Someone explain what is 'spent' under the Rehabilitation Act

Home Forum Chat Forum Someone explain what is 'spent' under the Rehabilitation Act

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)
  • Someone explain what is 'spent' under the Rehabilitation Act
  • nbt
    Member

    Speeding offences do not need to be mentioned 🙂

    If you;d gone to court or more likely jail, you would need to mention it

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    Don't forget to mention any parking tickets which you might have received.

    btw, I'm not sure whether criminal convictions to become spent, or ignored, after a 'rehabilitation period' in the case of serial killers.

    btw, I'm not sure whether criminal convictions to become spent, or ignored, after a 'rehabilitation period' in the case of serial killers.

    Certain offences never become unspent. Notably murder and wearing socks with sandals.

    grumm
    Member

    Can't believe you are even considering putting it down!

    Munqe-chick
    Member

    What is the exact wording? does it say "criminal convictions" or "criminal convictions and cautions"?? speeding tickets DO NOT need to go down they are not a "criminal conviction" per se like for example, burglary or robbery.

    Exact question for one application is:
    'Have you ever been convicted of a criminal offence not treated as a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of offenders's act 1974?' Under this description, i feel i don't need to say anything about speeding convictions.

    However another application states that under the Rehabilitation Act:
    'you are entitled to withhold information about any 'spent' convictions as per the details outlined on the previous page. All other convictions, including formal cautions, reprimands, driving convictions, convictions within the arned forces, convictions outside the UK must be included.'

    It has all got me very confused. Are the above two examples the same, or does it come down to how it is worded? This help is greatly appreciated, as i can't find any useful info on the net.

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    As I understand it (insurance contract law, material fact, utmost good faith), once a conviction is spent, it is as if it never occurred – to the extent that you can sue someone for defamation if the called you a convicted drunk driver after your conviction was spent.

    I'd have a look into the act and find out what the "spent" period is for your offence. If it's spent (3/5 years?) you don't mention i, if it's not, you should. CBA should help if you can't find out ont' web

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    clicky – looks like 5 years so if it was more than 5 years ago, don't mention it.

    If it was less, you should, but state what offence it was and I can't believe it's going to affect your chances much. Who'd put their hand up and say they're never exceeded 80mph on the motorway? (non divers excepted!)

    I am filling out application forms to celebrate no longer being a student. But on application forms it keeps asking if i have and spent or not-spent convictions under the Rehabilitation Act of 1974. Looking up said act shows examples of people being rehabilitated aftre prison sentances, and what i would call major offences.

    I have a single speeding conviction, 80 on a motorway is hardly the biggest offence in the book. Im not here to argue about the justification for speeding, there are plenty of other threads around for that. I also understand that a speeding conviction also counts as a criminal record, so assume i must declare it somewhere on the form.

    My question is, do i enter it in the box for the above mentioned act, or does it go somewhere else? I don't want to enter it in the box that says i am a serial killer (which is what it sounds like if i do enter under the rehabilitaiton act), because it is only a speeding conviction. I dont want to be losing out by putting it in the wrong place! I think it does go under this act, but seeking clarification really!?

    Cheers

    tankslapper
    Member

    default

    It relates to criminal activity – not for speeding/ civil as far as I'm aware

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    Endorsements

    An endorsement is not a 'disability, prohibition or other penalty' within the meaning of the Act, and therefore it cannot affect the rehabilitation period of a motoring conviction. So, for example, if a motorist is fined for drink driving and has his or her licence endorsed, the rehabilitation period would be five years (the length applicable to the fine) rather than 11 years (the length of time before a driver convicted of drink driving is entitled to a clean driving licence).

    im glad it's not just me that is confused by this act. i will probably try contacting the CAB, but for the meantime think i will state on the safe side and mention it, but as suggested above state that it is for a motorway conviction at 80mph and hope they take pity!

    cheers all for the advice. Back to the application forms!

    Munqe-chick
    Member

    The first point is "Criminal conviction" have you been convicted in court of a CRIMINAL offence … not speeding. The 2nd one includes cautions, formal warnings, speeding etc as it mentions speeding and you have a speeding conviction with the last year 5 years then yes you need to mention it.

    RichPenny
    Member

    Just lie anyway, none of their business IMO.

    Ewan
    Member

    IANAL but I think driving conviction would refer to something that went to court, e.g. causing death by dangerous driving or something.

    They're not going to sack you if they later find out you once got 3 points on your licence (if you claim ignorance), but you could well get put on the auto reject pile…

    falkirk-mark
    Member

    I second Ewans comment,I work with a girl who used to work in the personnel office and she reckons they rarely check, but if you mention something that is even spent they would not look on it favourably.

    donald
    Member

    A fixed point penalty is not a conviction. To be convicted of something you have to go to court.

    Unless you were actually taken to court and convicted then you just answer "No". If you were taken to court then you need to look into it a little more but I'd guess the answer would still be "No".

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)

The topic ‘Someone explain what is 'spent' under the Rehabilitation Act’ is closed to new replies.