HQL Warranty Question

I bought a revolver a couple months ago, went though the background check and all. It has since had to go back to the manufacturer for warranty repairs. My question is, if they have to swap the gun out for a different one will I have to have a HQL to receive it from the dealer? This will be coming back after Oct 1st. I hope they can fix it but I think >50% chance they will simply replace it with another one.

(1) In accordance with 27 CFR §178.147, a person not
otherwise prohibited by federal, State, or local law may ship a
handgun to a licensed manufacturer for any lawful purpose, and,
notwithstanding any other provision of federal law, a licensed
manufacturer may return in interstate or foreign commerce to that
person the handgun or a replacement handgun of the same kind and
type.

occbrian said:

(1) In accordance with 27 CFR §178.147, a person not
otherwise prohibited by federal, State, or local law may ship a
handgun to a licensed manufacturer for any lawful purpose, and,
notwithstanding any other provision of federal law, a licensed
manufacturer may return in interstate or foreign commerce to that
person the handgun or a replacement handgun of the same kind and
type.

Click to expand...

If I'm reading this right I should be good-to-go. Thank you

I'm skeptical that the regulation cited by occbrian -- it is 29.03.01.58 in the just-published regulations -- squarely addresses the question posed by AKbythebay. It is pertinent, certainly. But if you read it in context, I think that the meaning is that the manufacturer hasn't violated the transfer laws (federal or state) if he ships a repaired gun to its owner, without the involvement of a licensed dealer such as would otherwise be required. Moreover, the manufacturer may also ship "a replacement handgun of the same kind and type" directly to the owner without going through a dealer -- but in that case, there are further requirements for the manufacturer to comply with the fired-casing requirement that applies to "new" handguns.

However, as of October 1 a separate provision of law, also replicated in a new regulation (29.03.01.26), will say that a person "shall possess" a HQL before he may "receive a handgun." There are some exceptions to that requirement, but no exception spelled out for replacement handguns. As discussed in other threads, the term "receive" is not defined in the law, nor in the regulations. In the cases in which the manufacturer chooses to send a replacement handgun, with a new serial number, it's not entirely clear to me that the HQL requirement will not be deemed to apply.

I agree that the most reasonable interpretation by the enforcers would be to harmonize the new law with the old repair/replacement provision and say that the HQL does not apply to receipt of a replacement handgun -- but the matter is not free from doubt, as the lawyers like to say.

IANAL and this is not legal advice, but if it was me, I'd get the HQL before having them ship a replacement handgun to me. You won't need to take the training -- after all, you already lawfully own a regulated firearm.

If they need to replace it, see if they can give you the same serial number. If so I would think you would be good to go. You would not be "receiving" a handgun, you would simply be getting YOUR handgun returned after warranty work. If they gave you a new serial number, then you would have to have an HQL.
Of course, this is dependent upon the MSP's and AG's interpretation which we all know if completely F'ed up. IANAL.

Dean's point still stands. We need clarification of receive. You can own a firearm and still receive it... Every time someone hands it to you or gives it back to you (gunsmith, manufacturer, etc).

rbird7282 said:

If they need to replace it, see if they can give you the same serial number. If so I would think you would be good to go.

Click to expand...

I will bet lunch that the replacement gun will not have the same serial number. The reason manufacturers send replacements is usually not that the gun cannot be fixed, but that's it cheaper to just grab another off the shelf.

AKbythebay said:

I bought a revolver a couple months ago, went though the background check and all. It has since had to go back to the manufacturer for warranty repairs. . . .

Click to expand...

A Taurus, by any chance?

Well now I'm confused again. I suspect the company (Rossi) will be shipping me a new revolver with a different serial number. The dealer (Fred's Firearm Service - Chestertown, MD) who I have worked with many times in the past tells me that if they send a new gun the transfer would have to go through him. He did not mention anything about the Oct 1st changes. So now I'm starting to get worried that this will be treated as a new "transfer" and I might need the HQL. However this should not be subject to any sort of background check since that ready occurred with the original one. What do you guys think????

bump

Anyone?

