Global Rifles taken to court and to the cleaners

[deerman]

Hi guys,

 

I thought long and hard about whether I should post this information on here, but as it is in the public domain and is of public interest, I decided that I should.

 

A customer of mine ordered a 6mm BR SR2 Pfeifer Waffen rifle from Global Rifle early last year and clearly stated the dimensions of thread he wanted, as he intended to use a Quicksilver titanium moderator to keep the weight down, given that the rifle was to be used in his mountain forays in Eastern Europe.

 

The thread specification was a bog-standard M14x1, 15mm long with 2mm undercut and a square shoulder - doh. The promise was that the rifle would be delivered after 8 weeks, but delivery only took place after many excuses and 5 weeks later.

 

The rifle that arrived had a 9mm thread with a 1mm undercut, and was a VERY loose M14x1 - a gunsmith measured it, and in places it was 13.5mm OD. For a barrel that was manufactured by Heym that was a very poor show or GR simply never passed the customer's specifications to the manufacturer.

 

The customer spotted the short thread immediately on delivery and only agreed to take the rifle away on the condition that he could return it should the thread not be suitable for his moderator. On arriving at home he screwed on the moderator and found it to be very wobbly. He made a short video of the fitting and how wobbly the moderator was on his mobile and sent it to me for an opinion. On viewing the video I told him that it would not be safe to shoot the rifle with a moderator attached as there was too much play and that due to the short thread, should the moderator come loose on firing there would be the possibility of following rounds striking the baffles on the inside and it would be anybody's guess where that round would end up, not to mention possible damage to the moderator. I further advised the customer to take rifle and moderator to a local gunsmith for a proper opinion, as I had only seen a video and could not form a proper opinion on the fitting based only on that.

 

That same evening GR sent him and an email acknowledging the problem with the thread and clearly stating that if he thought the rifle was not to his specification they would be happy to refund his money on the condition that the rifle was returned in "as new" condition. A couple of days later the customer took rifle and moderator to his local gunsmith, who confirmed that the fitting was not safe and measured the thread properly. In terms of precision work, it was nowhere near an M14x1 thread. During his inspection, the gunsmith, who had done his apprenticeship at Holland & Holland - so knew a thing or two about quality stocks -, spotted a massive flaw in the stock that had been filled in with wax and lacquered over. GR denied that an offer for a refund was ever made, even despite their own email sent to the customer on the same day he collected the rifle from their premises.

 

After that visit to the gunsmith, the customer sent GR an email availing himself of their offer and stating that he wanted to return the rifle. He received a reply stating that the offer that they had made was for a refund of only £50.00 to cover the cost of shortening the barrel and having a new thread cut!!!

 

On delivery, they had told the customer that the thread could be recut without the need to shorten the barrel - the barrel was already very short and the muzzle was not far from the fore end of the stock. And this was just one of their misrepresentations to this customer.

 

The customer sent countless emails and made countless telephone calls to try and resolve the situation and return the rifle to GR. Then GR stopped answering his calls and would reply to some of his emails in an abusive manner.

 

The situation got to a point that the customer saw no other alternative but to take the matter to the Small Claims Court in hope of a solution. He gave GR ample opportunity to avoid this course of action. They never replied to his emails or faxes, and his recorded delivery letters were sent as having been refused.

 

The customer filed a claim with the Court and was contacted by the court with the suggestion of mediation. He accepted the offer, but mediation was a pointless excise, as GR wanted to have their cake and eat it. A hearing date was set, but a couple of days before that hearing, GR applied for an adjournment on the grounds that they had to fly to Australia for some urgent business with Australian Special Forces!!! Another date was set and my customer submitted his claim and evidence to the Court and waited for GR to submit their defence. When their defence finally arrived it was laughable - for a company who had apparently sought legal advice from two "silks", as they put it.

 

Apart from trying to rubbish my customer's claim, GR stated that the rifle had been extensively fired by my customers, that the blemish on the stock had been caused by the customer and subsequently repaired, that QSUK moderators were imported, that they knew me very well, that Heym had contacted QSM in the USA for advice on thread length, etc., etc.

 

Prior to the case going to Court, GR contacted me and purchased two moderators, a .223 and a .308. There was never any mention of the ongoing legal proceedings or that they intended to use one of the moderator to test the rifle object of legal proceedings.

