Spy Blog - SpyBlog.org.uk

...do you think it is likely that 'stepped down' convictions will still show on an enhanced CRB?

I have three that were 'stepped down' in 1996 and have to complete an enhanced CRB soon for my employer, who doesn't know about my past.

Please help, I am worried sick that my past will come back to haunt me over 20 years later )-:

Comment for Marjorie, I have the same problem as you. I was convicted 14 years ago and I understand that this can now be conisdered spent however will it showe up on a CRB check???

ANY ONE HELP ME?
Being given mixed messages...was given (or had no choice but to accept) a caution at age of 22, now 38. been working in nursery school office for a year - same employer for 3 yrs previous- never requested I do a crb form but now am being asked to do an enhanced 1 has been asked for as working around children. Fair dos everyone has one from the kitchen staff to the Headteacher! Dataprotection chap says - don't declare it - its not a conviction and after 16 yrs its definitely deleted - check on PNC came back clear. phoned local station - comes up as archived and says 'caution' no details. I'm like Marjorie worried sick it will come up because its an enhanced check.
Many people on websites say - 'don't worry - you've not had dealings with police - no recurrance - forget it. It won't show. Others say - be honest - tell your employer. Dataman says - don't worry - don't tell them. PNC advisors say - it 'could' come up - up to me what I do, etc, etc. Its terribly annoyed and giving me (and others) anxiety that is totally unecessary. Why do professionals connected with the police force itself give out contradictory information? I said to dataman @ police HQ I'll give your name etc as the person who advised me not to say anything if anything comes up - he said fine - cos it won't. Really, I just want to be told - don't declare it on crb form because a caution itsn't a conviction so one is not lying. 2. It won't show up because the Chief OFficer person will deem it totally unnecessary to be shown as its 16 yrs old and for something totally unrelated to violence, abuse, etc. I'm a law abiding citizen. Unfortunately with 20:20 vision if I knew then at 22 what I know now. I could have had the police done for harrassment, both sexual and racial. So, is there anyone there who can help me OUT HERE? I've emailed the Chief at my local station and guess what - She hasn't got back to me...and is she meant to me the person who makes the almighty decision of whether a caution from 16 yrs back is declared on the crb enhanced check? Some people have had cautions and not further connections with police after 6 yrs I read and nothing appeared on enhanced crb check for them. Apologies for long windedness, obviously anxiety is seeping through my words. Many thanks in advance to who responds.

In 1970, when I was 17, I was convicted of possession of drugs (LSD)and sentanced to probation. This was before the Misuse fo Drugs Act 1971 and in those days drugs were not classed 'A, B & C' as they are today. I have no other convictions.

I have never needed to disclose the offence to employers until now but may need to go through a Stndard Level CRB disclosure soon. Should I disclose the conviction or can I safely assume it is stepped down and won't show up on the Standard CRB check?

In july 2001 I was given a police caution for actual bodily harm following a provoced scuffle I have not been in trouble with the police prior too or since that date.I applied to migrate to canada in september of 2006 as i had an offer of employment .I was told in 2001 that this caution would remain on file for 5 years so was suprised to see it on my police search ,as the caution was spent i enclosed the police check with my application for immigration as requested.On november the 30th i received a letter from the canadian immigration office refusing my application for a work visa and enrty into canada based on this caution.If this caution had been removed as i was informed would be the case in 2001 then i feel that my work visa would have been granted. please can anyone advise me how to get this information removed from the subject access report.I understand that the law cahnged from the 31st of march 2006 but feel strongly that this law should only stand for cautions etc given from that date and that all previous caution information should be removed as informed by the officer who gave it to me .I therefore feel that the opportunity of living in a new country with my family has been cruely denied me due to this change in the law

I was followed and watched by the police for quite some time on suspicion of being a drug dealer. I wasn't and am not. I was an addict at the time.

Anyway, obviously, no arrest -no communication at all in fact. I only knew they were watching me cos a nurse at the hospital told me so.