If the gun is replaced with a new one with a different serial number, the transfer will need to go through an FFL. (Walther tried to do this to me for other reasons.) It goes to an FFL for only one reason--to process the transfer. If that happens, almost assuredly you will need an HQL.

However, since the guidance, rules, interpretations, and virtually everything about SB281 seems to chang by the hour, who knows?

If they send a replacement it can not be sent directly back to you . It has to go to a FFL and if it is post October 1 then whatever regulations are in effect will have to be followed by you and your FFL. They can not give you the same serial number as it is a newly manufactured handgun.

johnhmpg said:

If they send a replacement it can not be sent directly back to you . It has to go to a FFL and if it is post October 1 then whatever regulations are in effect will have to be followed by you and your FFL. They can not give you the same serial number as it is a newly manufactured handgun.

Click to expand...

This is wrong. As already discussed near the top of this thread, federal law and Maryland law both explicitly allow the manufacturer to ship either a repaired handgun or a "replacement handgun of the same kind and type" directly to the owner, without any involvement by a dealer. Occbrian quoted some of the actual language of the Maryland regulation above -- it is 29.03.01.58(D) in the just-published regulations. The Maryland regulation incorporates the citation to the applicable federal regulation.

However, if the manufacturer chooses to do this, and if the replacement is a "new" (not previously owned by a non-dealer) handgun, then the regulation also requires the manufacturer to submit a fired shell casing to the Maryland State Police by the specified methods, just as a Maryland dealer would be required to do. Some manufacturers prefer not to mess with this, so they ship the gun to a Maryland-licensed dealer and let the dealer handle the shell-casing paperwork. But this is not legally required -- the law allows for both options.

If the handgun was merely repaired, the shell casing requirement does not apply.

Well it is definitely going through my FFL. He shipped it so whatever they send back, whether it's a repair or replacement, will go to him. As I suspected, if it's a new gun with new serial number he can submit the fired shell casing. Rossi does not include a casing with their guns anymore.

So now if I get a new replacement gun it sounds like I'm going to have to get the f-ing license that I was trying to avoid by buying this two months ago. Then I would have to wait God only knows how long to receive it before I can pick up the gun. This is sounding real ducky wonderful...

ddeanjohnson said:

This is wrong. As already discussed near the top of this thread, federal law and Maryland law both explicitly allow the manufacturer to ship either a repaired handgun or a "replacement handgun of the same kind and type" directly to the owner, without any involvement by a dealer. Occbrian quoted some of the actual language of the Maryland regulation above -- it is 29.03.01.58(D) in the just-published regulations. The Maryland regulation incorporates the citation to the applicable federal regulation.

However, if the manufacturer chooses to do this, and if the replacement is a "new" (not previously owned by a non-dealer) handgun, then the regulation also requires the manufacturer to submit a fired shell casing to the Maryland State Police by the specified methods, just as a Maryland dealer would be required to do. Some manufacturers prefer not to mess with this, so they ship the gun to a Maryland-licensed dealer and let the dealer handle the shell-casing paperwork. But this is not legally required -- the law allows for both options.

If the handgun was merely repaired, the shell casing requirement does not apply.

Click to expand...

I stand corrected. What is the form they mention that needs to be filled out?

johnhmpg said:

I stand corrected. What is the form they mention that needs to be filled out?

Click to expand...

You'll find the procedure described in detail in the aforementioned regulation. Basically, the fired casing is sealed in a special envelope. A form is available from the MSP, which is filled out with information about the firearm and the manufacturer, and signed. The manufacturer sends all that to the MSP.

Any manufacturer that ships new handguns to dealers in Maryland already has the envelopes for the shell casings, and quite likely the forms. It's just that they usually send them to the dealers with the unsold guns.