Thread: Sales through the register

Originally Posted by BRADS

My experience says it has no effect on the seller but they come after the buyer if you don't do your part


Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Correct, I transferred ownership of a couple rifles today and made a point of asking as I had just read this thread, the authority will contact the new owner if nothing is confirmed within 30 days. I made very sure to ask if I had done everything required by me as a seller under the act and if there was any come back on me if the buyer hadn't confirmed within the 40 days....was told absolutely no come back on me as long as I check FAL and confirm their current, then the transfer will be marked as pending on my record and they will follow up with the buyer if they fail to complete.
By notifying the authority of the change of ownership that is your only obligation as a seller apart from sighting FAL and confirming identity.
FYI there is a firearms license checking link on the authority website
https://webforms.police.govt.nz/fal#no-back

FYI if done over the phone like me you need the buyers full name, FAL number and date of birth. Very quick and easy.

Good info that clears it up. So do you give fsa the new owners details when you sell?

Originally Posted by blip

Good info that clears it up. So do you give fsa the new owners details when you sell?

You give the FSA the new owners full name, FAL number and date of birth, plus the details of the firearm obviously

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

No.3 thats double edged sword....say you have GrandDads shotgun .22 and .303 he is past using them but still alive n kicking.. you have possession of them,technically he owns them still but what use AT ALL would it be having them on his ticket???
far better to be on yours,you after all are person looking after them...
back to topic... if you have on sold item....and notify police/register people of such...DO YOU NOTIFY AS TO WHO AND LICENCE NUMBER ????
that right there is a huge bit.....
and as said earlier watch this space,because if they fail to register within 30 days they have breached conditions and are liable for revocation...

Hear what your point is - but if GrandDad is past using them, under the medical or competency standards there's a technical thing about him still being 'fit and proper' I would say. It kind of answers the question you raise... The 30-day transfer and possession requirement means it will likely end up on your ticket as well. A bit of a side line from the original question though to be fair.

The sale thing becomes a bit of a question though, you sight the purchaser's license and check it's valid on the online checker, get paid, hand the firearm over and then notify the regulator and do your bit. Regulator marks the transfer as pending, nothing after 30 days so go after the purchaser - who comes back with "Huh? not me... I didn't buy a firearm recently...". Then what?

It's the same here.
I bought a Rifle last year that the guy two owners back had never done the paperwork on. Meaning both I am the previous owner had processed it illegally.

I had to take it to a gunshop they put it on their books until it all got sorted out two months later.

Fucking clown world.

Originally Posted by No.3

Hear what your point is - but if GrandDad is past using them, under the medical or competency standards there's a technical thing about him still being 'fit and proper' I would say. It kind of answers the question you raise... The 30-day transfer and possession requirement means it will likely end up on your ticket as well. A bit of a side line from the original question though to be fair.

The sale thing becomes a bit of a question though, you sight the purchaser's license and check it's valid on the online checker, get paid, hand the firearm over and then notify the regulator and do your bit. Regulator marks the transfer as pending, nothing after 30 days so go after the purchaser - who comes back with "Huh? not me... I didn't buy a firearm recently...". Then what?

That last bit was going to be my question too.
Especially as @dannyb suggested on phone deals. How do you know if you are dealing with a legit licence holder or hacker?

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

That last bit was going to be my question too.
Especially as @dannyb suggested on phone deals. How do you know if you are dealing with a legit licence holder or hacker?

If you are not handing the firearm over in person then you should be doing the police mail order form so they can check both the buyer and seller are legit.

Originally Posted by dannyb

If you are not handing the firearm over in person then you should be doing the police mail order form so they can check both the buyer and seller are legit.

Same as always has been, it's up to seller to make sure there licensed

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by dannyb

You give the FSA the new owners full name, FAL number and date of birth, plus the details of the firearm obviously

so I'm probably being to logical here but surely that's all that would be required to register firearm to new owner..

Originally Posted by dannyb

If you are not handing the firearm over in person then you should be doing the police mail order form so they can check both the buyer and seller are legit.

Then you end up with the HDPA mail order thing all over again, Police S43a form checks out, gets approved, you send it and notify the regulator who marks it as pending yet the guy who apparently brought it denies all knowledge... The only way forward if you go to that level is sighting the licence at the time the purchaser picks up the thing and before you hand it over make sure they do the paperwork. Otherwise it ends up being a manual physical transfer - you drop the piece off at the handling outfit and complete the paperwork to take if off your ticket as sold, the next owner picks it up and transfers it before leaving. What a pain in the bum...

That sounds along the lines of what they do in aussie.

Originally Posted by No.3

Then you end up with the HDPA mail order thing all over again, Police S43a form checks out, gets approved, you send it and notify the regulator who marks it as pending yet the guy who apparently brought it denies all knowledge...

