• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Petersburg Clerks office at it again.

Status
Not open for further replies.
peter nap

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Grapeshot said:
You have a point TFred - still no teeth/penalty in the law.

Just a certain amount of public acknowledgement/disclosure that they aren't doing there job. Only effective if they care about having a light focused on them.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if a Writ Of Mandamus would work in the first place. There has been no official application made to rule on.

What we need to do is figure a way to get a case number for an application that was not accepted.
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
peter nap said:
I'm wondering if a Writ Of Mandamus would work in the first place. There has been no official application made to rule on.

What we need to do is figure a way to get a case number for an application that was not accepted.
Click to expand...
I really think there is something significant about the clerk essentially discarding a court document. The return receipt of the mail would seem to be important to establish that he did send it in, and they received it. It sure seems to be problematic that a clerk gets to decide what is an official filing and what is not.

Now how you go about holding them to account is another question altogether.

TFred
 
user

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
A writ of mandamus is an order requiring a public official to do his job. The reason it "didn't work" in that other case is that the public official did do the job, after the petition was filed; hence the case became moot. Probably the same thing that would happen here. There are a lot of folks with their noses in the public trough who think they can do what they want because of the cost of making them do what they should; and when you force 'em with respect to that one issue, it makes no change in their behavior generally, because they know that less than one percent of the population with take them to task. Perhaps a suit for malfeasance in office would work better? The Circuit Court Clerk has no authority, except for limited cases involving land records, to determine whether or not to accept papers for filing. The job is to accept papers for filing and there's a statute that says so, and which says that if there's any question about the propriety of the filing, that's for the judge to determine.
 
B

builtjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
323
Location
South Chesterfield, VA
As the Clerk has not returned PVC's phone calls thus far, I have sent her an email explaining that her office's requirements are unlawful, with code cites. We shall see if she bothers to respond.
 
Old Virginia Joe

Old Virginia Joe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
365
Location
SE Va., , Occupied CSA
we were forwarned . . . .

Isn't this whole story just a mild example of EXACTLY what our founders tried to warn us of when they said NOT to TRUST government, and to jealously guard our Liberties? Am I wrong?

And we have fellow Americans that call us paranoid, about preserving our rights in this country.

I have very deep roots in Petersburg, back to 1832. It was my own Mother's hometown. I hate to hear how far this place has fallen in my own lifetime. It makes me sick, such a once proud city, left to be run by these incompetents and (better not say it).
 
2a4all

2a4all

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,846
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
Loudon County may be making the same mistakes

From the VCDL Alert Update 3/14/2013

Contact: Liz Mills, Director of Media Relations and Communications,
571-251-5568 (mobile)
Liz.mills@loudoun.gov

LCSO & Clerk of Circuit Court Advise Residents of New Concealed Handgun Permit Application Process

Loudoun County, VA- In an effort to better streamline the process for applying for a concealed handgun permit, Loudoun County Sheriff Mike Chapman and Loudoun County Clerk of the Circuit Court Gary M. Clemens are advising residents of changes in the application process to obtain the permit that will take effect on February 25, 2013.

"I am happy to work with the Circuit Clerk of the Court to streamline and expedite the concealed permit process," said Sheriff Chapman. "Gary Clemens and I are always looking for ways to improve service to the community," added Chapman.

In order to apply for a concealed handgun permit, residents are asked to print out an application on the Virginia State Police website at www.vsp.state.va.us
and click on Forms & Publications and then click on Firearms. Here you will find a downloadable version of the application for a concealed handgun permit. You can also download the application from the Clerk of Circuit Court website at www.loudoun.gov/clerk
and click on Concealed Handgun Permits on the left-hand side of the home page.

Residents may also pick up an application at the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Administrative Office located on 880 Harrison Street in Leesburg, VA, the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office Dulles South Station located at 25216 Loudoun County Parkway in Chantilly, VA, or the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court located at 18 East Market Street in Leesburg, VA.

The completed application must be filled out in black ink only, and residents are asked to take the application to the Clerk of the Circuit Court's Office to complete and/or file their applications. Residents must also provide their driver's license and proof of training for new applications or your old permit for renewals.

"I value the partnership and collaboration with Sheriff Mike Chapman and his leadership team as together we are attempting to provide better services to our citizens," said Gary M. Clemens, clerk of the circuit court. "Streamlining the application process for the concealed handgun permits is just one of several ways we are teaming up for the benefit of our residents."

The fee for the applications process is $40.50. Credit card, cash, and check payments are accepted. The Clerk of the Circuit Court does not accept packets after 4PM. It takes up to 45 days for your application to be processed by the court.

For more information about obtaining a concealed handgun permit, please visit http://sheriff.loudoun.gov/handgunpermit.​

Apparently, they've overlooked the mail-in option, nor can they require an applicant to present a previous CHP for a renewal.
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
2a4all said:
From the VCDL Alert Update 3/14/2013


The completed application must be filled out in black ink only, and residents are asked to take the application to the Clerk of the Circuit Court's Office to complete and/or file their applications. Residents must also provide their driver's license and proof of training for new applications or your old permit for renewals.

