The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Mike, your response doesn't surprise me, I've had 5 other shooters say the same thing and I agree if LanTac made one (or better yet a 10mm) he'd clean up the market.

The actual cost to SGC to replace the upper and lower receiver is peanuts, I can get a retail AR-15 upper in the US for under £50 but he's refused to even repair it.

I have no problem with Shooting Supplies, in fact I bought my Hatsan MPA from them a few weeks ago.

No matter what I do SGC will use the magic "get out of jail free card" by saying home loads have been used and therefore no guarantee.

phaedra1106 wrote:Update.

Just received a letter from the dealer, he has enclosed part of an email from Robert Clarke at SGC.

Basically it says that even if I can somehow manage to find the missing Privi case and show to his satisfaction that it was factory ammo being used the rifle is still not covered by any guarantee/warranty as I have used home loaded ammo in it, from the point of the first home load being used all guarantees/warranties are voided.

He also states that I have shown a reckless disregard for my own and other shooters safety, despite having safely reloaded and shot numerous calibers (including 9mm) for over 35 years.

So, if any LRA9 owners have shot anything but factory ammo your rifle is not covered for any subsequent problems no matter what the cause.

I will of course be passing this on to my solicitor and seeing where we go from here.

I would not trust Bob Clarke as far as I could throw him. (Despite myself being able to bench press a considerable amount of weight, I doubt it would be more than six inches.)

During the first 9mm debacle two years ago Clarke suggested I had modified my rifle to defeat the lever release system and my fac would be revoked. This was despite him not having seen it, as it was in police custody. I informed the police of Clarke's allegation and asked them, during their examination of the rifle, to pay particular attention to the lever release mechanism. They did not find any suggestion what so ever that the mechanism had been tampered with. When he finally replaced the section 5 version with a section 1 variant I even had to pay the RFD transfer fee, despite this epiosde being entirely SGC's fault. Why did he adopt this attitude?

Clarke was extremely upset because I was openly sharing my experiences with his company on several internet shooting forums. I rejected the rifle under the Sale of Goods Act, and sent a pre-litigation letter asking for the return of my money. He was not happy at all. This was exercebated when I shared with people the seizure by Devon & Cornwall Constabulary of the 9mm rifles Clarke had told people to send back to him, when ACPO determined they were section 5. Clarke was a section 5 dealer, but, at that time, did not hold section 5 ab(self loading or pump action rifle) authority. As a result he was not in lawful possession of those rifles which had been returned. SGC said this was a technicality. I think he also saw the Sale of Goods Act as a technicality as well.

Ceri

It's a shame, I'd quite fancied one of these but I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole after hearing all this.

Nothing surprises me when it comes to SGC and their sadist version of 'customer service'.

Hope you get sorted without too much more hassle smile2

Can't see it getting sorted at all, so far I'm £1400 out of pocket and no rifle.

Where is the rifle?

TattooedGun wrote:Where is the rifle?

...for a mere £1400, it CAN be in YOUR safe!

saddler wrote:

TattooedGun wrote:Where is the rifle?

...for a mere £1400, it CAN be in YOUR safe!

All the different bits though? :lol: :lol:

phaedra1106 wrote:Can't see it getting sorted at all, so far I'm £1400 out of pocket and no rifle.

That's really bad news, Jeff. I feel for you, I really do.

I'm sorry, I really don't want to, but, I did tell you so!

On the brightside, you now know full well how Bob Clarke conducts his business. Go after him with the same attitude. That said though, you brief will fully guide you on this, but I still think that that your course of action is not towards SGC, but your dealer.....

As bad a taste as that leaves in the mouth, I believe that most consumer legislation in regards to refunds, returns, not fit etc lie with the retailer....

Sim G wrote:

phaedra1106 wrote:Can't see it getting sorted at all, so far I'm £1400 out of pocket and no rifle.

That's really bad news, Jeff. I feel for you, I really do.

I'm sorry, I really don't want to, but, I did tell you so!

On the brightside, you now know full well how Bob Clarke conducts his business. Go after him with the same attitude. That said though, you brief will fully guide you on this, but I still think that that your course of action is not towards SGC, but your dealer.....

As bad a taste as that leaves in the mouth, I believe that most consumer legislation in regards to refunds, returns, not fit etc lie with the retailer....

Yip - even though the retailer has been giving you lots of assistance, your contract under English Law is with them
There is also an EEC Law about goods must be refunded if they fail within 5 years...

The RFD that sold the gun to you will then have to pursue SGC as HIS contract is with SGC

Good luck with it