When cases do not bring an F/N VGIs to the Examiner, it is the signal to study the whole case anew and find the bug or bugs that keep it from running and get them handled.

Recently I took over a whole series of these non F/N VGI at Examiner cases and very very carefully studied each one. In every examiner non F/N case I found flagrant out tech in (a) the Programming (b) the C/Sing and (c) the Auditing. All three outnesses existed.

These cases were taken as all the Non F/N Exam reports on a line containing hundreds of folders and over 600 W. D. hours a week. So you can see that these errors had been missed by expert C/Ses and Auditors. The errors were missed because hope was being used instead of study.

There was a hope that just routine C/Ses and auditing would work it out eventually.

The fact of non F/N at Examiner was not given sufficient importance.

The fact is that many who F/Ned at the Examiner had small flaws in them yet still got by.

The Exam Non F/N indicates flagrant out tech in the Programming and the C/Sing and the auditing. That’s what it takes.

After a bug is found and corrected the case still may not F/N at the Examiner for a while. But after that while is passed the failure to give the Examiner an F/N means another bug and more study.

One case I found had had a major grade done twice two years apart. This was pointed out and rehabbed. But after 2 or 3 sessions the TA remained high. A restudy now found Recall Flow 2 of the Exteriorization Rundown had been run months ago to F/N and then continued for dozens of commands with the TA rising to 4.5. This was then repaired. The case then began to F/N at the Examiner. It now runs like an ordinary case.

There is always a bug, not necessarily current, often very old, in these Exam Non F/N Cases. There are sometimes two or three bugs.

The answer is not go on C/Sing and hope.

The answer is, study and find the bug.

Cases run on triples after a long list of singles is a type of bug.

Cases exteriorizing and then getting no Ext RD is another bug.

Cases given false reads or*Editor’s Note: Probably a typo in the original: instead of “or” it should read “on”. See below on point 7. already run W/Hs, cases who don’t tell their cogs, cases who were on drugs but drugs were never run, cases that Rockslammed but no crime found, any of the GF 40 or GF reading items, cases with lists out, cases that are always sad or tired… well these types of cases are the usual bugged cases. But even they sometimes F/N if only to roller coaster.

The general rule of going back to where the case was running well and coming forward still holds. But an audit past Exteriorization can be before that and only eventually catch up.

General repair is harmful when a big bug exists.

Every case I examined had a big bug. Flagrant god-awful overruns, messed up Exteriorization Rundown, three major programs begun, each incomplete, engram after engram botched and run to high TA then walked off from. The errors were real! They had been sitting there for some time unnoticed. Session after session mounting up into piles of wasted auditing.

Sick pcs are another indicator. Pc F/Ns at Exam, then reports sick. Look behind it you find some wild program, C/S and auditing error.

So the answer is to study the case.

Get a total FES done if one has never been done. Get a current FES done or do it yourself.

Then examine the programs and the FESes and Folder Summaries and suddenly you’ll find it.

Fortunately there aren’t many things that can really foul a case up.

1. Overruns concealed within work sheets. Major grades twice.

2. Auditing past Exterior or flubbed Ext RDs.

3. Earlier unrun flows restimulated by later runs on those flows.

4. GF + 40 Items.

5. Never handled out lists.

6. Undetected drugs or drugs never handled by Dianetics.

7. False reads called (as in w/hs that “won’t blow”).

8. Hidden standards.

9. Long Duration ARC Brks.

10. Impractical or inapplicable programs.

11. Major actions started never completed.

12. Overrepair.

There can be combinations of these.

So there aren’t many. It’s really knowing what is right so well that the wrong shows up like skywriting.

Sometimes the errors are silly. A bogged Dianetic case had gotten tons of VI repair.

The C/S, an VIII, had never realized Dianetic C/Sing is its own brand of C/Sing. He didn’t shift gears to Dianetic C/Sing when C/Sing Dianetics sessions. The auditor way back had not known that when the pc originates “It’s erased” and the TA remains high, his correct action is one more A B C D. This C/S had then tried Class VI remedies instead of telling the auditor”Flatten or rehab the last chain”.

When the chains left unflat were rehabbed all was suddenly well.

Another case was interrupted for a year on a major action and when returned to auditing was begun on a long, long repair program. Inches of folder later the interrupted program was found and resumed and the case did great. All that “hopeful” repair was lost work. Ten minutes of case study would have saved twenty hours of useless repair.

The stable datum is cases moderately well programmed, C/Sed and audited run well.

So cases that don’t run well (unchanging Exam natter comment, Non F/N) have a big error in Programming, C/Sing and Auditing.

Look well and you will find it. And if that isn’t it, there was another to be found as well.

If you can’t find the folder or data in it you should take every imaginable measure to acquire more data. D of P Interviews, 2WC sessions, telexes to his last org and telegrams to his auditors. But get data from somewhere somehow.

Soon, when hours pick up and skill, all auditing will be sold by package not by hours. So learn economy of hours!

An auditor or C/S who really knows his theory and has a good grasp of practical application knows the right way. From that he can easily see how things are wrong.

An ounce of case study is worth ten pounds of wasted sessions.