For more information about obtaining a concealed handgun permit, please visit http://sheriff.loudoun.gov/handgunpermit.​

Apparently, they've overlooked the mail-in option, nor can they require an applicant to present a previous CHP for a renewal.
Click to expand...
The article has flaws, especially in the bolded part, I left in the quote. The website does seem to be more accurate, including details on the mail-in option and also providing the proper procedure for a renewal (no mention is made that your old permit is required).

The article is wrong when they mention that a driver's license is required. The web page does not specifically state that, and I believe the confusion may be over the fact that the application must be notarized. A Notary Public must establish the identity of the person for whom they are notarizing. Unless the notary happens to know you personally, that means you will have to show them some form of ID that convinces them that you are who you say you are. In most cases that will be a driver's license. Since the Clerk's office will notarize your application for you if you have not already had it done, that is where they would need to see your ID. But ID is not required to simply turn in your completed application to the Clerk.

I'd be willing to bet that there are still Clerks who violate the law and require an ID to accept the completed application.

TFred
 
2a4all

2a4all

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,846
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
TFred said:
The article has flaws, especially in the bolded part, I left in the quote. The website does seem to be more accurate, including details on the mail-in option and also providing the proper procedure for a renewal (no mention is made that your old permit is required).

The article is wrong when they mention that a driver's license is required. The web page does not specifically state that, and I believe the confusion may be over the fact that the application must be notarized. A Notary Public must establish the identity of the person for whom they are notarizing. Unless the notary happens to know you personally, that means you will have to show them some form of ID that convinces them that you are who you say you are. In most cases that will be a driver's license. Since the Clerk's office will notarize your application for you if you have not already had it done, that is where they would need to see your ID. But ID is not required to simply turn in your completed application to the Clerk.

I'd be willing to bet that there are still Clerks who violate the law and require an ID to accept the completed application.

TFred
Click to expand...
You'd likely win. When I renewed my CHP, the clerk informed me that she'd need to see a photo ID. When I asked why, she said "...so that we can tell that you're who you say you are...". Didn't have a response when I told her I was mailing in the application. She also said that she'd need to see a copy of my current CHP, or if none, then some proof of competency. When I told her that, for a renewal, the application didn't require a copy of the old CHP, she said "...or we could just look it up...". I mailed in the app and a check, and everything went as expected.
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
2a4all said:
You'd likely win. When I renewed my CHP, the clerk informed me that she'd need to see a photo ID. When I asked why, she said "...so that we can tell that you're who you say you are...". Didn't have a response when I told her I was mailing in the application. She also said that she'd need to see a copy of my current CHP, or if none, then some proof of competency. When I told her that, for a renewal, the application didn't require a copy of the old CHP, she said "...or we could just look it up...". I mailed in the app and a check, and everything went as expected.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, not very often, but maybe eventually, if you stare at all the pieces long enough, the picture might just start to emerge!

The mail-in provision should be all the logical proof any barely-competent person should need to realize that you can't require a photo ID to merely file a complete application. :)

TFred
 
B

builtjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
323
Location
South Chesterfield, VA
Why is it so difficult for Clerks to simply follow the law, as it is plainly written, without imposing a bunch of extra BS?

Also, in my situation, do I have to wait for the 45 day period to be over before proceeding with the mandamus? The clerk is clearly refusing to do their job by refusing application by mail.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Last edited:
skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
builtjeep;1908467 .... Today said:
This is the trigger event you needed to start the process. Since First Class Mail is accepted in many instances as "proof" of delivery or of service the envelope and contents are your prima facie evidence 1) that you had submitted the application, and 2) that the Clerk refused to process it according to law. While post-it notes are not often accepted as evidence, you probably can get this one into the record since it has a signature.

stay safe.
Click to expand...
 
T

Tosta Dojen

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
183
Location
Roanoke, Virginia, USA
builtjeep said:
Also, in my situation, do I have to wait for the 45 day period to be over before proceeding with the mandamus? The clerk is clearly refusing to do their job by refusing application by mail.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that there are two approaches you could take.

First, you can take the position that the clerk has failed to execute his duty to receive and file a paper that was properly presented for filing and accompanied by the correct fee. User has indicated that there exists a statute establishing that duty, so you should be able to file a petition for a writ of mandamus immediately, as the clerk has already breached his statutory duty. (I haven't been able to locate this statute, however -- I'd appreciate a citation.)

Alternatively, you could take the position that your application was filed when it was received by the clerk, and that he's failing his duty to render a decision on your application. This is a plausible argument, but strikes me as the less productive approach. Under this argument, the clerk has not breached his statutory duty until 45 days have passed, which means that you won't be able to take action right away. It's also unproductive in the sense that the clerk won't actually be able to fulfill that duty, because he no longer possesses the application he needs to do so. That might actually serve as a defense against mandamus, as there exists a general principle that the law can't require something that's literally impossible. ("Lex non cogit ad impossibilia.")

In short, the latter approach seems unnecessarily circuitous, and more problematic for you. If it were me, I'd look into the former approach instead.
 
B

builtjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
323
Location
South Chesterfield, VA
I'll be off the radar for a little while. My wife and I welcomed Madeline Anne Mcneill into the world at 9am this morning. :)

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top