Advice appreciated. Missing machine gunsand where to go for answers

[Chappy]

I need some insight from members who have been there or know of.

Okay, here we go. One of our brethren members and I have traded over the last couple of years. I traded 2 select fires and some $ and he was going to send me a pre-May 1928 and American 180 with some goodies. He told me the guns needed to be transfered from paper for 4s to from 3s. It had been quite a while but we were in tough through texts. Unfortunately I got a call from an under sheriff today letting me know my guns were sold and there is nothing left. I guess he turned himself into the authorities yesterday. He owes me 3 subguns or $31500. He owes some else a lot more. So the guns were sent to him as payment and then he sold them to someone else. Sounds like selling and double sellings guns and not coming up with the goods.

1. Are my sub guns being sold a case of sellng stolen goods?

2. Do I have any recourse in getting the guns back?

I really could use advise from any of you if you have had this happen or if you have hard knowledge of what can be done.

Thanks,

Chappy

[Rekraps]

Gracious I hate to hear these type of stories. Hate to say it, but when I buy SMG's now, from anyone but a retail dealer, I insist that the SMG be taken to a local storefront FFL (Gun shop) and they physically hold it until the ATF approval. Once they have the gun, I do a wire transfer.

Listen my friends, all is well until it isn't. We know each other, but things happen and in this case, it's $31K out the door. 

[Rekraps]

Next question is this: 

Do you have a bill of sale for the guns? Dated, SN description etc? If so, then you may have a case for the new owner not legally owning the guns, and if so, then the local police would have to confiscate the guns from the "new" owner and return them to you. I'd get an attorney. 

[Bridgeport28A1]

Are you able to share who the "brethren member" is?

[BillinBama]

3 hours ago, Rekraps said:

Next question is this: 

Do you have a bill of sale for the guns? Dated, SN description etc? If so, then you may have a case for the new owner not legally owning the guns, and if so, then the local police would have to confiscate the guns from the "new" owner and return them to you. I'd get an attorney. 

Yes, I know it's not nice to kiss and tell, but in this case we should know since others could find themselves in the same situation.

[inertord]

My .02 if you transferred your guns in the NFA Registry to the guy that didn’t pay you, they are no longer your property and Law enforcement has no power to retrieve them from the current NFA Registered Owners. Any funds owed to you would be a civil/criminal matter depending on the jurisdiction and willingness of local prosecutors. 

[Rekraps]

Interesting perspective.  I believe however if the transfer was made after the guns were legally sold, but awaiting ATF approval for transfer then the Form 4’s would be revoked. Plus, Chappy did not say that the ATF had issued Forn 4’s, just that the guns were “sold” again. 

[Chappy]

Rekraps, I am going on what the sheriff told me. I sent him a couple of guns to use before the deal was consumated. At one point I talked with him about sending the guns back. He told me that the Thompson and American 180 he was going to send me were on paper fForm 4s as a part of his fathers estate. Later he told me that he had made a mistake on the Form 4s and it would be a little while. A little while was never.

As for me, I trnsfered on Form 3s directly to his inventory.

[Chappy]

12 hours ago, BillinBama said:

Yes, I know it's not nice to kiss and tell, but in this case we should know since others could find themselves in the same situation.

One other member got ahold of me. He is in the same situation. We have talked and he is being very helpful. we are on the lower end of the fraud. 180K and 150K compared to our 30K and under loss.

[Chappy]

13 hours ago, Bridgeport28A1 said:

Are you able to share who the "brethren member" is?

James Sietsma

[Rekraps]

9 hours ago, Chappy said:

James Sietsma

What was / is his handle on the Forum?

[BillinBama]

11 hours ago, Chappy said:

James Sietsma

I know I've chatted with him in the past, not sure if I've ever done any business with  him, but I don't think I've done any NFA transfers.

[Robert Henley]

On 3/11/2026 at 1:43 PM, inertord said:

My .02 if you transferred your guns in the NFA Registry to the guy that didn’t pay you, they are no longer your property and Law enforcement has no power to retrieve them from the current NFA Registered Owners. Any funds owed to you would be a civil/criminal matter depending on the jurisdiction and willingness of local prosecutors. 

