theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


3 Passport scenarios (I assume these are legal, or else that's the question - not seeking criminal...


3 Passport scenarios (I assume these are legal, or else that's the...

Author
Message
BenS
BenS
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 302, Visits: 2.9K
Harmless - 18 Sep 18 8:54 AM

I know an RSO who face to face claimed he just went to Germany undeclared (but using his declared passport) to "see what happened" (his life is so ruined he's just having fun with it now).

Nothing happened, he said. 



If he only "just" went to Germany, it might take a while for the Border Force's entry information to be sent to his PPU ...

There is an RSO (more than downloading, served several years in prison) who went to the US on holiday without notifying. He got into the US no problem by ticking "no" on an ESTA, but was arrested on return once the PPU got the information about his arrival from UK Border Force. He was sent back to prison. The story can be found online but I'm not sure I should link it as we all feel the same way about privacy and the Google effect.

As an aside, this would suggest that unless you tell the US about your conviction, you're very unlikely to have a problem when travelling on an ESTA, but it would be best to wait until you no longer to notify under the SOR.
Harmless
Harmless
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)Supreme Being (13K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110, Visits: 391
BenS - 18 Sep 18 10:06 AM
Harmless - 18 Sep 18 8:54 AM

I know an RSO who face to face claimed he just went to Germany undeclared (but using his declared passport) to "see what happened" (his life is so ruined he's just having fun with it now).

Nothing happened, he said. 



If he only "just" went to Germany, it might take a while for the Border Force's entry information to be sent to his PPU ...

There is an RSO (more than downloading, served several years in prison) who went to the US on holiday without notifying. He got into the US no problem by ticking "no" on an ESTA, but was arrested on return once the PPU got the information about his arrival from UK Border Force. He was sent back to prison. The story can be found online but I'm not sure I should link it as we all feel the same way about privacy and the Google effect.

As an aside, this would suggest that unless you tell the US about your conviction, you're very unlikely to have a problem when travelling on an ESTA, but it would be best to wait until you no longer to notify under the SOR.

He long ago (maybe 3/4 years ago) went (only\just) to Germany. and then back, with no ill consequences for himself.

Moreover he did it for our benefit! To try and elucidate the actual mechanisms involved and provide us with a data point.

So we him one I guess!


Edited
4 Years Ago by Harmless
Yankee
Yankee
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)Supreme Being (41K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 234, Visits: 994
BenS - 18 Sep 18 8:38 AM
I don't have a factual source on what I said about the SISII running by name matches rather than passport numbers. I "learnt" this from another user on here, who asserted this. So it's not gospel, but I would tend to agree with it - otherwise any RSO could simply get a new passport and not report it, then travel freely undetected. It can't be that easy. So it would make sense that it's your name and DOB on the system and not just your passport number. Monkos's example shows this perfectly: people with Arabic names being stopped due to sharing a name with someone on a watchlist. Obviously these innocent trravellers won't have the same passport number as the people on the watchlist but they still flag up - reason: name.

But obviously this is all speculation.

The UK Passport Office system has a marker field that can be flagged by the PPU (as does the DVLA) so that they are notified automatically of any 'activity' such as ordering a new passport or changing a name. I don't know whether this marker is set for every RSO or only those where the PPU assess there is a risk of name change (in one of the police documents I read it discussed risk factors such as a job that required overseas travel, other convictions that had a fraud element,....)
Square
Square
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 85, Visits: 339
BenS - 18 Sep 18 8:38 AM
I don't have a factual source on what I said about the SISII running by name matches rather than passport numbers. I "learnt" this from another user on here, who asserted this. So it's not gospel, but I would tend to agree with it - otherwise any RSO could simply get a new passport and not report it, then travel freely undetected. It can't be that easy. So it would make sense that it's your name and DOB on the system and not just your passport number. Monkos's example shows this perfectly: people with Arabic names being stopped due to sharing a name with someone on a watchlist. Obviously these innocent trravellers won't have the same passport number as the people on the watchlist but they still flag up - reason: name.

But obviously this is all speculation.

The information regarding SISII can be hound at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32007D0533 
The information stored in the database is:

3.   The information on persons in relation to whom an alert has been issued shall be no more than the following:

(a)

surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth and previously used names and any aliases which may be entered separately;

(b)

any specific, objective, physical characteristics not subject to change;

(c)

place and date of birth;

(d)

sex;

(e)

photographs;

(f)

fingerprints;

(g)

nationality(ies);

(h)

whether the person concerned is armed, violent or has escaped;

(i)

reason for the alert;

(j)

authority issuing the alert;

(k)

a reference to the decision giving rise to the alert;

(l)

action to be taken;

(m)

link(s) to other alerts issued in SIS II pursuant to Article 52;

(n)

the type of offence.



