Clerks that don't follow the code

[builtjeep]

Looks like I won't be making it to the city council meeting tonight, wife is not feeling well and the baby is being fussy. :-/

 

[grylnsmn]

Today is 180 days before my permit is due to expire. As such, tomorrow I am mailing in my application to the Fairfax Circuit Court, and I've decided to test their extralegal requirements.

Below is the text of the letter that I am including:

To Whom It May Concern:

Enclosed is an original copy of my Application for Concealed Handgun Permit (SP-248) to renew my Concealed Handgun Permit. Also enclosed is a money order in the sum of $50.00, as required by §18.2-308.03 for this renewal. As requested on the application, a listing of my previous addresses for the past 5 years is:

[redacted]

§18.2-308.02 states “No information or documentation other than that which is allowed on the application in accordance with this section may be requested or required by the clerk or the court. “ As such, I am submitting only the information and documentation explicitly required by the application. As the application only requires “documentation that demonstrates your competence with a handgun” for “initial permits only”, and my application is not an initial permit, I am not including a copy of my current permit. I am also not submitting any additional copies of my application, nor any envelopes (self-addressed, stamped, or otherwise), as such are not required by the application, nor by law.

As stated in §18.2-308.04(C), you are required to issue the permit by mail within 45 days of receipt of my application, unless I am determined to be disqualified. As I will be mailing this locally today, Wednesday, September 18, 2013, I expect that you will receive it no later than Friday, September 20, 2013. This means that you are required to mail my renewed permit no later than Monday, November 4, 2013.

Before I send the letter tomorrow (on my way home from work, as I'm going to get our HR person to notarize it for me), is there anything I'm missing? Suggested improvements?

 

[TFred]

The whole point of this particular section of code is to ensure that you don't have any gaps, or overlap in your valid permit dates. You may want to mention that you expect the new permit to become effective on the day after your old permit expires.

ETA: Just a personal thought, and perhaps this is moot to some extent if we know this office does not follow the rules, but the tone of your letter is rather adversarial. And maybe that is appropriate. If it were me, I would try to be a little more polite, perhaps outlining each of your actions as according to the code, and then noting each exception to any published direction they may have on a website, etc. Just a thought.

TFred

 

[grylnsmn]

The whole point of this particular section of code is to ensure that you don't have any gaps, or overlap in your valid permit dates. You may want to mention that you expect the new permit to become effective on the day after your old permit expires.

ETA: Just a personal thought, and perhaps this is moot to some extent if we know this office does not follow the rules, but the tone of your letter is rather adversarial. And maybe that is appropriate. If it were me, I would try to be a little more polite, perhaps outlining each of your actions as according to the code, and then noting each exception to any published direction they may have on a website, etc. Just a thought.

TFred

I'll add the bit about the effective date.

About a year ago, when he declared his candidacy for AG, I had an email back-and-forth with John Frey, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, asking why his office was imposing extralegal requirements for CHP applications and why we should believe his statements about supporting the Second Amendment when his actions to date do not support that. (Incidentally, I submitted my question to his campaign website, but I received a reply from his government email.)

Based on his responses at that time, I decided to take a more confrontational approach. He made it clear before that he feels he can ignore the actual law "for efficiency". I wanted the law stated and cited explicitly so he can't claim to be ignorant of it.

 

[builtjeep]

From what I've read of others applying in FFX, they will not refuse/return your application if you don't send the SASE, but they refuse to change the wording on their site stating it as a requirement. They are fully aware that they are violating the law, but as long as they don't actually enforce the rule on anyone who is aware that it's illegal then they don't have to worry about going to court.

Better option would be to send the application/MO sans the letter and see what they do, in the unlikely event that they do return it, you would have grounds to take further action. But I doubt they will be so foolish.

 

[TFred]

From what I've read of others applying in FFX, they will not refuse/return your application if you don't send the SASE, but they refuse to change the wording on their site stating it as a requirement. They are fully aware that they are violating the law, but as long as they don't actually enforce the rule on anyone who is aware that it's illegal then they don't have to worry about going to court.

Better option would be to send the application/MO sans the letter and see what they do, in the unlikely event that they do return it, you would have grounds to take further action. But I doubt they will be so foolish.

In other words, why tip them off that it's a test!

TFred

 

[grylnsmn]

From what I've read of others applying in FFX, they will not refuse/return your application if you don't send the SASE, but they refuse to change the wording on their site stating it as a requirement. They are fully aware that they are violating the law, but as long as they don't actually enforce the rule on anyone who is aware that it's illegal then they don't have to worry about going to court.

Better option would be to send the application/MO sans the letter and see what they do, in the unlikely event that they do return it, you would have grounds to take further action. But I doubt they will be so foolish.

I decided to follow this approach. I still included a letter, but it consisted of nothing more than stating that I was submitting the application and MO for my renewal and providing a list of my current and previous addresses covering the last 5 years.

If there's a problem, I expect to hear back next week. If not, I expect to have my renewed permit by Nov 4.

 

[roscoe13]

providing a list of my current and previous addresses covering the last 5 years.

Why did you submit to that extralegal requirement?

Roscoe

 

[grylnsmn]

Why did you submit to that extralegal requirement?

Roscoe

It's not extralegal. The SP-248 (7-1-2013) form specifically states: "3. Residential address (Attach a separate listing of all addresses within the last 5 years)". 18.2-308.02(A) states "No information or documentation other than that which is allowed on the application in accordance with this section may be requested or required by the clerk or the court."

It is requested on the form, and so that means that they can request the information. That means that it's not an extralegal requirement.

 

[roscoe13]

It's not extralegal. The SP-248 (7-1-2013) form specifically states: "3. Residential address (Attach a separate listing of all addresses within the last 5 years)". 18.2-308.02(A) states "No information or documentation other than that which is allowed on the application in accordance with this section may be requested or required by the clerk or the court."

It is requested on the form, and so that means that they can request the information. That means that it's not an extralegal requirement.

Sorry. my mistake...

Roscoe