Lapd dq / appeal

[ab1992]

Hello,

I recently received a DQ letter from LAPD after my background was submitted. I am given the options to either withdraw within 30 days or have it processed as a DQ in my file - or, submit an appeal. The letter does not specify why I was disqualified, rather just states i did not meet one or more of the 6 Public Safety Positions Background Standards. I am interested in submitting an appeal. However, I am not entirely sure how to present support for my appeal as I do not know why I was disqualified. Has anyone else been through the appeal process, and has anyone been successful?

Thanks in advance

[L-1]

As someone who was involved in backgrounds, hiring and firing for over 10 years, I can offer the following:

Appealing is not saying you want additional consideration, or a do over, or that you really want the job, so please, please, please give you a second chance. An appeal on those grounds is meritless and will be rejected on the spot.

There are only two grounds for a successful appear:

1. That the disqualifying information they have about you is inaccurate and does not meet their criteria for disqualification. Given that you don't know what derogatory information they have or what their criteria is for disqualification, you are going to have difficulty with this one.

2. That their criteria for disqualification has no reasonable relationship to the job you are seeking. Again, as you their basis for disqualification, you're going to have a problem, here as well.

Lastly, most civil service agencies have a limited window within which you may file your appeal. In some cases it may be as little as five or 10 days after being notified of your disqualification.

Disqualification appeals are not for the faint of heart. They are complicated and governed by complex civil service law most people are not familiar with. They are definately not a do it yourself project.

Most successful appellants hire an attorney who is well versed in civil service law. He files a blanket appeal based on "all grounds allowed by law." He then files a discovery motiuon to obtain a copy of their background investigation, their FDQ criteria, and all documentation that led to their DQ determination. After speaking with you he will then formulate the specifics of your appeal.

No doubt you are thinking that hiring legal counsel to represent you is expensive, complicated and something you can't afford. But remember, a 30 year career in law enforcement will probably pay you over $5 million in salary and benefits and another $3 million in retirement and benefits. With that in mind I ask, can you afford not too hire an attorney?

[ab1992]

I greatly appreciate the response!!! I certainly was not aware the appeal process was that extensive.. and is completely above my law knowledge. I just received my notification letter today so I have a little time. My background was completed then sent back to be under review by a case manager. In your opinion... would it be completely out of line to reach out to my prior BI, or the case manager to ask for any insight on my DQ? Not for specific answers (as I know that would never be provided), but would it be fair to ask which of the 6 points it was that I did not meet at the very least? Or if they can just basically say LOL! You don’t have a shot! If that’s the case. Haha. I have a pretty decent background so I am unsure where it went wrong. I don’t exactly have any other avenues for questions and answers, so I really appreciate the help!

[mezaD432]

Hi, I was disqualified from moving forward. The reasons given were more subjective and irrelevant. My BI made a lot of mistakes in presenting his arguments of why I was disqualified and to the point where accused me of non factual data. I would like to appeal my DQ. Do you happen to know attorneys who can help?

[mezaD432]

Do you happen to know of a good attorney who can help me with my appeal?

[L-1]

It won't hurt to ask. All he can say is No.

I would phrase it in terms of, If I've done something wrong, I need to know what it is so I can make corrections in my lifestyle and become a viable candidate in the future. OTOH, if it turns out I didn't do anything wrong, I need a chance to clear up any misunderstanding.

Above all, if he tells you anything, don't argue with him. This is not the place to hold court.

The big reason for not telling you is that when people talk to them, they are given your waiver and a sheet from the PD promising anonymity in what they say to them. They agency you apply with will always be unsure if what they provide to you will violate that promise of anonymity.

I don't know about LAPD, but in my agency the criteria for DQ was very broad and open to interpretation. for example -

All candidates for, appointees to, and employees in the civil service shall possess the general qualifications of integrity, honesty, sobriety, dependability, industry, thoroughness, accuracy, good judgment, initiative, resourcefulness, courtesy, ability to work cooperatively with others, willingness and ability to assume the responsibilities and to conform to the conditions of work characteristic of the employment, and a state of health, consistent with the ability to perform the assigned duties of the class. Where the position requires the driving of an automobile, the employee must have a valid state driver's license, a good driving record and is expected to drive the car safely. The foregoing general qualifications shall be deemed to be a part of the personal characteristics of the minimum qualifications of each class specification and need not be specifically set forth therein. The board may prescribe alternative or additional qualifications for individual classes and such shall be made a part of the class specifications.