Details on accessing what SISII alerts are on the UK system for you can be requested (see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/421540/SISII_General_Information_document.pdf), and you can request disclosure from each member country individually. 
BenS
BenS
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)Supreme Being (60K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 302, Visits: 2.9K
Square - 23 Sep 18 8:31 AM
BenS - 18 Sep 18 8:38 AM
I don't have a factual source on what I said about the SISII running by name matches rather than passport numbers. I "learnt" this from another user on here, who asserted this. So it's not gospel, but I would tend to agree with it - otherwise any RSO could simply get a new passport and not report it, then travel freely undetected. It can't be that easy. So it would make sense that it's your name and DOB on the system and not just your passport number. Monkos's example shows this perfectly: people with Arabic names being stopped due to sharing a name with someone on a watchlist. Obviously these innocent trravellers won't have the same passport number as the people on the watchlist but they still flag up - reason: name.

But obviously this is all speculation.

The information regarding SISII can be hound at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32007D0533 
The information stored in the database is:

3.   The information on persons in relation to whom an alert has been issued shall be no more than the following:

(a)

surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth and previously used names and any aliases which may be entered separately;

(b)

any specific, objective, physical characteristics not subject to change;

(c)

place and date of birth;

(d)

sex;

(e)

photographs;

(f)

fingerprints;

(g)

nationality(ies);

(h)

whether the person concerned is armed, violent or has escaped;

(i)

reason for the alert;

(j)

authority issuing the alert;

(k)

a reference to the decision giving rise to the alert;

(l)

action to be taken;

(m)

link(s) to other alerts issued in SIS II pursuant to Article 52;

(n)

the type of offence.



Details on accessing what SISII alerts are on the UK system for you can be requested (see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/421540/SISII_General_Information_document.pdf), and you can request disclosure from each member country individually. 

Regarding the ability to see SISII information on yourself, the information in that document (and others) and the link simply go to the ACRO website for doing a subject access request on yourself. I.e. a complete extract of your criminal record (spent and unspent). I already have one of these on myself so I know what it looks like - but this surely is different from what is seen on SISII? When you do an ACRO request, you can't see anything specifically relating to SISII, like reasons for an alert, etc. It just goes around in circles and ends up with the ACRO SAR. So I'm not sure if there is actually any way of seeing what SISII has on you.

Or do you specify in the request that you are expressly looking to view your SISII details rather than your general criminal record?
Edited
4 Years Ago by BenS
AB2014
AB2014
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)Supreme Being (95K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 884, Visits: 5.5K
BenS - 24 Sep 18 7:58 AM
Square - 23 Sep 18 8:31 AM
BenS - 18 Sep 18 8:38 AM
I don't have a factual source on what I said about the SISII running by name matches rather than passport numbers. I "learnt" this from another user on here, who asserted this. So it's not gospel, but I would tend to agree with it - otherwise any RSO could simply get a new passport and not report it, then travel freely undetected. It can't be that easy. So it would make sense that it's your name and DOB on the system and not just your passport number. Monkos's example shows this perfectly: people with Arabic names being stopped due to sharing a name with someone on a watchlist. Obviously these innocent trravellers won't have the same passport number as the people on the watchlist but they still flag up - reason: name.

But obviously this is all speculation.

The information regarding SISII can be hound at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32007D0533 
The information stored in the database is:

3.   The information on persons in relation to whom an alert has been issued shall be no more than the following:

(a)

surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth and previously used names and any aliases which may be entered separately;

(b)

any specific, objective, physical characteristics not subject to change;

(c)

place and date of birth;

(d)

sex;

(e)

photographs;

(f)

fingerprints;

(g)

nationality(ies);

(h)

whether the person concerned is armed, violent or has escaped;

(i)

reason for the alert;

(j)

authority issuing the alert;

(k)

a reference to the decision giving rise to the alert;

(l)

action to be taken;

(m)

link(s) to other alerts issued in SIS II pursuant to Article 52;

(n)

the type of offence.



Details on accessing what SISII alerts are on the UK system for you can be requested (see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/421540/SISII_General_Information_document.pdf), and you can request disclosure from each member country individually. 

Regarding the ability to see SISII information on yourself, the information in that document (and others) and the link simply go to the ACRO website for doing a subject access request on yourself. I.e. a complete extract of your criminal record (spent and unspent). I already have one of these on myself so I know what it looks like - but this surely is different from what is seen on SISII? When you do an ACRO request, you can't see anything specifically relating to SISII, like reasons for an alert, etc. It just goes around in circles and ends up with the ACRO SAR. So I'm not sure if there is actually any way of seeing what SISII has on you.

Or do you specify in the request that you are expressly looking to view your SISII details rather than your general criminal record?

I would expect the SISII information to be a mixture of what ACRO tells you and information held locally, equivalent to the approved information disclosed on an enhanced DBS check. If you apply for copies of both sets of information, that should cover it. As with enhanced DBS checks, I doubt that the police would add any information that is not held either on the PNC or in local files.

=========================================================================================================

Robert Lightfoot, former head of NASA, said it succinctly in his parting speech in April 2018: Protecting against risk and being safe are not the same thing ... [W]e must move from risk management to risk leadership. From a risk management perspective, the safest place to be is on the ground. From a risk leadership perspective, I believe thats the worst place [we] can be.

GO


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search