I believe NFA ownership and registration are two different things.  I can own a Title 2 gun and transfer it to, for example, a dealer to sell.  With that said, everyone knows the old saying that possession is 90% ownership.  As we all know, there is a lot of trust involved in buying NFA firearms and, another old saying, only deal with people you trust.  I say the above in part because I transferred three Title 2 guns to a well-known and respected Class 3 dealer for consignment.  It all worked out but it took me a month to get my money after the sell with not a lot of communication in between--which was not comforting.  Not sure I'd do it again.  Maybe get the money in hand first next time.

[Robert Henley]

On 3/11/2026 at 7:30 AM, Rekraps said:

...when I buy SMG's now, from anyone but a retail dealer, I insist that the SMG be taken to a local storefront FFL (Gun shop) and they physically hold it until the ATF approval. Once they have the gun, I do a wire transfer....

 

The challenge with this approach is the SMG would have to be transferred to the dealer first before the dealer could take possession and hold it--which takes time.

P.S, You would also have to have a lot of trust in the dealer the SMG was transferred to because once it's transferred to the dealer what if the dealer then decides to sell your SMG to someone else instead of transfer it to you?  Perhaps an escrow account may be the way to go--I know there are some and think Gunbroker.com offers now just as an example (the buyer deposits the money with the escrow which is released when the gun is received).

Edited March 13 by Robert Henley

[Robert Henley]

On 3/11/2026 at 8:29 AM, Rekraps said:

Next question is this: 

Do you have a bill of sale for the guns? Dated, SN description etc? If so, then you may have a case for the new owner not legally owning the guns, and if so, then the local police would have to confiscate the guns from the "new" owner and return them to you. I'd get an attorney. 

In order to prove theft, there has to be intent to permanently deprive.  If the buyer bought the guns from a licensed dealer and was unaware of the recent history, it's going to be very difficult to prove theft IMO.  It is a good question, however, and I'm not aware of any case law related to it.  Possibly an issue of first impression?  Would be interesting to see if anyone is aware of a similar situation.

Edited March 13 by Robert Henley

[Rekraps]

On 3/13/2026 at 10:52 AM, Robert Henley said:

In order to prove theft, there has to be intent to permanently deprive.  If the buyer bought the guns from a licensed dealer and was unaware of the recent history, it's going to be very difficult to prove theft IMO.  It is a good question, however, and I'm not aware of any case law related to it.  Possibly an issue of first impression?  Would be interesting to see if anyone is aware of a similar situation.

Great point, but theft is not the word I would use. If you buy a stolen car, regardles of what you paid or who sold it, the car is stolen property and you do not own it. Same for WW2 artwork that was taken by the Nazi's and then after the war somehow came in to possession of others, none of which were the original owners. Who owns this stuff? The original owners do, so you are out. Same for the guns, if Chappy bought them, and has a bill of sale, then they are his, even if he never took possession. If the silly owner then sold them to another, Chappy is still the legal owner. That is simply recovery of property principle. Whether or not there was theft is of no importance. 

[Robert Henley]

1 hour ago, Rekraps said:

Great point, but theft is not the word I would use. If you buy a stolen car, regardles of what you paid or who sold it, the car is stolen property and you do not own it. Same for WW2 artwork that was taken by the Nazi's and then after the war somehow came in to possession of others, none of which were the original owners. Who owns this stuff? The original owners do, so you are out. Same for the guns, if Chappy bought them, and has a bill of sale, then they are his, even if he never took possession. If the silly owner then sold them to another, Chappy is still the legal owner. That is simply recovery of property principle. Whether or not there was theft is of no importance. 

When we think of stolen property, we think of the goods being sold below market value and the transaction being "too good to be true."  I guess that means the buyer is out whatever they paid, even if they were unaware and paid market value?  They would have to recover their money from the seller (which may be long gone)?  I'm sure there are plenty of examples of this happening, but if the law is the property belongs to the original owner, which makes sense to me, then everyone downstream loses when the fraud is discovered because the owner gets his or her property back.  Excellent point.

[LDog2012]

From a business perspective, this is a civil matter and the original owner now has a bad debt on his books. You can hire an attorney and obtain a judgement against the buyer, but almost certainly the money is gone and are there is nothing to recover. So, you win on paper, but almost certainly you are out the cash plus legal fees. 

Edited March 15 by LDog2012

[Robert Henley]

2 hours ago, LDog2012 said:

From a business perspective, this is a civil matter and the original owner now has a bad debt on his books. You can hire an attorney and obtain a judgement against the buyer, but almost certainly the money is gone and are there is nothing to recover. So, you win on paper, but almost certainly you are out the cash plus legal fees. 