It's easy to diaqualify under any of the above provisions for even the slightest issue in one's life or work history. Too many errors in your Personal History statement can be looked at as dishonesty, lack of thoroughness, lack of accuracy, or the one I always liked, the inability to read and follow simple written instructions.

Next is Section 18935 of the Government Code, which states:

18935. (a) The department or a designated appointing power may refuse to examine, or after examination may refuse to declare as eligible, or may withhold or withdraw from an eligible list, before the appointment, anyone who meets any of the following criteria:

(1) Lacks any of the requirements for the examination or position for which he or she applied.

(2) Has been dismissed from any position for any cause that would be a cause for dismissal from state service.

(3) Has resigned from any position not in good standing in order to avoid dismissal.

(4) Has misrepresented himself or herself in the application or examination process, including permitting another person to complete or attempt to complete a portion of the examination on his or her behalf.

(5) Has been found to be unsuited or not qualified for employment pursuant to rule (above).

(b) The remedies provided in this section are not exclusive and shall not prevent the board, department, or appointing power from taking additional actions pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 19680).


Next, for Peace Officer Candidates there is Section 1031 of the Government Code, which states,

Each class of public officers or employees declared by law to be peace officers shall meet all of the following minimum standards:

(a) Be a citizen of the United States or a permanent resident alien who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship, except as provided in Section 2267 of the Vehicle Code.

(b) Be at least 18 years of age.

(c) Be fingerprinted for purposes of search of local, state, and national fingerprint files to disclose a criminal record.

(d) Be of good moral character, as determined by a thorough background investigation.

(e) Be a high school graduate, pass the General Education Development Test or other high school equivalency test approved by the State Department of Education that indicates high school graduation level, pass the California High School Proficiency Examination, or have attained a two-year, four-year, or advanced degree from an accredited college or university. The high school shall be either a United States public school, an accredited United States Department of Defense high school, or an accredited or approved public or nonpublic high school. Any accreditation or approval required by this subdivision shall be from a state or local government educational agency using local or state government approved accreditation, licensing, registration, or other approval standards, a regional accrediting association, an accrediting association recognized by the Secretary of the United States Department of Education, an accrediting association holding full membership in the National Council for Private School Accreditation (NCPSA), an organization holding full membership in AdvancED, an organization holding full membership in the Council for American Private Education (CAPE), or an accrediting association recognized by the National Federation of Nonpublic School State Accrediting Associations (NFNSSAA).

(f) Be found to be free from any physical, emotional, or mental condition that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer.

(1) Physical condition shall be evaluated by a licensed physician and surgeon.

(2) Emotional and mental condition shall be evaluated by either of the following:

(A) A physician and surgeon who holds a valid California license to practice medicine, has successfully completed a postgraduate medical residency education program in psychiatry accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and has at least the equivalent of five full-time years of experience in the diagnosis and treatment of emotional and mental disorders, including the equivalent of three full-time years accrued after completion of the psychiatric residency program.

(B) A psychologist licensed by the California Board of Psychology who has at least the equivalent of five full-time years of experience in the diagnosis and treatment of emotional and mental disorders, including the equivalent of three full-time years accrued postdoctorate.

The physician and surgeon or psychologist shall also have met any applicable education and training procedures set forth by the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training designed for the conduct of preemployment psychological screening of peace officers.

(g) This section shall not be construed to preclude the adoption of additional or higher standards, including age.

How a lot of this is interpreted in relation to your background can sometimes depend on how you come off to your BI. If you attitude and demeanor suggest yo have your sh*t together and can handle the job, little errors might be overlooked. OTOH, if you come off as a space cadet or a professional test taker who scores high on any test he takes but who has no grasp of real life (like one of my former Captains), you'll be looked at and evaluated a lot harder.

[Dt1911]

I went through the appeal process with LAPD a few years ago and was disqualified for life. I'm currently a police officer at another agency and couldn't be happier...especially during these times. Appeal and see how it goes, if it doesnt work out, move on to the next agency.

[ab1992]

It won't hurt to ask. All he can say is No.

I would phrase it in terms of, If I've done something wrong, I need to know what it is so I can make corrections in my lifestyle and become a viable candidate in the future. OTOH, if it turns out I didn't do anything wrong, I need a chance to clear up any misunderstanding.

Above all, if he tells you anything, don't argue with him. This is not the place to hold court.

The big reason for not telling you is that when people talk to them, they are given your waiver and a sheet from the PD promising anonymity in what they say to them. They agency you apply with will always be unsure if what they provide to you will violate that promise of anonymity.

