Page 2 of 3

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:46 am
by Polchraine
To quote the guide:

it is illegal to complete a sale (accept full payment) for a firearm, Section 1
component part or accessory or shot gun to a person who cannot produce a
firearm or shot gun certificate authorising them to acquire the firearm etc. You
may only take a deposit on a purchase prior to sight of the relevant certificate
giving authority to purchase the firearm.


It does not state it is illegal to take a deposit. It says you can take a deposit to purchase prior to sight if the relevant certificate but forbids full payment. It does not say that the person has to have the slot of a cetificate at the time of placing the deposit and allows an RFD to take a deposit whilst waiting for sight of the certificate. There is no time limit so it could be 1 day of 1 year.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:43 pm
by Christel
We have discussed this many times on this forum, it does not change.

No slot, no deposit.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 4:38 pm
by Practical shooter
I thought this was a discussion forum. Obviously not

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:20 pm
by Alpha1
Its been discussed lots of times. Do a search you can debate all you like the end result is the same no slot no deposit.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 8:04 pm
by Polchraine
Practical shooter wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 4:38 pm I thought this was a discussion forum. Obviously not
It is, but some are not prepared to discuss and accept incorrect advice.


The point is that the guidance as printed does not say it is illegal and cannot be done. It specifically syates a deposit can be taken "prior to the sight of a certificate giving authority to purchase" it does not say the purchaser must have a certificate at the time of placing a deposit.

I have a couple of meetings with my solicitors & legal advisers coming up, I will ask for their interpretation of the wording.

Also, that document is "GUIDANCE" and not the law.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:55 pm
by Alpha1
We have at least two registered firearms dealers reply to this thread ( and others) telling us if you don,t have a slot they will not take a deposit. Speaking to your Solicitors will make no difference what so ever.
What is wrong with you people they have advised you in good faith of the requirements you need to stay within the law and keep plod happy. Its not rocket science get a variation then go buy the firearm in the caliber you want.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:05 pm
by Polchraine
Alpha1 wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:55 pm We have at least two registered firearms dealers reply to this thread ( and others) telling us if you don,t have a slot they will not take a deposit. Speaking to your Solicitors will make no difference what so ever.
What is wrong with you people they have advised you in good faith of the requirements you need to stay within the law and keep plod happy. Its not rocket science get a variation then go buy the firearm in the caliber you want.

I have asked for an explanation of where the instruction comes from. The link provided does not say it and interpretation of te the text does not give that impression either.

To me it sounds like another of those "you have to do it this way" comments that proliferates. An RFD can decide not to accept a deposit, but that is their choice and no in line with the text.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:21 pm
by Alpha1
Polchraine wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:05 pm
Alpha1 wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:55 pm We have at least two registered firearms dealers reply to this thread ( and others) telling us if you don,t have a slot they will not take a deposit. Speaking to your Solicitors will make no difference what so ever.
What is wrong with you people they have advised you in good faith of the requirements you need to stay within the law and keep plod happy. Its not rocket science get a variation then go buy the firearm in the caliber you want.

I have asked for an explanation of where the instruction comes from. The link provided does not say it and interpretation of te the text does not give that impression either.

To me it sounds like another of those "you have to do it this way" comments that proliferates. An RFD can decide not to accept a deposit, but that is their choice and no in line with the text.
Why have you asked for an explanation are you looking to buy a firearm you don,t have a variation for why do you think you need to involve Solicitors. Has I said get a variation for the caliber you want then go buy the firearm what is so complicated about that. (By the way you need to use a spell checker.)

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:31 pm
by Polchraine
Where have I said I am planning to buy? I am not involving solicitors but asking legally qualified how they would interpret the statement which does not stop someone placing a deposit, irrespective of whether they have a certificate/slot at that time.

Re: Cambridgeshire Variations

Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:14 am
by Blackstuff
Polchraine wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:05 pm
I have asked for an explanation of where the instruction comes from. The link provided does not say it and interpretation of the text does not give that impression either.

To me it sounds like another of those "you have to do it this way" comments that proliferates. An RFD can decide not to accept a deposit, but that is their choice and no in line with the text.
This is entirely reasonable to me. The guidance contradicts what the practice is. A bit like up until about 5-6 years ago when most RFDs were operating the common sense, but not official line for firearms transfers (the receiving RFD filling in the certificate, not the sender).

IMHO if that was taken to court the case against an RFD/buyer would be thrown out in minutes as soon as the printed guidance was read out. But i'm saying that from the luxury of not being in that position. If I was an RFD i'd likely take the more cautious approach too.