Pre sample now transferable on online inventory?

[Got Uzi]

I was setting up my new laptop last evening and logged into my eForms account. Filed an eForm 4 for a customer and I noticed something odd. While selecting the firearm he was to get, I noticed that two of my pre sample guns were coded in WHITE as transferable guns, not RED like all the post and pre sample guns. I went back in and created a new Form 4 and when I tried to select one of the known pre samples in RED it flagged saying “dealer or post sample-unable to complete” but when I did the same thing with the pre samples listed in WHITE, it went right through and would allow me to complete the transfer. 
 

Has anyone else seen this? Who do I contact to find out for sure if this is the case? That they were labeled wrong when entered or are they indeed transferable? 

[fifthmdec]

A FOIA request will settle the conundrum. We do one on every NFA MG that we’ve purchased. More than once it has saved us the hassle of not knowing. 
 

The FOIA request process has helped us immensely. Save the guess work. The NFA does not have access to the original paperwork one the history of a particular weapon. 
 

The ATF disclosure department has access to the information that has been entered into there system. I doubt it if the original paperwork is even in storage. 
 

The FOIA documents take the guess work out of your questions. We’ve submitted copies of our documents, especially, the original that was entered into the NFRTR. The form and date of entry are the most important information in determining,  whether the weapon is transferable, pre may or post may. Mistakes are made; and occasionally, one might go in your favor. We’ve not paid a cent for any submissions of a FOIA request.

[BRMCII]

48 minutes ago, fifthmdec said:

"The NFA does not have access to the original paperwork one the history of a particular weapon."

If ATF/NFA does not have access to the NFRTR, who does?
 
 

 

 

[fifthmdec]

Since the FOIA requests for a weapons history goes through the ATF Disclosure Division. That is where the copies of the paperwork are processed. 

A few years ago, we transferred a Police Ordnance Company M6 SMG to a C&R FFL holder. In our eForm inventory, it list the manufacturer as Form 2. That information was on the Form 3. During the transfer process, the NFA kicked back the Form 4 stating, that this weapon is not a C&R. 
 

It appears, that if the information that is in the NFRTR. Would have reflected the date of the Form 2 entered into the NFRTR as 1952. It seems, that that information was omitted or the examiner did not check. Who knows.

In order to complete the transfer as originally intended. We then submitted , photos of the weapon, historical literature and a copy of the original Form 2 dated 1952.  It was then approved. 
 

The approval would not have been possible without the FOIA paperwork.

Where are the original forms dating back to 1934? How much information was accurately imputed into the NFRTR data base that is currently available?

My point, the most accurate way to access a weapon history is through a FOIA request. Sometimes, some of the forms cannot be located. Even, after an appeal for more information. Sometimes, the original form that was submitted into the NFRTR is no longer available for whatever reason. One time during the appeal process, the Disclosure Division of the ATF did locate the original form. By doing so, that weapon went from just a transferable to a C&R transferable.

Just relying on the information contained in the NFRTR only, may be short sighted. Especially, if there are questions about the weapons transfer status. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by fifthmdec

[johnsonlmg41]

Eventually they all get caught when somebody checks at some point.  Most things going to non- SOT's get thoroughly checked.  Between SOT's just about anything goes.

I recently had a transfer denied as well because it had been transferred twice on form 3's and it was a newer examiner.  I just reminded her the gun was on the C+R list just like the Ingram M6 and that's all you need to do.   While the FOIA info is great personally, you sending it to them is useless since they will have to verify it anyhow, by looking it up on their own.

The grey area's will be the guns registered post 68' and now we are up to 1973 guns.  Those records seem quite a bit more complete and the registration forms are still pretty easy to figure out what is what.

[fifthmdec]

Sure, the FOIA on the weapon history is personal. Our transfer of the Ingram M6 went to a C&R holder. I did contact the NFA and asked if they can change it to a C&R weapon. They would not, the examiner states since it states Form 2, that is what they based the transfer status on. I had 30 days to send the NFA proof that this was a C&R transfer. Since I had done a FOIA on the weapon history. It was simple to send in a copy of the original Form 2 and the  next transfer on a Form 5 to a LE agency. Both forms dated in the 50s. POC sold quite a few M6 police models to LE in CA in the 1950s. This weapon went to the Marysville CA PD. The Form 5 did not have that information redacted. Basically, they missed a box. I sent the packet back within 30 days and the transfer was approved. 
 

I could not imagine, putting the transferee through an obvious mistake made by the NFA. That is just one reason, that I choose to submit FOIA requests for the weapons history. 
 

Another example, we sold a Beretta Model 38/42 to a well known dealer. Before we proceeded with the sale. I let him know that the Amnesty paperwork stated that the model as an MP40 and the caliber as 7mm. That’s the information that is on the Form 3. We use eForms. It stated that fact in our inventory in the eForm data base. I did send him a copy of the letter requesting, that a correction be made in the NFRTR. I sent a copy of the Amnesty Form, comparison photos of the weapon next to our MP40. Including the overall length, barrel length and weapon nomenclature in comparison photo. I received a packet a few months later with a copy of a letter and all the photos, stating that, the information presented was approved for a correction to the NFRTR. I forwarded that letter as a copy to the transferee dealer. He was very pleased. That saves him the burden of explaining that the weapon is the same as on the form to the potential customer.

Some customers may not care. In my opinion, why not go the extra mile and have as much information as possible. With many C&R MGs, especially brought back from overseas, from WWII and Korea were deactivated, and made unserviceable at the time of registration. I always let the potential customer know, if the weapon was rendered unserviceable, before the original form was approved and entered into the registry.

That matters to some. But, it matter to me to be honest and forthright with the customer. Indeed, it is a personal choice…

 

[Rekraps]

Agree.  I've gone through the trouble of having the information on several MG's corrected in the registry, and it's kind of a pain in the butt, but certainly makes things easier when selling. 
 

The ATF simply over stamps their approval on your request letter and then next time the gun transfers, the Form will now have the corrected info.