TexasCHLforum.com

I'm sure you all as instructors have encountered people who truly need the class time.
I have had many students that have no clue as to what has happened in the previous 4 or 5 years from their original class.
Some are misinformed, some not informed, some clouded by their brother, uncle, friend, co-worker, local LE friend, internet, etc.
I have had students show up to renewals that do not own a gun and have not shot in 4 or 5 years.

This is not a joke, I had one student show up a couple of years ago to renew and he showed me his "permit'. It was his CHL-100 from 4 years prior folded up nicely with his hunting license.
He thought that was his CHL. I cringed when I looked at it and thankfully it was not one of my students. Whew! He had taken it somewhere else and the instructor was not available anymore; wonder why?

I've already had a few express interest in sitting in on a class anyway for the "refresher" and shooting. There is not a problem doing this? right?
I'm glad that there are responsible people out there eager to keep up with proficiency. If they do sit in, I'm guessing I would just not submit them a chl-100 or include on the chl-8?, right?
Not sure about a fee for "sit ins"? any thoughts?

hitwsr wrote:I'm sure you all as instructors have encountered people who truly need the class time.
I have had many students that have no clue as to what has happened in the previous 4 or 5 years from their original class.
Some are misinformed, some not informed, some clouded by their brother, uncle, friend, co-worker, local LE friend, internet, etc.
I have had students show up to renewals that do not own a gun and have not shot in 4 or 5 years.

This is not a joke, I had one student show up a couple of years ago to renew and he showed me his "permit'. It was his CHL-100 from 4 years prior folded up nicely with his hunting license.
He thought that was his CHL. I cringed when I looked at it and thankfully it was not one of my students. Whew! He had taken it somewhere else and the instructor was not available anymore; wonder why?

I've already had a few express interest in sitting in on a class anyway for the "refresher" and shooting. There is not a problem doing this? right?
I'm glad that there are responsible people out there eager to keep up with proficiency. If they do sit in, I'm guessing I would just not submit them a chl-100 or include on the chl-8?, right?
Not sure about a fee for "sit ins"? any thoughts?

There is nothing in the law prohibiting a person from 'monitoring' your class. It is just no longer required for renewal. You would not give them a CHL-100 (you could, but it would be a waste of paper) and you would not list them on your CHL-7 or CHL-8. They are just 'there' for continuing education.

We are allowing renewals, or anyone else, to sit in a class for $25.

No range time, no certificate. Just listen, and maybe, learn.

I have a guy that needs to renew in October and wants to come to the class. I told him it is not required, but he is adamant that he wants to come to the whole thing. Is there anything wrong with me charging him full price, since my expenses are the same, and giving him a CHL-100 just like he is a brand new student?

steven8669 wrote:I have a guy that needs to renew in October and wants to come to the class. I told him it is not required, but he is adamant that he wants to come to the whole thing. Is there anything wrong with me charging him full price, since my expenses are the same, and giving him a CHL-100 just like he is a brand new student?

Why give him a CHL-100? It's worthless to him. And, you can charge him $1M if he is willing to pay it to attend your class. You just can't say it's mandatory and force them to come to the class in order to renew.

Keith B wrote:

steven8669 wrote:I have a guy that needs to renew in October and wants to come to the class. I told him it is not required, but he is adamant that he wants to come to the whole thing. Is there anything wrong with me charging him full price, since my expenses are the same, and giving him a CHL-100 just like he is a brand new student?

Why give him a CHL-100? It's worthless to him. And, you can charge him $1M if he is willing to pay it to attend your class. You just can't say it's mandatory and force them to come to the class in order to renew.

Keith is right. Under no circumstances would I give a CHL-100 to someone who only needs to renew a current CHL. That could lead to a later claim that you falsely told them they needed to take a class to renew. Plus, if they sent it to DPS for some reason, your CHL-8 would appear incomplete. If you included such a person on your CHL-8, then DPS is going to assume it's a new student and could be asking you questions later.

Chas.

I added sections to registration software for "renewal" people to voluntarily sit in for 1/2 price. And get the same class lesson plan/handout as "original license" students, plus get some quick trigger time on their own while others are taking written test. Or, for a little more $, get a private "shooting skills tune-up" later.

If someone wanted a CHL-100, I sure would include them on the CHL - 8.

I don't see a problem w/giving them a CHL 100. They can claim whatever they want. What are they going to sue for - $100 course fee?

switch wrote:If someone wanted a CHL-100, I sure would include them on the CHL - 8.

I don't see a problem w/giving them a CHL 100. They can claim whatever they want. What are they going to sue for - $100 course fee?

Under the DTPA, that $100 class fee can become $300 plus $5,000 in attorney fees. Including a renewal student on a CHL-8 is going to make DPS think they are a new student. That's bound to generate questions.

Chas.

Sounds like the student would be guilty of DTP.

Sounds like a whole new categorie of class structure should be added for these people. I would keep them separate from the "new" students. Make range time optional. This would be good for the instructors as additional income, good for those who will not continue education on their own. Bi-yearly?

switch wrote:Sounds like the student would be guilty of DTP.

Nope, they sought goods or services from you, not the other way around.

If you want to give them some type of certificate, just create one for yourself and call it a "refresher" course or "CHL continuing education certificate." That way they have something if they want it and you have absolutely no exposure.

One thing for all of us to remember is that the limited immunity we enjoy when teaching a class to people who need it does not cover renewal folks taking a refresher class or participating in a class with new students. I'm not saying this is a reason not to allow them to participate, but just be aware there's no immunity. Everyone should have the NRA Instructor Insurance and it should be the "Plus" policy (or whatever it's called) so it will cover everything we teach and not just NRA classes.

Chas.

hitwsr wrote:I'm sure you all as instructors have encountered people who truly need the class time.
I have had many students that have no clue as to what has happened in the previous 4 or 5 years from their original class.
Some are misinformed, some not informed, some clouded by their brother, uncle, friend, co-worker, local LE friend, internet, etc.

It used to be worse. There were a few instructors who "forgot" the law, or didn't know about changes, because they didn't have to take a renewal class. Then they passed along their ignorance to unsuspecting students.

sunny beach wrote:

hitwsr wrote:I'm sure you all as instructors have encountered people who truly need the class time.
I have had many students that have no clue as to what has happened in the previous 4 or 5 years from their original class.
Some are misinformed, some not informed, some clouded by their brother, uncle, friend, co-worker, local LE friend, internet, etc.

It used to be worse. There were a few instructors who "forgot" the law, or didn't know about changes, because they didn't have to take a renewal class. Then they passed along their ignorance to unsuspecting students.

All instructors have had to renew their certificates every two years, and starting in 2001 DPS made the renewal requirement in the fall of the odd number years so all instructors would have the latest updates. There is no excuse for instructor ignorance.

Why not just categorize those who want to attend a CHL class as a refresher as people just auditing the class? Might clear up confusion by not calling it a "renewal" at all.