TexasCHLforum.com

I am at 142 days and counting with no written letter of denial or explination of delay. at this point it almost seems hopeless!

I'll be interested to see how this goes. I mailed my packet in on June 8 and my online status still says, "Packet Mailed to Applicant".

I emailed DPS, and it was ignored.

I left a voicemail for DPS, and it was ignored.

I emailed DPS again on the same day that I called and held for 90 minutes to talk to somebody (just left the speakerphone on while I worked). The lady answered the phone and said it takes 6 weeks to get my application entered into the system to BEGIN processing. That same day I got a response from my first email inquiry stating:

Your application has not been entered into the system. It is likely going though the processes required before entry. When a completed application is entered you will be sent a confirmation letter with your PIN number.

So we'll see. I know I'm not past the 60 days yet (on a renewal application, nonetheless), but if they're waiting 6 weeks to begin the processing, then that leaves them two weeks to finish processing and get my plastic in the mail.

Luckily my card doesn't expire until November, but it sounds like I could cut that close from others' experiences.

For those of you following the saga, I received a nice email from TDPS customer service assuring me they had not denied my application and that they were still in the background check. I politely responded that by statute I had been denied and that I looked forward to my hearing.

As I have contemplated the statue further, I am wondering whether sending the application to counties other than your current residence is within the perogaties of the DPS. ( i live in Ft. Bend but lived in Harris 4 years ago where my BG check goes on..)

Quite frankly, I'm expecting to have to go to court to force them to have the hearing.

I'll keep you all informed

Cowboyrob wrote:For those of you following the saga, I received a nice email from TDPS customer service assuring me they had not denied my application and that they were still in the background check. I politely responded that by statute I had been denied and that I looked forward to my hearing.

As I have contemplated the statue further, I am wondering whether sending the application to counties other than your current residence is within the perogaties of the DPS. ( i live in Ft. Bend but lived in Harris 4 years ago where my BG check goes on..)

Quite frankly, I'm expecting to have to go to court to force them to have the hearing.

I'll keep you all informed

DPS Got my denial hearing letter on the 3rd called me on the 14th shipped it on the 16th and I got it on the 17th

So far that has not happened in my case. On line system still shows processing and I have not had any additional telephone calls. They received my request for a hearing on the 11th so I have a few more days before the scheduling of the hearing is also beyond the statute. I don't mind being the test case.

I'm sorry you're having to go through this CowboyRob. And, thank you.

Cowboyrob wrote:So far that has not happened in my case. On line system still shows processing and I have not had any additional telephone calls. They received my request for a hearing on the 11th so I have a few more days before the scheduling of the hearing is also beyond the statute. I don't mind being the test case.

You are absolutely doing the right thing. Good luck.

I hate to beat a dead horse again.. but you will never get a denial hearing, unless you are officially denied by dps. so far, no one has had a hearing and no one ever will. Now, it will make them hurry up and expidite the license. It will help speed up things and put more attention on it, but again- You will never get a "denial hearing" in front of a "judge", until you are officially denied by them by their definition of denied. I deal in "REALITY", not what "ought to be".

infoman wrote:I hate to beat a dead horse again.. but you will never get a denial hearing, unless you are officially denied by dps. so far, no one has had a hearing and no one ever will. Now, it will make them hurry up and expidite the license. It will help speed up things and put more attention on it, but again- You will never get a "denial hearing" in front of a "judge", until you are officially denied by them by their definition of denied. I deal in "REALITY", not what "ought to be".

Infoman- I guess my intentions were not clear to you. As noted in the title of this thread, my purpose was to force the issue--get them to act. If everyone did so they would not hold onto applications for almost 6 months. As in crimson's case above, I have now received an email that my license is approved and being printed However, my petition for a writ of mandamus is complete and will be filed on the 30th day if I don't have the license. If we all wait passively and do nothing, then we have no right to expect anything to change.

nitrogen wrote:I wonder what would happen if enough people started doing it...

