-
Contributing Member
Neil
My reading of your bolt picture is that the number is a badly stamped “9” which could be taken for an “8”.
Given that you’ve clarified that the rifle serial begins “60” and not ”80” as per the scope mount it’s worth checking what’s been entered on your FAC to ensure it shows the correct serial number. You don’t want any issues arising with your local licensing dept at Police Scotland!
P.s. the link to the earlier thread about the rifle was interesting. The 2013 photos look very like the staging/style of a UK dealer based in SE England (Kent?).
-
Thank You to desperatedan For This Useful Post:
-
06-08-2020 05:39 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
desperatedan
Given that you’ve clarified that the rifle serial begins “60” and not ”80” as per the scope mount it’s worth checking what’s been entered on your FAC to ensure it shows the correct serial number. You don’t want any issues arising with your local licensing dept at Police Scotland!
Thats a very good point......RFD you bought it from likely wrote the number down on your FAC as the one beginning with 8.
-
-
-
Originally Posted by
AngusMcRat
Any advice on legal recourse against the original dealer would be appreciated (I'm
UK based).
Is the dealer UK based? if so talk to him before you consider any "legal" course of action. If he (or she) has any sense they will do the best to help as a bad reputation in the gun world in the UK spreads very quickly.
We all make mistakes me included and it is quite possible that it was purchased as genuine especially if they were not clued up on Enfield Rifles let alone the sniper versions which are now being copied more and more.
If you don't get any joy I suspect that you would have a claim under the sale of goods act with something being incorrectly described, but first of all talk to the dealer. Good luck.
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Buccaneer For This Useful Post:
-
I would agree with Paul. It could well be that the dealer who sold it to you is not that 'au fait' with Enfield snipers & may have bought it in in good faith. I would endorse Paul's advice to have a word with the seller before contemplating anything else.
-
-
Legacy Member
I would agree with Paul. It could well be that the dealer who sold it to you is not that 'au fait' with Enfield snipers & may have bought it in in good faith. I would endorse Paul's advice to have a word with the seller before contemplating anything else.
It might be that whoever bought back in 2013/4 also eventually found out it was a fake, and hawked it around enough RFD's until finding one that wasn't clued up enough to realise and offered a good enough price.
It could also have found its way into a non-clued up RFD via estate disposal after the death of a local FAC holder?
-
-
-
-
Legacy Member
1944 Long Branch No.4 Mk1* T
Gents,
Many thanks for all your comments.
The 2013 photos look very like the staging/style of a UK dealer based in SE
England (Kent?).
That was my immediate thought.
As for the dealer I bought the rifle from, he is UK based and having discovered the back story, may have been used as a pawn by the previous owner of the rifle. I will be writing to the dealer who sold me the rilfe with all the facts that have come to light and fully expect to be told to take a hike if I get a reply at all. Thereafter I have a number of courses of action open to me which I intend to pursue.
As for the Statute of Limitations, S32 states
any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant...........the defendant include references to the defendant’s agent........the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be)
so on the face of it I should be alright although I will take advice on it.
As for the serial number, I will discuss the matter with my local firearms department with whom I have a very good working relationship with as I'm the Police Liaison Officer for one of the clubs I belong to.
I will let you know what happens.
All the best.
Neil
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
AngusMcRat
As for the dealer I bought the rifle from, he is
UK based and having discovered the back story, may have been used as a pawn by the previous owner of the rifle. I will be writing to the dealer who sold me the rilfe with all the facts that have come to light and fully expect to be told to take a hike if I get a reply at all. Thereafter I have a number of courses of action open to me which I intend to pursue.
As for the Statute of Limitations, S32 states so on the face of it I should be alright although I will take advice on it.
Do you still have a printed out copy of the RFD's original advert for the rifle, showing his exact description?
As without that, its just his word against yours and probably not worth bothering to make contact.
If you have a copy of his wording which states its a real one with no vague 'arse covering' phrasing, then yes make contact and see what he says.
-
-
Legacy Member
Can you remember if the RFD was selling it as 'his own' rifle or on behalf of the owner.
Big difference in legal liability.
It is was 'miss-described' and it was his rifle you have some legal come back.
If he was selling it on behalf of the owner he has no responsibility for it as he was simply acting as a broker. The owner is unlikely to have any liability either as it was in effect 'a private sale' and it is Caveat Emptor.
Speak with the RFD but I'd suggest you tread lightly in the first instance as going in 'all guns blazing' may just lead to 'not my responsibility mate'.
Fit for purpose?
The Sale of Goods Act 1979, under which traders must sell goods that are as described and of satisfactory quality, applies to second-hand goods just as it does to new ones. But the level of protection you’ll receive will vary depending on who you are buying from.
If you’re buying a used item on eBay from an official company, for example, you will be protected under the Sales of Goods Act in its entirety. This means that the goods must be of satisfactory qualify (as assessed by a reasonable person, bearing in mind the items are second-hand), as described by the seller and fit for purpose.
This is also the case when buying from any standalone official online retailer – whether the goods are second-hand or new. In fact, in this case, another layer of protection will apply, known as Distance Selling Regulations.
“As you haven’t been able to see the goods, this law states that you have a seven-day cooling off period, which starts from the day after delivery, in which to change your mind,” says Frank Shepherd, spokesperson for the Office of Fair Trading. This means you can get a full refund without having to give a reason – regardless of whether the goods are second-hand or new.
To get additional protection, it’s also wise to use a credit card when making an online purchase from a company, as you will be protected by the credit card company itself under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. The Act provides protection on goods between £100 and £30,000 in value. But even if you just put a deposit on the card, you are still protected for the full amount.
However, if you’re buying from an individual – which constitutes a private sale – the rules are slightly different. For example, the so-called ‘implied terms’ of the Sales of Goods Act only apply to title and description, not to quality. This means the goods must simply correspond with the description, and be legally owned by the seller.
“That means a dress can’t be a size 12 if it was described as a size 18,” says Stephen McGlade, a solicitor at consumer group Which?.
However, if an item is advertised as “a three-year-old bike”, for example, it doesn’t mean it has to work, just that it has to be three years old. In this case, especially when the item has been well-used, the transaction remains a case of caveat emptor, or ‘buyer beware’. “This, put simply, is why you pay a lower price for second-hand goods,” says McGlade.
A bit more here :
Consumer rights – what you need to know - Money Advice Service
Mine are not the best, but they are not too bad. I can think of lots of Enfields I'd rather have but instead of constantly striving for more, sometimes it's good to be satisfied with what one has...
-
-
Advisory Panel
The 60L0 serial number appears original and the lack of a straight line is typical of Long Branch.
The bolt appears to be a 1941 Long Branch bolt which has had the original serial number welded over (a true tragedy) and restamped.
As to whether this was an original Long Branch sniper?
In my view it is 95% certain to be fake...
Sight unseen, the 1944 date, and the serial number make it 85% certain to be fake.
The photos supplied by the owner raise that another 10%, but the last 5% is the problem...
In my view the deliberately faked markings and parts are enough that I wouldn't own it.... but I would like to hold it in my hands and physically look at it...under strong light...
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Lee Enfield For This Useful Post: