thanks UniKorn its very hard to find this information but you always provide it.

would a caution for 'harrasment without violence' still be disclosed?

I have a single caution for 'harassment without violence' I am desperate to find out if my offence will be filtered I have looked at the SCHEDULE 15 list and found this 57 'An offence under section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (c. 40) (putting people in fear of violence).'
Does this mean anyone who committed any offence under the protection from harassment act 1997 will be on this list? or only people with an offence under section 4 'harassment by putting people in fear of violence' which does not apply to me? I understand it to mean only people with offences under section 4 of this act while my offence seems to be under section 2 of this act.

Post Edited (charh777) : 28/05/2013 22:05:32 (GMT+1)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dbs-list-of-offences-that-will-never-be-filtered-from-a-criminal-record-check

here is the list of offences which will not be filtered.

in response to XL its not made clear. I think a conviction will only be filtered if its the only offence(which i understand to mean cautions and convictions). I thinks someone with two cautions may have them filtered but someone with a conviction and a caution would always have the conviction disclosed.

I cant be bothered now to find the link but I have seen in a black on the DBS website that if a job is exempt from the ROA act and they ask if you have a conviction/caution you can answer no if its conviction/caution that is subject to filtering.

An employer can only ask an individual to provide details of convictions and
cautions that they are legally entitled to know.
Where a Standard or Enhanced certificate can legally be requested (this is
where the position is one that is listed in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
1975 (Exceptions) Order 1975), an employer can only ask an individual about
convictions and cautions that would fall under the rules described above. That
means only those convictions and cautions that would be disclosed on a DBS
certificate.
If an employer takes into account a conviction or caution that would not have
been disclosed they are acting unlawfully under the Rehabilitation of
Offenders Act 1974.
When completing the DBS application form, a question will be asked whether
you have ever been convicted of a criminal offence. The response to this
question should only be in relation to convictions which would not be subject
to filtering.
There are a small number of defined positions where details of all convictions
and cautions may be taken into account. These positions do not come
through the DBS process. Examples are national security and police vetting.
Has eligibility for a DBS check been affected by these changes?
No. Further guidance on eligibility can be found on the DBS website:
Eligible positions guidance
What if I don’t obtain certificates from DBS?
If the position/occupation is not covered by filtering then the employer is
entitled to ask about, and receive information about, all spent convictions and
cautions. The employer should, however, follow existing guidance and
conduct a case-by-case analysis of any spent convictions and cautions and
consider how, if at all, they are relevant to the position sought.
It would be advisable for the employer to keep records of the reasons for any
employment decision (and in particular rejections), including whether any
spent convictions or cautions were taken into account and, if so, why. If the
employee fails to disclose any spent convictions or cautions, he/she will not
be protected from the consequences of this (i.e. the ROA will not apply).

Post Edited (charh777) : 30/05/2013 00:40:53 (GMT+1)

its worth noting the government haven't actually been given permission to appeal yet

the court may not give them permission to appeal unless they have found a significant flaw in the original ruling.

OMG!!!!!!!!! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21942544
The government has announced minor convinctions/cautions will be filtered from CRB CHECKS!!!!!

Not sure if it's got an official name as yet, but keep track of it here:

 

I can tell you where this information soon won't be, eh moderator?

Am i right in thinking this is totally seperate to the LASPO bill which should be commencing in November?

Hello Rob, Everyone,

Sorry - the first broadcast is actually found at:
Archives \ 20 May \ Committees \ HoC Second Delegated Legislation Committee - 4.30pm to 5pm.

the second is found at
Archives \ 21 May \ Committees \ HoL Grand Committee - 3.30pm to 5.18pm

Both are worth watching and it looks like it's moving in the right direction. Where does it go next?

Regards
Hugh

Hello Rob, Everyone,

UniKorn,

Isn't their ruling more to do with how far in the past the offense or offenses were committed rather than the number of convictions? (Forgive my lack of legal terminology).

"Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." - Solzhenitsyn

That's wrong though isn't it. They have announced that a minor conviction/caution will be filtered under certain circumstances. For somebody like me with more than one conviction although minor dating back to 20 years ago....nothing has changed. It's good news for many though so I suppose it's a step in the right direction. But I'm getting more and more convinced that for me the only positive step is a step onto an aeroplane out of here.

"Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." - Solzhenitsyn

Unikorn,
I hope you're right my friend.....I hope you're right.

"Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." - Solzhenitsyn

It doesn't go far enough. If accepted, it won't change things for many at all. Bearing this in mind, would it be better for them to not accept it? I'm not entirely sure how the legislative process works. Maybe somebody else could enlighten.....?

"Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." - Solzhenitsyn

I've just found this Report by Sunita Mason on Filtering of Old and Minor Convictions. Somebody was asking earlier on the thread about what would constitute a 'minor' conviction. She give examples on Page 3:

https://www.unlock.org.uk/userfiles/file/employment/IAfCIM%20-%20Rpt~Final%20-%20Filtering%20of%20Old%20and%20Minor%20Applications%20-%2019%20Dec%2011.pdf


1 Drunk and disorderly

2. Offence against property

3. Failure to report an accident


These offences seem more like 'mistakes' or errors of judgement made by somebody at some point. There's no provision for somebody who's life had gone 'off the rails' and then subsequently mended their ways and lived an offending free life for years after a certain point. I suppose I'll have to look forward to my 100th birthday; I might get a job then as a carer.....for myself.

"Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." - Solzhenitsyn