builtjeep
Regular Member
I emailed and called Mr. Valerio, no response to either.
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
-
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.
-
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.
Clerks that don't follow the code
- Thread starter peter nap
- Start date
builtjeep
Regular Member
video on fox35 in a few minutes, and on 12 news at 11pm. Video is more slanted than the article, just in the way they present it.
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
From a VCDL.org Alert..
Nice job to all involved! Congrats! :banana:
**********************************************************
1. VCDL VICTORY! Petersburg Circuit Court Clerk caves before Writ of Mandamus case
heard!
**********************************************************
After VCDL had a petition for a Writ of Mandamus issued against her, I have just received
word that the Circuit Court Clerk of Petersburg, Ms. Braxton, has sent a letter to our
attorney indicating that she is going to follow Virginia law on issuing CHPs! She will
now be accepting renewals through the mail and will ask for only one check for $50 total.
Looks like Ms. Braxton's legal council told her that she was going to lose when the
Virginia Supreme Court ruled on the case.
I can't believe it went this far, quite frankly. But we fixed the problem.
TRUST BUT VERIFY
VCDL is now waiting to see if member Michael McNeill, who has reapplied for his CHP via
the mail, gets his permit issued.
If you are a Petersburg CHP holder, or know one, keep us posted as to how your renewals
through the mail are processed.
Nice job to all involved! Congrats! :banana:
**********************************************************
1. VCDL VICTORY! Petersburg Circuit Court Clerk caves before Writ of Mandamus case
heard!
**********************************************************
After VCDL had a petition for a Writ of Mandamus issued against her, I have just received
word that the Circuit Court Clerk of Petersburg, Ms. Braxton, has sent a letter to our
attorney indicating that she is going to follow Virginia law on issuing CHPs! She will
now be accepting renewals through the mail and will ask for only one check for $50 total.
Looks like Ms. Braxton's legal council told her that she was going to lose when the
Virginia Supreme Court ruled on the case.
I can't believe it went this far, quite frankly. But we fixed the problem.
TRUST BUT VERIFY
VCDL is now waiting to see if member Michael McNeill, who has reapplied for his CHP via
the mail, gets his permit issued.
If you are a Petersburg CHP holder, or know one, keep us posted as to how your renewals
through the mail are processed.
builtjeep
Regular Member
Still more than a little annoyed. I sent my original application well within the 90-180 day window, which has now passed. But I guess victory is victory. Someone want to foia the clerks office for the new policy in writing?
Not holding my breath on the 45 day limit.
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 2
Not holding my breath on the 45 day limit.
Sent from my XT912 using Tapatalk 2
TFred
Regular Member
They held out as long as they could without paying any money.
The SCOVA will now reject the Mandamus, because the complaint is moot, thus denying the plaintiffs their award of legal fees and court costs.
This is why we MUST add serious teeth to preemption... teeth that bite the backside of those PERSONALLY involved.
Even the Clerks of the Courts are playing the "you might beat the rap but you have to pay for the ride" game.
TFred
The SCOVA will now reject the Mandamus, because the complaint is moot, thus denying the plaintiffs their award of legal fees and court costs.
This is why we MUST add serious teeth to preemption... teeth that bite the backside of those PERSONALLY involved.
Even the Clerks of the Courts are playing the "you might beat the rap but you have to pay for the ride" game.
TFred
Last edited:
va_tazdad
Regular Member
I just hope
She enjoyed the publicity on how stupid she had been. I doubt she will process applications "in a timely fashion". More likely she will hold all until the very last she can.
She enjoyed the publicity on how stupid she had been. I doubt she will process applications "in a timely fashion". More likely she will hold all until the very last she can.
builtjeep
Regular Member
I will post the letter from her attorney's as soon as I get a copy of it. Currently, the case still shows on the supreme court case information site. Thursday would be her last day to file whatever she is going to file with the court.