You would likely see a change...in the statute, not in the processing time.

infoman wrote:I hate to beat a dead horse again.. but you will never get a denial hearing, unless you are officially denied by dps. so far, no one has had a hearing and no one ever will. Now, it will make them hurry up and expidite the license. It will help speed up things and put more attention on it, but again- You will never get a "denial hearing" in front of a "judge", until you are officially denied by them by their definition of denied. I deal in "REALITY", not what "ought to be".

You're missing the point that getting a hearing is not the goal. The goal is getting their CHL.

Cowboyrob, I'm just curious...

1. Are you prepared for the possibility that the JP who presides over your hearing may be personally prejudiced against CHL?

2. Are you prepared for the possibility that, if the JP is prejudiced, then it may result in DPS's perception that their self-assigned "mandate" to slow things down is legitimate after all, and that they don't have to speed things up across the board - which will affect all other applicants whose applications have taken longer than 60 days.

There is strength in numbers, and in cases where you are battling against the state, you don't want to be the nail that's sticking up and gets pounded down. On the other hand, things like class action suits (if the state can even be sued... IANAL and don't claim to know if that's possible) and other actions in which there are large numbers on the "plaintiff" side may force the issue as effectively, or even more effectively, without putting your own CHL status at risk. That is why, were I in your shoes, I would place greater store in Charles Cotton's strategy.

...just a thought...

There is always the possibility of a "bad" judge. But I believe I have an outstanding JP. The issues are legal and the burden is on the state to prove I should not be issued. Not the otherway around. Nor would a decision for the DPS have any negative effects, as they are already delaying and a JP decision does not set any precident. Regarding Mr. Cotton's strategy; I don't really know where Mr. Cotton is with his action(s). I am doing exactly what Mr. Cotton proposed to do, only individually.

The results so far(series of two cases) seem pretty clear: Force the issue with DPS by demanding a hearing and your license gets issued. My only regret is I listened to folks on this board and wasted time calling my legislators rather than demanding a hearing at the earliest time under the statute. Clearly DPS doesn't want to defend itself in these cases. It has no defense. My recommendation to everyone who has been denied by default is to demand a hearing, (in writing, certified- return receipt) NOW. It cost a couple of dollars, all in.

IMHO: The outcome of more individuals pushing this strategy will simply be DPS starting to issue the required "your application has been delayed" letter at the 60 day mark.

I had several conversations with my state representatives during the processing, and they contacted DPS on my behalf. I started this at about the 95 day mark, and had plastic at 115 days. This included the dreaded Harris County background check. During that period, I called DPS directly maybe three times, and they said that they had a "legislative action sheet" or some such thing on me. It did make a difference. CowboyRob, if you had contacted your reps, it's hard to say which option worked. Probably a combination of both. BUT, if enough people start demanding hearings, it's a simple matter for DPS to stay within the law by simply issuing that delay notice. If Charles is working something about the implicit denial provisions, that would potentially put a stop to it.

I hope that no one from DPS is reading this post......

Chip wrote:IMHO: The outcome of more individuals pushing this strategy will simply be DPS starting to issue the required "your application has been delayed" letter at the 60 day mark.

I had several conversations with my state representatives during the processing, and they contacted DPS on my behalf. I started this at about the 95 day mark, and had plastic at 115 days. This included the dreaded Harris County background check. During that period, I called DPS directly maybe three times, and they said that they had a "legislative action sheet" or some such thing on me. It did make a difference. CowboyRob, if you had contacted your reps, it's hard to say which option worked. Probably a combination of both. BUT, if enough people start demanding hearings, it's a simple matter for DPS to stay within the law by simply issuing that delay notice. If Charles is working something about the implicit denial provisions, that would potentially put a stop to it.

I hope that no one from DPS is reading this post......

That doesn't matter. The letter at 60 days still does not allow them to go past the 90 day mark. The 90 day limit applies whether they sent the letter or not. The implicit denial is Not dependant on them not acting at the 60 day mark. It is simply 'If you have not been issued or denied 30 days after the department is required to act (the 60 day mark, so 90 days), you have been denied' plain and simple. The reference to the 60 day mark is only for a time reference, nothing else.