1 and transfer notice at the same time, then pay balance and collect the new rifle when the new ticket with the slot comes in.


nutty

 

[8x57]

There would be nothing wrong with that Nutty as you have full title and authority for the rifle you are leaving with the RFD and that will be part exchanged.

 

[HunterMoore]

ummm .... not sure I agree.
when you PX the rifle and tell the police you have disposed of it, it is no longer yours in any sense ... the value of the rifle has passed to the RFD who can sell it on immediately?
lets wait for a BASC comment as I still cannot believe any offence can possibly be committed if you haven't taken possession of the firearm but payment in full or in part or by PX has been made.
I also fully paid for a Zoli 30.06 / 12 bore that I sent via a dealer in Maun to my friend in Botswana that was never on my ticket.
is this not a storm in a teacup?
Tony

 

[Labrat]

I've been reading up, there appears to be a bit of case law, Watts v Seymour 1967 that defines what constitutes sale, and that sale with intention to deliver possession at a later date was illegal, but it also seemed that in that case the dealer allowed use at a club under supervision prior to that later date, and it was before the 68 act, and I can't find a full text of the judgement so it may very well turn on the facts of the case - but at least it hopefully gives you a point in the right direction.

 

[mereside]

​Presumably because your FAC states "Firearms possessed, or authorised to be purchased or acquired"

so what if you have never had an FAC and put a deposite down how do you know you are breaking any laws?. what about people who die and leave guns they go to an rfd but they are still somebody's posessions not the rfd, atb wayne

 

[Greymaster]

How about the establishment of a Firearms Licencing Officers Certificate with levels 1 and 2. There could be any number of training providers, and the BASC could supply administrative support, and provide a list of BASC Approved Assessors. Then firearms licencing staff could demonstrate a basic or higher level of knowledge by undertaking a course of study and then sitting a number of exams etc...

 

[finnbear270]

How about the establishment of a Firearms Licencing Officers Certificate with levels 1 and 2. There could be any number of training providers, and the BASC could supply administrative support, and provide a list of BASC Approved Assessors. Then firearms licencing staff could demonstrate a basic or higher level of knowledge by undertaking a course of study and then sitting a number of exams etc...

I take it at least the two of us are in agreement then?Variation Problem. Beware! - Page 2

 

[Greymaster]

Oops! Missed that, but at least suggested the BASC etc!

 

[8x57]

Along with a good many FLO's............. really time was taken to sort out some educational courses for those wanting to work in this area, how can administration be applied if you are ignorant of the details?

They could even have a level one, a level two, in firearms admin!

Actually there are courses run for FEO's and Firearms managers but I believe that not every force puts their staff on such courses. I have been looking for the references to them but at the moment have failed to find them. I believe that they have been referred to in job advertisements for a firearms manager that I read recently.

Added.
Just found reference to a job in Nottinghamshire but not the one I was looking for.-
"Have successfully completed the nationally recognised course of Firearm Enquiry Officer, or be prepared to do so within 18 months of appointment".

 

[perdix]

Actually there are courses run for FEO's and Firearms managers but I believe that not every force puts their staff on such courses. I have been looking for the references to them but at the moment have failed to find them. I believe that they have been referred to in job advertisements for a firearms manager that I read recently.

Added.
Just found reference to a job in Nottinghamshire but not the one I was looking for.-
"Have successfully completed the nationally recognised course of Firearm Enquiry Officer, or be prepared to do so within 18 months of appointment".

Yep,thought about applying for that nyself but i was told by a lad that works there that it was an office based job so shyed away from it.It was in the shooting mags for ages too

 

[BASC Firearms Dept]

I applied for a variation to my FAC for a 308 and whilst waiting for the process to unfold I saw what I was looking for advertised in SD.
I spoke to the seller and told him I was waiting for my variation and we both agreed that I could make the purchase and have the rifle sent to my local RFD whilst I waited for my variation. I contacted two local RFD's and they confirmed that it would be fine for them to accept delivery of the rifle and hold it while the variation was dealt with. Another call to my chosen RFD again said OK to what I was doing and we agreed prices etc, he also told me that my FEO had changed and gave me a phone number for him.

I paid for the rifle and went abroad for 6 weeks working, my variation sent with a covering letter saying can you visit on my return?

Next thing is my wife gets a call from the RFD saying he can't accept the rifle as I do not have a slot for a 308 on my licience and I shouldn't have bought it, the police are clamping down on this etc etc......

A phone call to him from me ( from USA!) and I reminded him that we had spoken about this and he had agreed it was OK to do, he calmed down and accepted the rifle but said that there may be issues.

I return home and the next day my FEO turns up and we have a pleasant chat about the type of rifle I had requested and that one of the farms I wanted to shoot was only cleared to .22 rimfire and the other only to .243. I said I wanted the 308 as I was doing a paid stalk at Thetford Forest and they only use .308 and I was planning Stalking in Scotland where the .308 seems to be the choice which he agreed.

He then commented that I had bought a .308 already so he understood that the .243 ground would need to be cleared for .308. There then was a lengthy conversation about the fact that I had broken the law by purchasing the .308 even though it was held by a RFD. He is of course correct if you read your firearm certificate, so I had to eat humble pie and plead mitigating circumstances and poor advice which I believe he was OK with but he said that his boss, the Chief Police officer who signs the FC had clamped down on this happening in this area so ultimately its up to the man who signs my certificate.

For my part I believe that its the RFD's who are at fault as the RFD's in this area had been warned about it before and should have passed that on to their customers.

Next time I will phone up BASC for advice rather than listen to well intentioned advice of others.

In the mean time I hope this will not turn out the wrong way, I will keep you posted but in the mean time be warned.