I'm not sure exactly how it will go from here, but I will be keeping tabs. I know at least one person who will be renewing by mail in the coming months. I will also be covering the fee for a friend to apply, with the stipulation that no extra legal steps be complied with. No photocopying of ID, no going to the police station, etc.
Thanks again to all involved, no matter how small the role.
I'm not sure exactly how it will go from here, but I will be keeping tabs. I know at least one person who will be renewing by mail in the coming months. I will also be covering the fee for a friend to apply, with the stipulation that no extra legal steps be complied with. No photocopying of ID, no going to the police station, etc.
Thanks again to all involved, no matter how small the role.
Given that her "change in policy" is tantamount to an admission that they were failing to comply with the legal requirements, and given that this particular situation allowed for recovery of legal fees, then why can't those still be recovered? I'm not an attorney and didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night....but wouldn't the fact that her actions (and all the documentation of attempts to get her to comply with the law) be something that was still actionable with regards to recovering costs? I'd be interested in hearing User's take on that.
And in the back of my mind every time I read about one of these "public officials" not doing their job, malfeasance comes to mind and wondering what it would (finally) take for someone to be able to take an action based on that. Has anyone here ever pursued something like that -- what does it take and what can be done wouldn't there be some sort of a process in place to at least allow for the recall/removal of an elected official for malfeasance???
I agree though, absent some real teeth it does seem like this then is fast becoming the new version of "beat the rap but paying for the ride."
And in the back of my mind every time I read about one of these "public officials" not doing their job, malfeasance comes to mind and wondering what it would (finally) take for someone to be able to take an action based on that. Has anyone here ever pursued something like that -- what does it take and what can be done wouldn't there be some sort of a process in place to at least allow for the recall/removal of an elected official for malfeasance???
I agree though, absent some real teeth it does seem like this then is fast becoming the new version of "beat the rap but paying for the ride."
Not that I'll be paying any attention, but just to pour a little salt on the wound...if I were to try to keep up with her actions it would be difficult because she is now EXEMPT from the Government in the Sunshine laws. I can't FOIA anything involving the individual applications. I did find a very small crack to peek through but it has cost some research money so far whereas just the applications and permit issue dates were pretty much free once upon a time.
She can operate in secret now and that's always a bad thing to let Government do.
Salt on the wound, and that which raises blood pressure. It's getting to the point when I read here in this forum some of the things going on that I think of what I've read in the many historical accounts of events leading up to the Revolutionary War. And I particularly appreciate Thomas Jefferson quotes, given not only his role in that but also due to his viewpoints expressed while Governor of Virginia. And this favorite quote certainly fits well with all of this:
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson
That's true TFred but I don't have anything to monitor yet either. The money I spent so far was to see what was involved in tracking issues via the crack and even then, I can't get specifics, just numbers.
July 1st is less than a month away so all new applications will fall within it during the 45 day processing period and be secret. What good are teeth in laws if you can't find anything to sink them into.
The saving grace is that it only pertains to CHP information. If I had any small part in Builtjeeps case it was to support Grapeshot and VCDL and because Builtjeep deserves better than the treatment he got.
CHP's aren't my concern so the secrecy isn't going to keep me awake at night.
builtjeep
Regular Member
Just got the letter from the attorney. This is BS, there is no admission, no mention of correcting the procedure, etc. I hope I'm missing something BIG behind the scenes.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4fwnOFVn4k4bFZZSWZ2MjZLelk/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4fwnOFVn4k4bFZZSWZ2MjZLelk/edit?usp=sharing
builtjeep
Regular Member
Try it now.
Nope!
Wait a freakin second -- it's worse than that isn't it? Am I not reading that this letter is essentially telling you to now resubmit an application? What about the one that WAS already submitted, that is the basis for your lawsuit??? Am I in the twilight zone here???
It is there -- are you logged in? I couldn't see it until I logged in (even though I was supposed always logged in to my Google account).