This site is dedicated to protecting private process servers' best
interests and keeping the Texas legal community informed about
pending legislation and other news relating to private process
service in Texas.
From our links page you will be able to access many other
helpful sites relating to the private process service industry.
The main concern of Texas Process Watch is SAFETY! The
safety of the process server and the safety of the public.
Process servers should not be expected to be anything more
than messengers. The difference being that process servers
must often make their deliveries to a specific person. This is no
different than the mailman obtaining a signature on a restricted
parcel. Process servers keep themselves out of trouble and the
public safe by executing their duties with this in mind. Process
servers should never jump locked gates, bang on back doors in
the middle of the night or chase anyone in their cars. No service
is worth putting the safety of the public or the server at risk.
This brings up an important point about credentials. A
government issued identification card will cause problems for
process servers. Some courts like those in Bexar County
provided a government issued id. card to process servers
approved on the Bexar County blanket order. During testimony
on SB 165, a server from San Antonio claimed that by using his
Bexar County id. card, he is granted access to restricted areas
at military bases that he would not have been granted otherwise.
Texas Process Watch and every American should be concerned
about process servers being granted access to areas that are
restricted to the average citizen, especially military installations.
The problem created when the government issues an id. card is,
although there is a statement on the back of the card indicating
that the process server is not an employee or agent of the court,
the card itself, with a county seal and signature of the Bexar
County court administrator, creates a perceived authority. This
is the very authority the statement on the back seeks to prevent.
A process server's identification card is his or her driver's license
and Supreme Court order number. With these two items,
anyone can verify that the server is certified under the Supreme
Court order. Furthermore, this certification only shows that the
server is authorized to serve the process. It does not and should
not give the server any additional authority with regard to access
to persons or property.
At the time, anyone could have applied to be on the Bexar
County blanket order and would have been given an official id.
card. Any average citizen could have applied and citizenship
was not even a requirement. Process servers are just that,
AVERAGE CITIZENS. Process servers do not need a
government issued id. card because it will lead to rules,
regulation and licensing. Process servers do not need the state
to protect them; assault on a process server is already against
the law. All process servers need from their state is the ability to
serve all manner of process from any court pursuant to Federal
Rule (4) on a statewide level. Being over 18 and not a party to
the suit is adequate for serving all process including all Texas
subpoenas, all federal summons, all federal subpoenas, all
Texas child support citations and all other child support notices
(rule change; 103 orders no longer required for child support
process. Now anyone over 18/not a party can serve), and
process from nearly all the other states. Furthermore, being
over eighteen and not a party to the suit (and not interested in
the outcome) is all that is required to serve citations and other
notices pursuant to Rule 103/536, T.R.C.P. as long as you
obtain an order from the court. The only difference is that before
the certification program, a judge could say "No" to your 103
order. Being that process servers have now achieved the long
sought after statewide authorization through a simple
certification process, it makes one wonder why the proponents
of legislation, who claim to have the servers' best interest at
heart, keep filing a licensing bill each and every session. It's
money motivated.
Regardless of your position on the id. card issue, it's important
not to give the proponents of licensing a leg up. They are trying
to lay the groundwork for another run at licensing next session
by making the certification program look as much like licensing
as possible. The first step is an id. card and rules to go along
with it. An id. card issued by the government looks EXACTLY
like a license!
KEEPING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE:
Service of process by the private sector is a unique job. Unlike
other professions, a private process server must swear under
penalty of perjury that he or she completed each and every job.
When was the last time an appliance repair man, auto mechanic or
pool cleaner signed a sworn statement certifying that they
completed your job? Swearing to each service is, in itself, a form of
regulation designed to protect due process and keep us honest.
Why are process servers being singled out among the business
community at large? Where is the proof that private process
servers are doing things that require more regulation than swearing
under oath on each service? Isn't it enough that we risk perjuring
ourselves by lying on a return? Service of process is not about the
credibility of the person who executes service. It is about the
person's age and ability to swear under oath to facts about the
service. This is why Federal Rule 4 reads the way it does. This is
why T.R.C.P. Rules 103, 536 and 176 read the way they do. Anyone
over eighteen who is not a party to the case (and not interested in
the outcome) can deliver process.
Passing a licensing bill or creating a certification program that
resembles licensing goes against the trend in Texas and in the
country. Twenty-six states have a Federal Rule 4 equivalent for
service of state court issued process. The remaining majority have
a Rule 103 equivalent. Licensing, like what could be found in SB
165, is not the trend in Texas or the national trend. (Certification is
also not the trend hence the reason to keep it as simple as
possible). Licensing is an extreme measure only instituted when an
industry represents harm to the public or pervasive fraud exists.
Being that process servers do not harm the public, the often used
argument is that some private process servers engage in "gutter
service". Even if it were true, which we have found little or no
evidence supporting this argument, falsifying a government
document is already against the law. If a server or servers have
done gutter service and then lied on an officer's return, they should
be arrested and charged with a crime. Where's the need for
licensing? Where's the need for a board to regulate us? Show us
some proof!!! At none of the three hearings on SB 165, was there
one shred of evidence offered that indicated process servers were
engaging in fraudulent behavior or causing harm to the public.
Please go to the Players and History page for more on facts that
led up to process servers winning statewide certification without
the constables' help.
This site is maintained by Tod E. Pendergrass
Certified Private Process Server
Supreme Court No. SCH1660
interests and keeping the Texas legal community informed about
pending legislation and other news relating to private process
service in Texas.
