Must I send my FAC away..........

owdnorthener

Well-Known Member
Hi, I hadn't noticed this on my ticket until last night. Is it a change or had I missed it in the past ?

I was looking for an RFD, with a view of buying an FAC air rifle, at distance. On their site it mentioned that some tickets have different wording in regard to who signs the FAC, that if this is on your ticket, they cannot complete and sign your FAC.

4. If you are selling a firearm/ammunition which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person you should complete the tables and notify the police of the transaction concerning the firearm( as in 2 above )
The dealer who hands over the firearm should not complete the tables.


Does this now mean I must send my FAC away for the sending RFD to complete ? and of course be without my FAC for however long the transaction takes.

So now I will be looking for .22 FAC air rifle which I can buy face to face.

Alan.
 
There was a thread on this subject just a wee while ago. Two trains of thought . . . .One, the letter of the law states 'yep, you should send it off to the RFD (or seller)'. Two, 'nope, no way am I sending my FAC off into the wild blue yonder'. My own view (and I stand to be corrected), is that the transferring RFD can sign it over to me on behalf of the original seller, as has been done for donkeys years with no complaints from any Firearms Licensing Department. I intend to stick with established practices and have the seller transfer to a local RFD, who can then fill out the paperwork while I have my FAC in plain sight.
 
All depends on who you deal with or which RFD you deal with. I've just had to send my certificate away (seller requirement) for a recent acquisition, whereas I just took my certificate to my RFD before when a rifle was transferred to him.

Even my RFD was confused by the new system but he says that it's the new way...
 
The letter of the law is clear. You should be sending your license off to the vendor to complete. If you have the rifle sent to your nearest dealer then they become embroiled in warranty issues as they become “point of sale” and therefor you have the right to return to “them” and not the person that shipped it to them..... hence why most will no longer entertain such things.
 
Exactly as deerstalker says. If you have a good relationship with an RFD it can work. I sold a 223 about a year ago and my local RFD shipped it after I had filled in the fac sent from the chap buying the rifle. Some will charge for this It can work but it face to face is easier
 
Had to send mine away after recent purchase from non local RFD. Wasn’t really comfortable with idea but as Deerstalker states the law seems pretty clear. The only potential issue came when the dealer stated that they would return the FAC packed with the weapon which seemed absolutely ridiculous? In the unlikely event that the firearm did go astray the subsequent ‘recipient’ would not only have an unauthorised weapon but also a certificate for it (easy to change photo?) allowing them to purchase ammo? Admittedly, highly unlikely but not a risk that I was happy with so got FAC returned directly to me.
 
Again Deerstalker is correct along with the above posters. I had a post going on this a month ago and to cut a long story short, it is the way it is now like it or not. My RFD thinks its nuts as do I, but most (from what I understand) are doing it this way now. If I could have bought F2F I would have but it was quite a rare rifle so had to do a transfer. Costs more now when you factor in the 2x RFD fees (each end) plus the Special Delivery to send off your FAC. Mine too was sent back with the rifle which had me worried but was a very secure return service tbh (well, as secure as can be). I'd do it again if I absolutely had to, for something rare or unavailable at all locally, but wouldn't even consider it for 'lesser items' such as a mod or reloading bits. A very bad idea IMHO...
 
Thanks for your interesting comments. I do get that if on my FAC its seems to be law.

The reason I asked, was the RFD was saying, "If the wording is" ..... (as I wrote above) which says to me, that not all FAC have the same wording.

So if it is law, wouldn't the wording be the same on all FACs ?

Alan.
 
Thanks for your interesting comments. I do get that if on my FAC its seems to be law.

The reason I asked, was the RFD was saying, "If the wording is" ..... (as I wrote above) which says to me, that not all FAC have the same wording.

So if it is law, wouldn't the wording be the same on all FACs ?

Alan.

that would be too simple!!
 
As far as firearm law goes, either option is valid. Product liability, and how it goes through the books financially, is different. I would expect a multiple onward sale to attract multiple commissions.

the risk of having it effectivly sold between dealers, before it gets to you, is that you don't have title to it, till it's on your FAC. As happened to me. I agreed a sale, and a very very good price. The remote dealer took the gun on as a purchase, to then arrange to sell on to me, via my local RFD. But everything went quiet at that point. I recon the dealer just put it on sale himself and made a quick buck.
 
As far as firearm law goes, either option is valid. Product liability, and how it goes through the books financially, is different. I would expect a multiple onward sale to attract multiple commissions.

This is not correct...By law the certificate MUST be sent to the vendor to be filled in as appropriate.
This is also not a new law, it’s just that it’s being enforced more now.
Not worth the risk for your receiving RFD, unless he/she is prepared to buy the firearm on your behalf and enter it onto his/ her register, then, sell it to you. And has been said, that method potentially opens up a whole new can ‘o’ worms.
Regards,Ken.
 
Back
Top