Lets be safe out there
​Bertie

First and foremost it is illegal to "purchase" a Section 1 firearm without a certificate. This includes persons who have a certificate for other firearms but have yet to seek or be granted a variation for the particular calibre of firearm. You may only purchase a firearm upon receipt of the fully authorised firearm certificate.

Secondly the process of buying a firearm long distance is as follows;

Section 32(2)(c) of the 1997 Act requires a "face to face" transfer. As this cannot be done in a long distance scenario, intermediaries must be used i.e. Registered Firearms Dealers (RFD).

Section 32(2)(b) also says the "transferor must comply with any instructions contained in the certificate" - transferor includes individual certificate holders and dealers.

The Firearms Rules 1998, Rule 1 (6) and Part II of Schedule I provides the certificate instructions - Number 3 says the following (note my underlining);

"3. Any circumstances attending the transaction which appear to require investigation must be reported within 48 hours to the chief officer of police who granted this certificate. If you are selling a firearm which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person you should complete this table and notify the police. The dealer who actually hands over the firearm should not complete the table or notify the police (except in circumstances which may require police investigation as above)."

In layman’s terms; when legally entitled to purchase a firearm, the buyer may speak to the selling dealer and agree a sale, then the buyer must send to the seller his firearm certificate, the dealer will endorse it and send it back to the buyer. That dealer may then book out the firearm from his register and send it to the buyer’s local dealer who will receive it and book it into his register. The buyer then goes to his local dealer to collect whereupon he shows the certificate and details of the transfer made by the selling dealer. The second dealer then hands over the firearm making an entry into his register but NOT onto the firearm certificate.

In short, the Firearms Rules are a statutory instrument and any instructions on the certificate must be followed by law. Section 32 reminds us of the need to follow the instructions. Penalty can be by prosecution and or revocation of your certificate. RFD's can also lose their trade if they do not follow the rules.

NOTE: This process applies to shotguns also as the same note appears on the shotgun certificate.

NOTE: Private long distance sales involve the rules but only one dealer will be required i.e. at the purchasers end. What a seller cannot do is send any gun to a private individual under any circumstances after endorsing the certificate on receipt by post.

 

[BASC Firearms Dept]

I wonder what the correct interpreation actually is?

No such thing as interpretation, its what the law says.

the case of pepper -v- hart 1992 established the principles. If the law was ambiguous to how it can be applied then it would require further investigation and a ruling. Even in such cases, the law says what it says, it is the situation which does not match.

 

[Apache]

"3. Any circumstances attending the transaction which appear to require investigation must be reported within 48 hours to the chief officer of police who granted this certificate. If you are selling a firearm which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person you should complete this table and notify the police. The dealer who actually hands over the firearm should not complete the table or notify the police (except in circumstances which may require police investigation as above)."

In layman’s terms; when legally entitled to purchase a firearm, the buyer may speak to the selling dealer and agree a sale, then the buyer must send to the seller his firearm certificate, the dealer will endorse it and send it back to the buyer. That dealer may then book out the firearm from his register and send it to the buyer’s local dealer who will receive it and book it into his register. The buyer then goes to his local dealer to collect whereupon he shows the certificate and details of the transfer made by the selling dealer. The second dealer then hands over the firearm making an entry into his register but NOT onto the firearm certificate.

I have done this quite a few times and on each occasion it is the RFD where I physically collected the gun from that completed my cert.

MMM

 

[Vipa]

I believe the view of some Forces is that if you have paid for the rifle then it's yours, irrespective of any RFD transferring or looking after it. As we all know, if you own a rifle without the appropriate slot on your ticket then you are a very naughty boy and may be treated harshly...... I know a local RFD who wont even take a deposit on a rifle, unless you have the slot on your ticket, as the deposit confers an element of part ownership.

Surely, it is only illegal to 'possess' a firearm without a certificate with relevant slot? 'Ownership' is a whole different thing. If your ticket is revoked or lapses and you put your firearms into the local RFD to sell via him you still own them and you are breaking no law! Why would this be any different?

 

[Dalua]

No such thing as interpretation, its what the law says.

the case of pepper -v- hart 1992 established the principles. If the law was ambiguous to how it can be applied then it would require further investigation and a ruling. Even in such cases, the law says what it says, it is the situation which does not match.

Thanks for that: could you please explain what 'to purchase' means in this context?

The main point of the Pepper v Hart judgement seems to be that it permits reference to Hansard when it is neccessary to clarify the meaning of primary legislation: so I'm not altogether clear what bearing it has on these circumstances.

 

[BASC Firearms Dept]

Surely, it is only illegal to 'possess' a firearm without a certificate with relevant slot? 'Ownership' is a whole different thing. If your ticket is revoked or lapses and you put your firearms into the local RFD to sell via him you still own them and you are breaking no law! Why would this be any different?

Its different because that what the law says, it is illegal to purchase a firearm (and shotgun) without a certificate. The word "purchase" means the offence stops there (well it then says manufacture etc) but the essence if what I cite is that yes you may own a firearm after its initial lawful purchase and continue to own it in storage (for example) if your authority was removed by you or the police.

Sorryy guys but you'll have to put a deposit on a gun (which is not a complete sale/purchase) until you have authority but don't whine if the RFD keeps the deposit (or time limits it) because police refused your variation. Make sure you know the T&Cs and preferably get them
in writing.

 

[BASC Firearms Dept]

I have done this quite a few times and on each occasion it is the RFD where I physically collected the gun from that completed my cert.

MMM

Doesn't mean its right!!!

Logically it is simpler for RFD1 to send to RFD2 and then the transfer is effected by him, our brains all tell us that a trail is straightforward when the item goes from one to another to another etc.. But this Act is not so.