This also makes sense to me because, unlike the theft of property, the original owner willingly (and that is a key distinction) entered into the transaction and provided his goods to the buyer (with the understanding he would be compensated at some point).  It would be interesting to see if any case law related to this issue.

[Rekraps]

6 hours ago, LDog2012 said:

From a business perspective, this is a civil matter and the original owner now has a bad debt on his books. You can hire an attorney and obtain a judgement against the buyer, but almost certainly the money is gone and are there is nothing to recover. So, you win on paper, but almost certainly you are out the cash plus legal fees. 

Very true, but in this case the guns still exist. Subject siezure by the police (or ATF or FBI) and returned to the rightful owner. Of course we are all assuming that the guy Chappy purchased them from owned them... the second buyer would be out the money, Chappy would get the guns.

[Robert Henley]

For the sake of clarity of what happened, here's my understanding of what happened from the above.

Chappy holds a FFL SOT as does the person who he worked out a trade/cash deal.  They are both FFL SOTs.

Chappy transferred his two select fire guns to the person via a Form 3 (dealer to dealer) transfer (plus cash).

Chappy was waiting on a pre-May Model 1928 Thompson and American 180 (plus some goodies) in return.

Chappy never received the pre-May Model 1928 and American 180 (and presumably anything else).

Chappy learned that his two select fire guns had been sold by the person and Chappy never received anything.

Chappy can feel free to interject if I'm missing anything in my above summary.

We know Chappy's two select fire guns were legally owned by him, and his deal with the person was a legal transaction (all the elements of a legally binding contract appear to have been met: offer, acceptance, consideration, capacity of the parties, and legality of purpose).  The person Chappy had the legally binding contract with did not fulfill his obligation when he did not transfer the pre-May Model 1928 and American 180 (and some goodies).

Based on the above, it appears to me to be a breach of contract which of course would be a civil issue.

The question then becomes because Chappy never received what the parties had agreed can Chappy's select fire guns be considered stolen guns.

I'm not sure of the answer to that question and would need to do some legal research to see if there's any related case law.

We don't know some key facts IMO.  We don't know what the ultimate buyer knew or what he paid for Chappy's two select fire guns.  My assumption is the ultimate buyer thought the two select fire guns belonged to the person Chappy had transferred the guns to and that the ultimate buyer paid fair market value for the two guns.  In my mind, these are relevant questions that would go to determining if the ultimate buyer had any knowledge that the two select fire guns may have been fraudulently obtained.

I think Rekraps believes because Chappy was never compensated as agreed so his two select fire guns constitute stolen property and remain Chappy's property.  (Rekraps can clarify if needed.)  I'm not sure but it seems to me in order for there to be stolen property there has to be a theft and therefore the elements of a theft have to be met.  I would certainly feel like my guns were stolen if I never received compensation for them, but being duped versus someone stealing them may be two different things legally.

If anyone has any experience with this kind of situation it would be good to know how it turned out and by what authority.  I'm sure this is not a first.

Hopefully, Chappy will let us know the ultimate outcome of this unfortunate deal and how it ends up so we all learn something from his experience.

[Rekraps]

You are right! I got the facts wrong! 
 

I’m no attorney so I’ll sit on the fence now as I’m adding confusion to an already confusing situation. 
 

Thanks for the summary. 

[Archmark]

Unfortunately, in business, there's no longer (if there ever was) a place for "trust" (or a handshake). This is just another sad example of what occurs hundreds, if not thousands, of times each day. Caveat Emptor...  

[83Baron]

5 minutes ago, Archmark said:

Unfortunately, in business, there's no longer (if there ever was) a place for "trust" (or a handshake). This is just another sad example of what occurs hundreds, if not thousands, of times each day. Caveat Emptor...  

Precisely. And, despite the markup, the reason why many people will only do business with the big auction houses.

That said, it’s a small community and relatively easy to get clarity on past transaction-ease from a business or individual.

[NFA amnesty]

Why did the fraudster turn himself into the local authorities if he did not commit a crime?   I would contact the local agency for a police report and contact local DA's office to see if  they have a criminal case, explain what happened, etc.  

It's worth a shot...no pun intended.   Worse thing they will say is no.   If you don't contact the agencies involved, we know the answer.