You can make this as hard as you like but in reality it's pretty simple, I the highly unlikely event that the purchaser (whomever is also fit and proper) who has provided all the information and done the police paperwork (the purchaser has always been the one to apply for mail order form) If they then deny all, knowledge, being a mail order form surely they will have paid via funds transfer and you could supply that evidence to the authority if proof was required, not to mention emails and texts etc.
I just can't see a situation where someone would apply for the paperwork and jump the hoops to get it then deny the purchase.
Sure it could happen but if you've done everything by the book I suspect the onus would be on the new owner.
The other thing is, I've only ever purchased a couple of rifles on mail order forms but when picking them up from my local dealer, even though they know me on a first name basis they always check my FAL and record it.
Some (not pointing the finger at anyone in particular) seem hell bent on making this out to be difficult and risky etc etc but it's just not.
Follow the guidelines set out by the authority, if unsure ask questions of them, keep relevant records until the transaction is completed simple.
Do I like or agree with the registration NO, but if I want to continue owning and using firearms I can follow the steps required to comply with it.

I think this is all slightly missing my original point.

I did everything by the book for 2 idenctical (but separate) transactions. One mail order form ended up with the rifle as pending on my account which is less than ideal but I can see the logic, the other mail order form had no impact on the rifle sitting registered to me at all - no record that I had done anything with it.

While the inconsistencies between the two are annoying its the potential impact of the second one that really grinds my gears.

If, and yes it's a real big "if", the new owner of that second rifle uses it to commit a crime then its my door the AOS will be banging on in the middle of the night, my family pulled out of bed, my dog that gets shot, my guns that all get confiscated and just thrown in the back seat of the police car and me that will be arrested and taken into custody while they figure out that actually it was just their paperwork issue. The AOS guys that get me out of bed aren't going to listen when I say I sold that gun, and they are most certainly not going to thumb through all the recent paper forms sitting on the arms officers desk before getting geared up and heading to my house.

As I use firearms daily for my business that would all be a massive cluster fudge to untangle and would likely be weeks before I'm reunited with my guns and allowed back online for my clients.

Pessimistic view for sure, but it's all possible just from one person's inconsistent handling of the mail order piece of paper.

@Mintie - you really should pass the details directly to Nicole McKie so they ACT has first-hand information that they can use.

Originally Posted by dannyb

You can make this as hard as you like but in reality it's pretty simple, I the highly unlikely event that the purchaser (whomever is also fit and proper) who has provided all the information and done the police paperwork (the purchaser has always been the one to apply for mail order form) If they then deny all, knowledge, being a mail order form surely they will have paid via funds transfer and you could supply that evidence to the authority if proof was required, not to mention emails and texts etc.
I just can't see a situation where someone would apply for the paperwork and jump the hoops to get it then deny the purchase.
Sure it could happen but if you've done everything by the book I suspect the onus would be on the new owner.
The other thing is, I've only ever purchased a couple of rifles on mail order forms but when picking them up from my local dealer, even though they know me on a first name basis they always check my FAL and record it.
Some (not pointing the finger at anyone in particular) seem hell bent on making this out to be difficult and risky etc etc but it's just not.
Follow the guidelines set out by the authority, if unsure ask questions of them, keep relevant records until the transaction is completed simple.
Do I like or agree with the registration NO, but if I want to continue owning and using firearms I can follow the steps required to comply with it.

Ideal world you are correct - but having been on the fringes of two stuffups pre-registration where a purchaser paid for a firearm but could not produce the mail order paperwork (and in one case even raised merry hell to try to force the sale through without completing the legal requirements which lead to a contact from a Police officer asking why the firearm was not being handed over as required by the law), I see the other side to this as well. Glass half full is one world view, but we are dealing with a minimum-funded Govt department here...

The registration system should work well, could work well, but it's been half-arsed and has the opposite problem to the motor vehicle registry. In the motor vehicle case, people have too much freedom to re-register a vehicle in their name despite the previous registered owner not actually selling it - and NZTA/LTNZ are not interested in changing the way that database works as it would cost far too much than 'inconveniencing' a small number of vehicle registration holders a year. That system is set up to assign bills to registered owners so as long as someone owns a registration they are happy.

The firearms registry is more concerned with the physical and appears to not want to transfer until all required steps plus plus have been met. If a registered owner reports the sale, and confirms firearm is handed over (no longer in their possession) then the registry must be updated ASAP otherwise the transaction will be 'lost' and the entire registry is now useless. This is where it gets murky, the system seems to have been set up on the basis that firearms ownership is rather static and not much happens but in reality I suspect it's a hell of a lot more dynamic with a lot more moving parts than the people designing and running the system expected. There should be processes about how things that aren't expected are handled - like what happens in the event of a courier 'loss of package' situation where the new owner doesn't receive. The firearm must be removed from the selling owner's ticket when the notification is made, otherwise you end up with a situation where the seller then has to report theft etc when they no longer lawfully own the item (this gets back to the issue with NZ Post and couriers in general where they only want to deal with the sender of an item - for a firearm I would now not drop the thing into a courier company I'd box up and give the purchaser a pickup address to organise their own courier pickup to get around that end of the legislation, once picked up it's the senders issue who are sending it to themselves!).