CFR's "Own Rules" and non-compliance with the FCA

[Hush85]

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but the fact that the 90 working days starts from when you hand in and pay for your licence application. Not from when your DFO decides to capture it on the system.

According to CFR, my app is on 74 working days.
According to my receipt my app is on 94 working days.

[MTTSS]

What about the fact that before, we could apply for our competency and licence in one go. Now we have to do it separately

FCA
6. Competency certificates, licences, permits and authorisations

(1) The Registrar may issue any competency certificate, licence, permit or authorisation contemplated in this Act -

(a) on receipt of an application completed in the prescribed form, including a full set of fingerprints of the applicant; and

(b) if the applicant complies with all the applicable requirements of this Act.

(2) Subject to section 7, no licence may be issued to a person who is not in possession of the relevant competency certificate.

Note: There is no prohibition contained in the legislation against the submission of a license application with the competency certificate application.

Let’s look at the official explanation that relates to the completion of the SAPS 271 form:

https://www.saps.gov.za/services/fla...lish/ei271.pdf


SECTION G: PARTICULARS OF APPLICANT
(Complete only the section that has bearing on
PARTICULARS OF EXISTING COMPETENCY CERTIFICATE
(Indicate with an X)
The applicable type of competency certificate issued to the
applicant must be indicated with an X in paragraphs G 1.1, 1.2,
1.3 and 1.4, for example:
A Competency certificate to trade in firearms X
1.5 Competency certificate number
The number of the competency certificate issued to the
applicant must be recorded in paragraph G 1.5.
1.6 Date of issue
The date on which the existing competency certificate was
issued must be recorded in paragraph G 1.6.

Note: the use of the word “existing” in the SAPS 271 form and the official explanation is a pointer to the fact that it was contemplated that the applicant may not have a competency certificate number yet at the time that he completes the SAPS 271 form and submits it to the DFO.

So in a nutshell, indeed this is a good example where they have now made up their own rules that is not provided for in the FCA and which also go against the way that they previously dealt with this issue.

[MTTSS]

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but the fact that the 90 working days starts from when you hand in and pay for your licence application. Not from when your DFO decides to capture it on the system.

According to CFR, my app is on 74 working days.
According to my receipt my app is on 94 working days.

First of all, the "working days" concept in itself is not provided for in the FCA.

Days mentioned in the FCA, being an act of parliament is interpreted in terms of the Interpretation Act to mean calendar days.

There are many pointers in the FCA that the expectation is 90 calendar days for a license application to be finalised from the date that it was submitted (the FCA places value on this date elsewhere) to the point where you have your card in hand, for instance where it states that renewal applications have to be handed in at least 90 days before the expiry of the license.

CFR will apply the law strictly if you have missed the 90 calendar days deadline, as we have seen... What is good for the goose...

Later on, CFR itself issued a directive that states that the license application needs to be finalised in 12 weeks. A copy of that has been posted on the forum at some stage). This translates to 84 calendar days.

That was the last official instruction that we are aware of.

The concept of 90 "working days" should therefore be rejected.

It is an "own rule" that goes against the expectations of the FCA and their own official policy.

[Hush85]

Wow...thanks MTTSS.
Doesn't change the fact that I don't have my license.

But, I have contacted GOSA, sent them relavent info and they are assisting

[Abdul Adam]

First of all, the "working days" concept in itself is not provided for in the FCA.

Days mentioned in the FCA, being an act of parliament is interpreted in terms of the Interpretation Act to mean calendar days.

There are many pointers in the FCA that the expectation is 90 calendar days for a license application to be finalised from the date that it was submitted (the FCA places value on this date elsewhere) to the point where you have your card in hand, for instance where it states that renewal applications have to be handed in at least 90 days before the expiry of the license.

CFR will apply the law strictly if you have missed the 90 calendar days deadline, as we have seen... What is good for the goose...

Later on, CFR itself issued a directive that states that the license application needs to be finalised in 12 weeks. A copy of that has been posted on the forum at some stage). This translates to 84 calendar days.

That was the last official instruction that we are aware of.

The concept of 90 "working days" should therefore be rejected.

It is an "own rule" that goes against the expectations of the FCA and their own official policy.

Meaning that within 90 "days" I should be approved and license collected? This would be good news given that many (Including myself are waiting for cards)

[MTTSS]

Meaning that within 90 "days" I should be approved and license collected? This would be good news given that many (Including myself are waiting for cards)

Here is an electronic copy of the directive, the original has been posted somewhere on the Forum, trying to find it for purposes of linking it here:

SAPS communiqué dated 29 May 2012
-The applications must be forwarded to the provincial office by the DFO within six weeks after submission, inclusive of the results of the fingerprint check received back from CRC;
-A quality check must be performed there, and the applications must be forwarded to the CFR within two weeks after receipt thereof;
-Applications must be finalized within four weeks after it reached the offices of the CFR;
-All printed cards must be collected within two weeks after being finalized by the CFR, and the cards must be collected or delivered within two weeks after that;
-All refusal letters must be posted within two weeks after being finalized by the CFR.

[Brendank]

Yes indeed, this is highly frustrating.

The problem is that they clearly have no intention to make their own system work and to abide by the law, so it will take something more than merely falling back on a situation where they capture 350's as part of the licensing process.

This is because they had a free ticket to litigate in civil law matters with taxpayer's money as they pleased even though I don't know of any case out of the more than 100 that they did not lose.

There are currently two initiatives to address this issue. In the one matter that was reported elsewhere on this Forum damages are being claimed against the relevant members of the CFR management, this is in addition to personal costs orders.

In the latest initiative criminal charges have in fact been laid with IPID as was reported on another platform. Personally I am very much delighted about this.

Is there any provision in our law to take SAPS to a higher court to get them to comply? I understand that is a series of onerous processes that have to take place beforehand, but surely there is some recourse for their blatant defiance in following the letter of the law i.e. FCA?

[bodhi_]

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but the fact that the 90 working days starts from when you hand in and pay for your licence application. Not from when your DFO decides to capture it on the system.

According to CFR, my app is on 74 working days.
According to my receipt my app is on 94 working days.

I cannot recall the act saying working days, and it certainly doesn't say the timeline starts when it lands on the table of whoever has to check it.

[WCC]

In my opinion taking SAPS to court generally is a very frustrating and costly affair, which seems to be a temporary measure at best given their seemingly endless budget to finance their myriad of frivolous defences and appeals. Do not underestimate the depths at which they will sink to in achieving their goal and wasting taxpayer funds.

Until such time as the budget taps are closed for the SAPS decision makers to fund litigation which have no merit and they are personally being held accountable for footing the bill, it will be a financially, emotionally and time draining process.

I also think it is time to really start putting on the pressure from an SAPS finance perspective, perhaps through the treasury. The more pressure they feel from it, the more likely they are to care about the impact of private litigation. If only we had a contact to give us an audience at treasury.

[MTTSS]

Is there any provision in our law to take SAPS to a higher court to get them to comply? I understand that is a series of onerous processes that have to take place beforehand, but surely there is some recourse for their blatant defiance in following the letter of the law i.e. FCA?

We have been to the highest courts with CFR on civil law matters.

The point of this thread is that the criminal law route is now being followed.