From our links page you will be able to access many other
helpful sites relating to the private process service industry.
The main concern of Texas Process Watch is SAFETY! The
safety of the process server and the safety of the public.
Process servers should not be expected to be anything more
than messengers. The difference being that process servers
must often make their deliveries to a specific person. This is no
different than the mailman obtaining a signature on a restricted
parcel. Process servers keep themselves out of trouble and the
public safe by executing their duties with this in mind. Process
servers should never jump locked gates, bang on back doors in
the middle of the night or chase anyone in their cars. No service
is worth putting the safety of the public or the server at risk.
This brings up an important point about credentials. A
government issued identification card will cause problems for
process servers. Some courts like those in Bexar County
provided a government issued id. card to process servers
approved on the Bexar County blanket order. During testimony
on SB 165, a server from San Antonio claimed that by using his
Bexar County id. card, he is granted access to restricted areas
at military bases that he would not have been granted otherwise.
Texas Process Watch and every American should be concerned
about process servers being granted access to areas that are
restricted to the average citizen, especially military installations.
The problem created when the government issues an id. card is,
although there is a statement on the back of the card indicating
that the process server is not an employee or agent of the court,
the card itself, with a county seal and signature of the Bexar
County court administrator, creates a perceived authority. This
is the very authority the statement on the back seeks to prevent.
A process server's identification card is his or her driver's license
and Supreme Court order number. With these two items,
anyone can verify that the server is certified under the Supreme
Court order. Furthermore, this certification only shows that the
server is authorized to serve the process. It does not and should
not give the server any additional authority with regard to access
to persons or property.
At the time, anyone could have applied to be on the Bexar
County blanket order and would have been given an official id.
card. Any average citizen could have applied and citizenship
was not even a requirement. Process servers are just that,
AVERAGE CITIZENS. Process servers do not need a
government issued id. card because it will lead to rules,
regulation and licensing. Process servers do not need the state
to protect them; assault on a process server is already against
the law. All process servers need from their state is the ability to
serve all manner of process from any court pursuant to Federal
Rule (4) on a statewide level. Being over 18 and not a party to
the suit is adequate for serving all process including all Texas
subpoenas, all federal summons, all federal subpoenas, all
Texas child support citations and all other child support notices
(rule change; 103 orders no longer required for child support
process. Now anyone over 18/not a party can serve), and
process from nearly all the other states. Furthermore, being
over eighteen and not a party to the suit (and not interested in
the outcome) is all that is required to serve citations and other
notices pursuant to Rule 103/536, T.R.C.P. as long as you
obtain an order from the court. The only difference is that before
the certification program, a judge could say "No" to your 103
order. Being that process servers have now achieved the long
sought after statewide authorization through a simple
certification process, it makes one wonder why the proponents
of legislation, who claim to have the servers' best interest at
heart, keep filing a licensing bill each and every session. It's
money motivated.
Regardless of your position on the id. card issue, it's important
not to give the proponents of licensing a leg up. They are trying
to lay the groundwork for another run at licensing next session
by making the certification program look as much like licensing
as possible. The first step is an id. card and rules to go along
with it. An id. card issued by the government looks EXACTLY
like a license!
KEEPING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE:
Service of process by the private sector is a unique job. Unlike
other professions, a private process server must swear under
penalty of perjury that he or she completed each and every job.
When was the last time an appliance repair man, auto mechanic or
pool cleaner signed a sworn statement certifying that they
completed your job? Swearing to each service is, in itself, a form of
regulation designed to protect due process and keep us honest.
Why are process servers being singled out among the business
community at large? Where is the proof that private process
servers are doing things that require more regulation than swearing
under oath on each service? Isn't it enough that we risk perjuring
ourselves by lying on a return? Service of process is not about the
credibility of the person who executes service. It is about the
person's age and ability to swear under oath to facts about the
service. This is why Federal Rule 4 reads the way it does. This is
why T.R.C.P. Rules 103, 536 and 176 read the way they do. Anyone
over eighteen who is not a party to the case (and not interested in
the outcome) can deliver process.
Passing a licensing bill or creating a certification program that
resembles licensing goes against the trend in Texas and in the
country. Twenty-six states have a Federal Rule 4 equivalent for
service of state court issued process. The remaining majority have
a Rule 103 equivalent. Licensing, like what could be found in SB
165, is not the trend in Texas or the national trend. (Certification is
also not the trend hence the reason to keep it as simple as
possible). Licensing is an extreme measure only instituted when an
industry represents harm to the public or pervasive fraud exists.
Being that process servers do not harm the public, the often used
argument is that some private process servers engage in "gutter
service". Even if it were true, which we have found little or no
evidence supporting this argument, falsifying a government
document is already against the law. If a server or servers have
done gutter service and then lied on an officer's return, they should
be arrested and charged with a crime. Where's the need for
licensing? Where's the need for a board to regulate us? Show us
some proof!!! At none of the three hearings on SB 165, was there
one shred of evidence offered that indicated process servers were
engaging in fraudulent behavior or causing harm to the public.
Please go to the Players and History page for more on facts that
led up to process servers winning statewide certification without
the constables' help.
This site is maintained by Tod E. Pendergrass
Certified Private Process Server
Supreme Court No. SCH1660
About TEXAS PROCESS WATCH
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |