Any clarity with this? I'm in exactly the same position. Conviction will be 11 years old in May and I have no further convictions.

The other issue is that it mentions only about protecting if an employer asks about previous convictions. I thought one of the cases was about someone trying to get onto a college course?

What is interesting from Chris's link is that there seems to be two amendments to legislation:

Change to the Police Act 1997: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111537749
and
Change to the ROA: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111537718/contents

Does the legislation address all of the judgments raised in the court of appeal case?
Or is there still a chance that further action could be taken?

This is the Video of the committee session in the House of Common discussing the changes:
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=13166

The changes to the ROA and Police Act got through the Commons (see video link above).
But I'm not sure its going to help that many people (won't help me!)
As the list of offenses that will still need to be disclosed is huge!
Basically its any offense that is Sexual or in the following list: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/schedule/15

UniKorn,

The proposed changes haven't been made in the form of a bill, rather in the form of an SI (Statutory Instrument). It's called:

"(Draft) Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1975 (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2013"

It has been laid before the House of Commons and is currently awaiting ratification pending on what's known as the "affirmative procedure". That is, MP's have to vote to pass it through and it must gain a majority in the House. The same thing goes for the House of Lords. You can see confirmation of this here: https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmsilist/section-e.htm (scroll down to see it among the various other SI's).

It is worth noting that the Government haven't somehow forgotten or don't care about the changes, there was a debate in Westminster only a few days ago about it (I watched it online). The only thing we can do is wait until it gets voted upon. This shouldn't take more than a few months from now, would think.

The proposed legislation will be in the House of Commons on the 20th and in the House of Lords on the 21st. Fingers crossed they like it!

Why have we not heard anything here, surely the time to appeal has ran out by now? If the judgement was passed down, surely it has to be followed through??

Great news! Although it actually mentions 'non-custodial sentences' for convictions will be filtered after 11 years which I believe is the same as 'minor'. Basically am I right to say minor mean ANY offence which does not lead to a custodial sentence?

Some convictions however can result in prison sentences and in some circumstances the same conviction can result in a fine only (e.g. motoring criminal conviction). Does this mean if you had received only a fine, after 11 years it would be filtered out? I guess with the new DBS system where records are sent to the individual first you could always challenge this if your record was not filtered when it should be.

For those that are interested, I received the following correspondence from the Disclosure & Barring Service:

Disclosure & Barring Service - Court of Appeal ruling: an update

February 2013

Last month, we told you the Home Office was seeking leave to appeal a Court of Appeal judgment on the disclosure of old and minor convictions. The Court found the law which requires people to disclose all previous convictions and cautions to employers is a breach of human rights. It found the current system disproportionate in dealing with historic and minor spent convictions and cautions. The Home Secretary and Secretary of State for Justice have recently lodged an application to appeal against this judgment. Pending the Supreme Court's decision on permission, the Court of Appeal's judgment has been temporarily suspended. While this suspension is in force, it is business as usual for us. We will continue to issue Standard and Enhanced certificates and these show all convictions and cautions as normal. We will keep you updated with the latest information on this judgment via DBS News and our website.

So does that mean an enhanced disclosure would show up a historic conviction? ............. and if asked is it ok to say no to the question of any spent convictions? Sorry If I appear dim, but cannot believe this is actually happening!!!

Thanks Aspire.

I miss Moo too!!!! come back soon....! Well as you know I have one conviction going back almost 28 yrs, and am just wondering if I will need to disclose or when it will be going through and fools like me will be safe!! ~

Wow the list is massive!!!! I'm hoping the new legislation will help me, (shoplifting 28 yrs ago, 1st & last offence).... I've looked at the list 3 times and couldn't see anything.

Thanks very much Chris. I wish something could go through that would help more people, kind of widen the net a bit because there are probably a few thousand people who would love to breathe out again.

The only thing I've managed to find on this subject is from the Unlock site itself. In the very helpful overview given on the old process of filtering convictions on the Unlock site, there is mention of a court challenge to the government in 'late 2012'. Has anybody heard anything further about this, as I can find nothing? It is no exaggeration to say that my life is on hold at the moment pending the outcome of this case (as it was running up to the implementation of the Protection of Freedoms Act, and what a disappointment that was). It is a shame nothing is happening in relation to the European side of things as there is a clear disparity between Member States on the issue, with people discriminated against simply from being a UK citizen. To still feel the ramifications of a minor conviction given over 12 years ago is ridiculous. I may have to move out of the UK in order to remedy this problem. It's crazy!

Thanks Christopher for the update.

I'm in a bit of an unusual situation in that a minor conviction from over 12 years ago is preventing me from entering a professional body (and consequently employment). It is not a dishonesty conviction. However, I did not disclose it initially and am now subject to a Standard CRB, so my entry to the profession has stalled. Incidentally, had I disclosed the conviction, I would have had to disclose every other involvement I've had with the police (that's the rules). I've been arrested a few times, as I used to knock around with a bit of a rough crowd. I only have a single conviction for obstructing a PC for which I received a small fine. The professional body has made it clear that previous arrests will likely bar entry to the profession, so I'm in a sticky situation.

I've worked hard in order to better myself and make a decent life, but as things stand, the last 10 years is effectively a write off. I actually left a job in anticipation of the change in law last April, so you can imagine how disappointed I was when the government effectively bottled it.

If things don't change within the next year, I will have to emigrate. I will also be bankrupt. Thanks Labour!

PS Thanks for all of your organisations hard work. Ironically, I work in this sector, so know first hand the desperation that previous convictions can cause, and the lack of sympathy others mostly have towards those with them. It can cause a vicious circle. Perhaps it is a sign of our negative society that we choose to dwell on the punishment aspect of a conviction rather than the element of reformation. However, I digress.

Interesting Parliamentary note dated 18 October 2012 setting out the current position on Criminal Records retention and disclosure.

www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06441

On the last page of the attached document is the following.

"It is therefore currently unclear when (or indeed if) any new filtering mechanism might be introduced."

So all the meetings, the time and expense to all those involved in producing the review was a complete waste. When the government says something is "under review", it usually means the proposal has been shelved. Is there no way to perhaps find out exactly what that review process is, or find out a timescale for the review? It doesn't seem right that the Government can simply bat away the proposals in Mason's report so easily after all the hard work and effort that must have gone into producing such a document.

Post Edited By Moderator (Christopher Stacey) : 09/11/2012 13:15:55 GMT

Just a quick update for anyone following this case:

www.panopticonblog.com/2012/11/28/court-of-appeal-considers-whether-the-enhanced-criminal-records-certificate-regime-infringes-article-8/

And the Court of Appeal case information:

casetracker.justice.gov.uk/listing_calendar/getDetail.do?case_id=20120520