RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to subscribe to our mailing list and get info on the next Sgt, Lt. or Captain Exam!
This test is over. It will not be thrown out. DCAS is mandated to let those people take the test on a later date. There will be a bigger lawsuit if they did throw it out. A lawsuit is a waste if your money That will come out of you own pockets. I have accepted my loss and will study 1 more time. Go to the protest review session and take it as a learning experience. The list is out and certified. It's not getting tossed
There is one thing I'll disagree....if I has a 69 right now and haf 106 wrong, I'd spend 500 a person to have a article 78 try and throw it out. This test will not be thrown out. But 106 is uncharted territory and dangerous. Why have a cut off date? To me it's one fight worth it. Best of luck to you all
There is one thing I'll disagree....if I has a 69 right now and haf 106 wrong, I'd spend 500 a person to have a article 78 try and throw it out. This test will not be thrown out. But 106 is uncharted territory and dangerous. Why have a cut off date? To me it's one fight worth it. Best of luck to you all
Your terrible grammar aside, I agree. 106 is worth the fight, it had to be a toss, otherwise they need to stop publishing a cutoff date.
I won't spend another dime of my money or time on this test. It starts at 500, then 500 more and then more. These lawyers will take any case knowing they will loose to take your money.
Fighting individual questions is only one possible angle on this test. I don't even think it's the best one. If you don't want to be a part of any legal action it's understandable but what do you care if others do? What do you care if either myself or anyone else wastes their money?
I beilieve a lot of people are exhausted with this process and want to move on. It's a legitimate option. They are a quiet bunch, though. The people who are activiely trying to disuade their colleagues have an agenda. They are scammers, those who don't have a prayer even with multiple changes and, finally, people who didn't even take this test. The last thing scammers want is more scrutiny. Everyone else wants a short a list as possible.
If it's hopeless, it's hopeless but our chances have absolutely nothing to do with an opinion of anyone on this forum.
Don't make any plans or pay any attorneys before you attend protest review. That's fighting blindfolded. Find out TVB reasons for not tossing the question and then take it from there. There is a possibility we missed something on the question as well. Remember dcas didn't take 3 extra months to publish this list for no reason. All question that were protested are most certainly backed up by them. If you were on the cusp and failed, you should most certainly go this session
I really don't care. It's just my opinion. I don't want people to hold on to false hopes and spend time and energy without knowing nothing will happen. Some people on this forum are creating false hope and ideas, granted they are mostly trolls but still.
DCAS's "most correct" answer from 106 was from an Interim Order that was after the cutoff date. There's no justification for keeping it. I got it right, but I got lucky, I spent over 10 minutes on that question at the end because I knew that procedure cold and knew none of the answers were correct. Anyone with a 69 and that question wrong has to fight, I know I would.
There is one thing I'll disagree....if I has a 69 right now and haf 106 wrong, I'd spend 500 a person to have a article 78 try and throw it out. This test will not be thrown out. But 106 is uncharted territory and dangerous. Why have a cut off date? To me it's one fight worth it. Best of luck to you all
Your terrible grammar aside, I agree. 106 is worth the fight, it had to be a toss, otherwise they need to stop publishing a cutoff date.
Lol @ sixmonthwonder
I agree with ltexam2015 as well. This is everyone's best chance. Espically in regards to question 106.
I've done a article 78....it was off duty against my village. Cost about 6k....this isn't what you guys think. Article 78 can only be based on the appeals already submitted. YOU CAN NOT REINTRODUCE EVIDENCE. The arguements are submitted in writing and case law is provided to back your arguements. A judge reads the facts and each sude arguements and rules from there. I don't believe this is any different from my experience. Again as stated prior...106 is new territory and worth exploring. You will spend quite a nice fortune trying to get test thrown out and you will not succeed. But to fight 106 I'd say 6k sounds right and that can be split up between 10 ppl
The cost is dependent upon the amount of people in the suit. How many people are in the 65 to 70 range? They are the most likely to join a legal action.
If you could get 100 people and the cost were $10K it would be $100 a person. Let's say it was $25 grand. That's $250 a head. I've spent more on box pools without blinking an eye and the chance of winning one of them is much less then winning at least few points here.