 

GR said to the customer that they wanted to inspect the rifle and moderator, and my customer agreed to that as long as he was present. On several occasion he tried to make arrangements to meet up with GL halfway from their respective premises at suitable facilities - funny to say that some rifle builders and gunsmith were contacted with a view to using their facilities for the inspection and they refused to have anything to do with GR. GR then applied for a Court Order to inspect the rifle ex-parte. The Order was granted and once again they failed to collect the rifle when arranged. They finally collected the rifle and went on to take it to Proof House to have the rifle proofed with their .30 moderator attached - although the rifle was a 6mm BR.

 

The hearing was held last Thursday - 25th February 2010 - and I was asked to give evidence, along with the gunsmith who checked the rifle and moderator a few days after delivery. My customer had applied to the Court to have the rifle in Court so we could all check fitting, specification, etc.

 

I had wanted to keep well away from any litigation, specially one not directly involving me or my business, but after having read what GR had stated about me and my business in their defence submitted to the Court I finally agreed to give evidence in person - I had already provided a witness statement about having seen the video and the advice given -, even if that meant two days away from my business and from home.

 

During the hearing, on top of what GR had stated in their written defence, they accused my customer of having forged my signature on his FAC - suggesting that the moderator had been sent through the post ?-, and accused me of trading in firearms while not a RFD. Apart from being fabrications, these were clearly desperate attempts to divert the focus on the case to their spurious allegations. They also sought to discredit the gunsmith by trying to undermine his good standing and, therefore, his evidence. I had also checked with my colleagues in the USA about any contact they had with Heym or GR in relation to threading. They categorically denied having ever been contacted by either and searched all their correspondence and emails in order to further back their statement. During our evidence, we also pointed out the fact that the moderator attached to the rifle during proofing had been a .30 calibre moderator - with a much larger bore and a lot more forgiving if there was any misalignment due to improper fitting -, rather than a 6mm one. We were also able to fit the customer's moderator to the rifle and confirm that the fitting wasn't safe, and above all not as specified by the customer on ordering the rifle.

 

Another moderator manufacturer gave evidence on behalf of GR and put their case to the Court. In the end, the judge saw through it all and found it in favour of the claimant, and ordered GR not only to refund the money paid in full - they wanted to keep the unfair £1,000 non refundable deposit, and the judge said that those were unfair terms and that even if accepted would be applicable if the order had been cancelled prior to delivery. The judge further ordered GR to pay the costs and reimburse the expenses and loss of earning incurred by myself and the gunsmith.

 

I believe that this Court decision reassures us all to some extent that. if dealt with properly, we can have our grievances put right. I very often read on forums posts by unhappy customers who have accepted sub-standard products and/or services from traders or suppliers, and feel unable to do anything about it. This may be a case in point that shows that if all else fails and your grievances are not addressed, let somebody in authority decide the issue.

 

Best regards,

 

George

[Streeker59]

I'm so glad to see that justice was served on the day... Well done..

[Orka Akinse]

George

 

Take it from me and my bitter experience, you can get them to court, win your case, be awarded compensation and refunds, as I was, only to find the person responsible declares himself bankrupt so as to avoid paying the court ruling.

 

He is still trading, taking people on Boar shooting holidays and writes in a well know shooting magazine.

 

I still aint got my money so don't bank on yours until its in the bank buddy!

 

They have 28 days to pay and unless they changed the rules, as long as the debt is over £750 [last time I looked] you can file for their bankruptcy on the 29th day.

 

Good luck hope it all works out for you.

 

OA

[deerman]

George

 

Take it from me and my bitter experience, you can get them to court, win your case, be awarded compensation and refunds, as I was, only to find the person responsible declares himself bankrupt so as to avoid paying the court ruling.

 

He is still trading, taking people on Boar shooting holidays and writes in a well know shooting magazine.

 

I still aint got my money so don't bank on yours until its in the bank buddy!

 

They have 28 days to pay and unless they changed the rules, as long as the debt is over £750 [last time I looked] you can file for their bankruptcy on the 29th day.

 

Good luck hope it all works out for you.

 

OA

 

 

Cheque is in the bank, and it´s up to them to declare themselves bankrupt. With their reputation, I think they are struggling enough as it is.

 

Cheers,

 

George

[Alycidon]

Sounds a familer tale, going bust is a to easy way out. Start again in 3 years.

 

As for CCJs. enforcing them can be hard but if you can find someone who owes money to the debtor you can serve that debtor with a garnishee order meaning they have by law to pay into court the amount they owe the guy you have a judgement against.

 

A

[scotsgun]

I read this thread with some trepidation after just discussing a rifle purchase with them. After some more research into their reputation and customer service, i decided not to confirm with the order.

 

Thankyou for the warning.

[Lee]

GR have had this coming to them for some time.... nice to have them put right in their place and that hopefully no one else gets caught out by them anymore.