Form 1 correction question

[Ritzypatrick]

I submitted my form 1 (trust) to manufacture an SBR on 11/30. At the last minute at the post office I switched to a fancy priority USPS envelope, and unfortunately my check didn't make it into the new envelope. Please, hold your applause, there's nothing you can say to me that I haven't already said to myself. As soon as I realized I had forgotten the check I called customer service to explain, and the woman I spoke with told me to wait, and it'll come back requesting payment. Good...so 12/15 I received my F1 with a big "RETURN WITHOUT ACTION" stamped across it, and the checklist had missing payment or whatever checked. So all I did was return the form they sent me (assuming RETURN WITHOUT ACTION meant RETURN WITHOUT ACTION) with the check included this time...very carefully. To be clear, nothing was noted as wrong with my form, only missing a the payment. My check was cashed days later. Here's where I'm baffled, on 2/6 I received the form AGAIN with a second (this time in red) "RETURN WITHOUT ACTION X2". The x2 was a nice touch, as if the big red print wasn't enough. This time, the checklist had no trust information checked, and hand written on the side said - 1. You can't reuse a form that has already been disapproved / returned without action. You must resubmit new forms in duplicate. 2. You must include a new payment and copy of trust for each new submission.

Is this typical? How on earth was I supposed to know that? I've heard of people making corrections to the actual FORM by crossing the error out with a pen, and correcting it right on the form. Why on earth do I need to submit EVERYTHING because I forgot the include the check? Has anyone else heard of this? If so, what date do I use for the new form 1? 11/30 to match the original, or current date? And am I going to have to bust balls to get my original 200 back?

[elCapitan]

Ah, the understandable yet futile search for efficiency in bureaucracy.

No idea if this is common, and won't even try to explain the why of it, other than someone trying to just follow policy. Hopefully someone with a bit more experience can speak to the $200. That stinks, sorry.

[Sithlord]

RETURN WITHOUT ACTION is them returning it to YOU without action, not a suggestion that you should return to THEM without action.

RED means disapproved. Remember, the stamp you eventually get back is going to be one of those two forms that you send in. So if it's stamped in red 'RETURN WITHOUT ACTION', I certainly wouldn't want that on my approved form - it would look suspicious to anyone and everyone.

Resubmit new documentation and forms with a new $200 check. The date is the date of submission - they haven't even ENTERED your information into the system, so your wait hasn't even started.

Yes, you will have to bug them about getting your original $200 back. I suggest a phone call.

Of course, since you are using a trust, why not use eForms? It'll be submitted and entered a lot faster, without the 2 week USPS headache.

[Ritzypatrick]

RED means disapproved. Remember, the stamp you eventually get back is going to be one of those two forms that you send in. So if it's stamped in red 'RETURN WITHOUT ACTION', I certainly wouldn't want that on my approved form - it would look suspicious to anyone and everyone.

They sent me a copy of one of the two forms I sent them. I can tell as my signature is not ink. Certainly they could ditch the ROA form when it came back with the missing payment, and carry forward with the clean copies I sent them originally.

Resubmit new documentation and forms with a new $200 check. The date is the date of submission - they haven't even ENTERED your information into the system, so your wait hasn't even started.

I think the most frustrating thing about this lesson learned (aside from being a moron and forgetting the check) is upon receiving the first kickback, I had no clue how to respond. All I got was a form that said ROA with a checklist that pointed in the direction of sending only the missing check. Then a month later after immediately cashing the check, I'm very clearly informed I must submit new forms. Talk about bullsh*t. Sorry - I'm ranting.

Of course, since you are using a trust, why not use eForms? It'll be submitted and entered a lot faster, without the 2 week USPS headache.

This is the route I took earlier tonight. The new eform has already been submitted. I heard stories of wonky caliber selection, and troubles correcting errors so I strayed away from it originally. Ironic right? Thanks very much for your information. It has cleared up a lot.

[Sithlord]

I'm glad everything is at least on a more 'known' trajectory now WRT eForms submission!

As far as the NFA branch is concerned, I have actually found them to be very helpful if you contact them. It may not end in the result you want, but they will take the time to investigate and let you know what to do. We, as the consumer, may not like the requirement, the process, the wait, etc. However, the folks actually examining these forms are not (a) making the laws or (b) going Ruby Ridge/Waco/... on folks. Doesn't mean I wish the ATF and NFA were abolished, but while the rules are in play, play by the rules. I wasn't alive in '34, '68, and I couldn't vote or voice my opinion in '86 (not that I even knew about FOPA then...)

This forum (iunlike MANY others) is at least sympathetic to NFA paperwork mistakes. We will be happy to laugh and share a beer with you. Plant.One might even bring the popcorn...