Article 78 on individual questions probably isn't even the best point of attack. They have defended against them before, they are prepared for legal challenges and , while I cannot quote a single result of such a challenge much less provide general stats, I imagine it's an uphill battle. All the signs point to zero changes being an arbitrary decision of a a single or few bureaucrats. 106 is the only proof you need of that. Whether valid arguements are presented against it or the rest of the controversial questions remains to be seen.
I say go after the 70 rule. It's the very definition of arbitrary. It excluded 94 percent of testers from even being eligible to be on this list, which is supposed to be a competative civil service exam. On other tests, it excluded much less. In fact, the percentage changes with every test dependant on it's difficulty, deviation from the standard testing format and throwouts. It's only been around 10 years. It was Kelly's stupid idea. Neither DCAS nor Bratton came up with it. If there is any legal basis in pursuing it there is probably no political will to fight it because nobody loses face if it is thrown in the trash heap. DCAS and the job dodges/buries a scsndal and we don't argue back and forth about what questions are worth fighting for. It's a win/win.
the passing score was stated in the NOE. A judge can't order it changed. There has to be a legal rational. No attorney let along judge would ever entertain that. You have a slighy better chance in article 78. Your idea is no different then adding a curve, adding 5 or 10 points, or any other random idea. These new rules would of needed to be added before the test. Of course, just my opinion. I'm no attorney
-- Edited by bigfoot45 on Tuesday 1st of March 2016 04:44:02 AM
the passing score was stated in the NOE. A judge can't order it changed. There has to be a legal rational. No attorney let along judge would ever entertain that. You have a slighy better chance in article 78. Your idea is no different then adding a curve, adding 5 or 10 points, or any other random idea. These new rules would of needed to be added before the test. Of course, just my opinion. I'm no attorney
-- Edited by bigfoot45 on Tuesday 1st of March 2016 04:44:02 AM
Great then operations orders and ccrg were not listed in NOE . So would a judge entertain those?
Presumably - As long as it was protested DCAS would have to articulate why those protests weren't considered valid. Those protests and their findings would be the basis of a challenge.
Ops Orders were explicitly listed as testable on prior NOEs and not this one right? Is there more obtuse language in the NOE which might cover Ops Orders, the CCRG, or anything else they feel like making testable? It's possible. I guess we'll find out their rationale soon enough. They will articulate findings for all of the protests. Like Slate said, people could have missed something on a lot of these contentious questions and people may leave the TVB leave saying, 'Oh ****! They got us.' On the other hand, their findings on some/many of these questions may be clearly contrived and arbitrary. I suspect it may be a mixture of the two. Time will tell. What numbers were the ops orders anyway?
Guys, your playing devil's advocate and grasping at straws. I hope your meeting with the attorney goes well but your plan of attack is flawed and all over the place.
Bigfoot you need to chill out. We're spitballing. So what if it's they're moon shots, hail mary plays or all over the place?!?! Nobody is setting their watches by this. What's the harm in it? It's been going on nonstop on this site for the past 10 months. Don't worry Dad, we'll let the professionals take the reigns when the time comes.
As of now, our plan of attack is as follows: consult with legal professionals who specialize in employment and civil service law (ideally from several firms); ascertain what, if any, legal options we have; get an idea of what it would cost. From there, assuming it's even worth it, we see if we can can get enough people on board to make it economically feasible for everybody. What are the flaws in this plan? What would you differently?
DOA, no need for the hostility. At the end of the day, my opinion is only that, an opinion. What I would do is meet with about 10 to 20 mos... Sharp mos and discuss what you want to litigate. You all need to be on the same page. If you guys are all split on what you think the issues are then it will be a lot more difficult. I would strictly focus on just getting questions tossed. At the end of the day your main goal is getting on the list and not worrying about makeup test takers... At least it should be. You should know what questions you want to argue. You should have proof and rational from an Authority... Like Yano saying they are definitely wrong. You will probably need to hear the reasons at the protest for further info.... I typed this all quick on my phone so i apoligize in advance for misspellings