I don't know about LAPD, but in my agency the criteria for DQ was very broad and open to interpretation. for example -

All candidates for, appointees to, and employees in the civil service shall possess the general qualifications of integrity, honesty, sobriety, dependability, industry, thoroughness, accuracy, good judgment, initiative, resourcefulness, courtesy, ability to work cooperatively with others, willingness and ability to assume the responsibilities and to conform to the conditions of work characteristic of the employment, and a state of health, consistent with the ability to perform the assigned duties of the class. Where the position requires the driving of an automobile, the employee must have a valid state driver's license, a good driving record and is expected to drive the car safely. The foregoing general qualifications shall be deemed to be a part of the personal characteristics of the minimum qualifications of each class specification and need not be specifically set forth therein. The board may prescribe alternative or additional qualifications for individual classes and such shall be made a part of the class specifications.

It's easy to diaqualify under any of the above provisions for even the slightest issue in one's life or work history. Too many errors in your Personal History statement can be looked at as dishonesty, lack of thoroughness, lack of accuracy, or the one I always liked, the inability to read and follow simple written instructions.

Great!! This was very helpful. i really really appreciate the input. Think i may try my shot with an appeal and see where it takes me!

[ab1992]

I went through the appeal process with LAPD a few years ago and was disqualified for life. I'm currently a police officer at another agency and couldn't be happier...especially during these times. Appeal and see how it goes, if it doesnt work out, move on to the next agency.

Glad you were able to find another department. Did you have legal assistance for your appeal or did you just submit it on your own?

[Dt1911]

Glad you were able to find another department. Did you have legal assistance for your appeal or did you just submit it on your own?

I submitted it on my own...maybe that's where I f'd up. My BI and case manager actually gave me the specifics on why I was disqualified. My BI helped me through the process, but I still lost.

[Robertinho37]

I submitted it on my own...maybe that's where I f'd up. My BI and case manager actually gave me the specifics on why I was disqualified. My BI helped me through the process, but I still lost.

And from your point of view did the specifics merit your disqualification in general to begin with? I say that with the sense that nobody knows themselves more than his or her own self. Departments always give you a chance to appeal for the most part, but are at the very end biased and one sided to begin with, with little to no chance at all to win. I am glad you appealed it because most people would not do such a thing. Remember it is a mind game, from the beginning to the end, you have to show them how badly you want it, and even then some more. Remember...............things are now what they seem to be at certain time, keep your head up.

[Dt1911]

All good. I was hired by another agency and i am sure glad to be out of CA atthe moment lol.

[CCCSD]

And from your point of view did the specifics merit your disqualification in general to begin with? I say that with the sense that nobody knows themselves more than his or her own self. Departments always give you a chance to appeal for the most part, but are at the very end biased and one sided to begin with, with little to no chance at all to win. I am glad you appealed it because most people would not do such a thing. Remember it is a mind game, from the beginning to the end, you have to show them how badly you want it, and even then some more. Remember...............things are now what they seem to be at certain time, keep your head up.

They aren’t biased. They are making sure the candidate fits. Just because YOU got DQd doesn’t mean the system is the problem. The problem is YOU. YOU failed to meet the criteria so YOU were booted.

That is why we don’t allow candidates to be in charge of anything except filling out forms.

Take your chip, and go shine some shoes. Here’s a shinebox to help you learn a trade.

[Mike_vaughn]

How far into the process did you get?

[cruz0311]

In my past experience as a background investigator, I can tell you I never DQ anyone just because, in fact the Department and County HR wont buy off a DQ just because. We had to have solid facts as to why we submitted you for a DQ. Now, a oral board is a different story and that is where I think most smaller departments can pick and choose more carefully in what they want.

[Mike_vaughn]

Removed post

[Robertinho37]

They aren’t biased. They are making sure the candidate fits. Just because YOU got DQd doesn’t mean the system is the problem. The problem is YOU. YOU failed to meet the criteria so YOU were booted.

That is why we don’t allow candidates to be in charge of anything except filling out forms.

Take your chip, and go shine some shoes. Here’s a shinebox to help you learn a trade.

So with the same criteria he was hired somewhere else as he should of been either way to begin with. Ironically it ended up working better for him and im proud of him. Like i said its a mind game, but one has to keep goin, indeed.

My shoes are quite new, they dont need any shining just yet.

[CCCSD]

Reading comprehension is beyond your ability.

Go shine your shoes some more.

[Robertinho37]

And yet you understood it enough to reply back.............like i said my shoes are new, shine your own.