Re: February Applications
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 6:21 pm
Finally, Application completed...License issued. Now just waiting on the plastic. Only 96 days!!!!!


The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
Yes Congratulations are in order, However I am not Jealous I just keep getting madder by the day! I would have never guessed the time frame would be over 100 days.bb281 wrote:Congrats, I am jealous
I agree!! Just so happens we are living in the wrong county when it comes to receiving a CHL......... Maybe one day we will receive them!BriN wrote:Day 113, no problems with the papework - it simply has been in processing status since March 9th. Talked to DPS today... still waiting on background checks to be returned.
I have said it before and I will continue to say it.... Harris County BITES!!!!!
I don't think I'd push the issue, given the highlighted part.rs3texas wrote:According to DPS statutes, don't they have 60 days to approve, deny, or at least give notice as to why licenses haven't been issued? Wouldn't those still waiting after 90 days be automatically denied if the DPS fails to notify them?
Those still waiting deserve answers, and if I were still waiting, I'd darn sure be calling someone requesting status in writing.
(c) Failure of the department to issue or deny a license for a period
of more than 30 days after the department is required to act under
Subsection (b) constitutes denial.[/b][/i]
I don't believe you can just quote that little snippet without having read the full statute which readsTexas Solo wrote:I don't think I'd push the issue, given the highlighted part.rs3texas wrote:According to DPS statutes, don't they have 60 days to approve, deny, or at least give notice as to why licenses haven't been issued? Wouldn't those still waiting after 90 days be automatically denied if the DPS fails to notify them?
Those still waiting deserve answers, and if I were still waiting, I'd darn sure be calling someone requesting status in writing.
(c) Failure of the department to issue or deny a license for a period
of more than 30 days after the department is required to act under
Subsection (b) constitutes denial.[/b][/i]
So if they don't issue because of someone 'pestering' I would imagine that was considered "capricious orISSUANCE OR DENIAL OF UCENSE. (a) The
department shall issue a license to cany a concealed handgun to an
applicant if the applicant meets all the eligibility requirements and
submits all the application materials. The department may issue a
license to cany handguns only of the categories indicated on the applicant's
certificate of proficiency issued under Section 411.189. The
department shall administer the licensing procedures in good faith so
that any applicant who meets all the eligibility requirements and
submits all the application materials shall receive a license. The
department may not deny an application on the basis of a capricious or
arbitrary decision by the department.
(b) The department shall, not later than the 60th day after the date
of the receipt by the director's designee of the completed application
materials:
(1) issue the license;
(2) notify the applicant in writing that the application was denied:
(A) on the grounds that the applicant failed to qualify under the
criteria listed in Section 411.172;
(B) based on the affidavit of the director's designee submitted
to the department under Section 411.176(b); or
(C) based on the affidavit of the qualified handgun instructor
submitted to the department under Section 411.189(c); or
(3) notify the applicant in writing that the department is unable to
make a determination regarding the issuance or denial of a license to
the applicant within the 60-day period prescribed by this subsection
and include in that notification an explanation of the reason for the
inability and an estimation of the amount of time the department will
need to make the determination.
(c) Failure of the department to issue or deny a license for a period
of more than 30 days after the department is required to act under
Subsection (b) constitutes denial.
(d) A license issued under this subchapter is effective from the date
of issuance.
time starts when DPS receives your packet ...thats why certified mail is recomendedKevinf2349 wrote: As a side question....when does the clock start? When the certified mail is delivered? When the DPS cash the check/money order? When you get the pin? Some other time? Thoughts?
I did read the the full statute, and you're probably correct. But my point was that they could exercise that "snippet", which is also a part of the law, snippet or not. They may not be justified in doing so, but do you really care to get in a pissing contest with DPS? It's just not worth it, IMHO.Kevinf2349 wrote:
I don't believe you can just quote that little snippet without having read the full statute which reads
So if they don't issue because of someone 'pestering' I would imagine that was considered "capricious or
arbitrary decision by the department." wouldn't it?
As a side question....when does the clock start? When the certified mail is delivered? When the DPS cash the check/money order? When you get the pin? Some other time? Thoughts?
i agree..according to their statute ,i should be receiving my plastic now,but im expecting it to be around 100 days or so to get it.Texas Solo wrote: They may not be justified in doing so, but do you really care to get in a pissing contest with DPS? It's just not worth it, IMHO.
usa1 wrote:i agree..according to their statute ,i should be receiving my plastic now,but im expecting it to be around 100 days or so to get it.Texas Solo wrote: They may not be justified in doing so, but do you really care to get in a pissing contest with DPS? It's just not worth it, IMHO.
i have not called to complain. im just letting them get it done wen they get it done. not to say i wont be getting tired of waiting ,but i would avoid creating friction unless it starts getting ridiculously long.
just my opinion
you got that right..you know ,some folks who applied in jan. are still waiting, but some who applied in feb. are already getting their plastic. just doesnt seem fair , and i feel bad for them. they have every right to be upset.Kevinf2349 wrote: It is pretty sad that we are even having a discussion about these things, even sadder when you consider that the laws are there for a reason and nobody should be above them, not even the law itself!