Would the information they collected on me be on their computer? If so, what can I do about geting it removed?

what a nightmare this is for people who did something stupid years ago and yet it follows you round like a bad smell. 30 years ago i stole a can of hairspray and was caught by the store detective, me and my friend paniced and tried to run, store/d had hold of us and i pushed her away with my hand that was actually holding a bag of crisps. you guys no the outcome.... yes a shoplifting charge and ABH. i have written to tony blair, the home office, the police station were i was arrested and the beloved CRB. but there is no chance of a reprieve, sad really because ive nearlly completed a childhood & youth studies degree (6 years wasted) but hey lets look on the bright side and think of all the work we are giving to our EU cousins, who by the way the majority havent been checked. and if my memory serves me right you dodnt need a CRB check if you are a nanny, au-pair or babysitter. mmmmmmmm

I received a caution a few years back for being drunk and disorderly on New Years Eve!! Anyway, I would really like to pursue a career in Law, but i am very concerned that this caution is likely to be a hindrance. I spoke to someone in the Public Access Department( the people who you apply to for infor held on PNC). THE GIRL I SPOKE TO CONFIRMED THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET CAUTIONS DELETED FROM THE PNC, YOU HAVE TO WRITE IN WITH AS MUCH INFOR AS POSSIBLE, she did confirm that if 5 years has elapsed, that you can apply to have details of your caution removed, as the police don't always do it.

I was cautioned for shoplifting in 1999 when I was a 21. I was young and stupid and certainly won't do anything like that again! Now I am 28 and I just want to put the past behind me, I am pursuing a career in law. Had a Subject Access check from PNC, came back clear but am worried sick about the CRB standard disclosure for when I qualify...anyone knows what I should do??? Thanks!

I found something quite useful (if it is true!)Records containing cautions

GENERAL RULES FOR CRIMINAL RECORD WEEDING ON POLICE SYSTEMS

8. If there are cautions but no convictions on the record and no further cautions have been recorded for a period of five years, the record will be deleted, except where the caution is accompanied by an 'offends against vulnerable person' information marker.

Does that make any sense?
See:

http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/weeding_rules_version5_nov_2000.doc

I graduated in July 2004, and in November 2004, I recieved a caution through recklessness,I could not take it anymore from a particular person(I WAS ONLY HUMAN)I feel what really upsets me, is I was the victim in this case, which turned around to make me look like the criminal. I feel because I had convictions from my past (WHICH ARE ALL SPENT)I feel that the police discriminated me, I explained why would I go out of my way to get in trouble by the police, when I have worked hard to turn my life around,this was the reason I did a degree is to turn my life around, they didnt care, they made me sign this piece of paper, and said your getting a caution,they didnt tell me what the caution was for I wish I had asked because if I had of known I wouldnt have sign that piece of paper and at that point I would have asked for a solicitor.I started applying for work and was ask for CRB checks when it came through, I couldnt believe what the caution was for, and because of this I have been unable to get employment the work I want to do is working with vulunerable groups. I feel that my degree as gone to waste and I feel what was the point.I feel like a fool, what can I do? I have been very depressed over this,I dont know what to do help me please

Good to read posts from people in a similar situation. What a mess this whole system that 1 small moments mistake can throw so many people with degrees or so much to give to waste. I have a police caution and a first class honours degree to waste. I want to be a teacher but im terrified of my caution on the CRB. so many sleepless nights. No one can understand this pain. God Bless you all. Everyone deserves a second chance after all.

I recieved a caution in 2001 at age 21 for shoplifting. I graduated in 2005 and have just started a new job wking in a childrens centre. I didnt declare the caution on my application form as when it asked if I had any convictions... which I havent I replied no.... not realising that underneath it stated long windedly that you had to disclose information about cautions. Yesterday my Employees recieved my CRB check which had the caution listed on it. I was called into the office as they wanted to know why I had not declared it. I stated the problem that I had had with the form and that I had mentioned the fact that I had had a warning by the police to my current boss. Rather than the actual caution they were more concerned about the fact I had not disclosed it. They understood that people did stupid things and I Luckily I managed to persuade them to keep me in post. It is actually illegal to discriminate against people with irrelevant cautions / convictions if indeed they are spent. My employees informed me that if were to apply for any future job, it is very important to be honest and just explain. They went on to say for example, if someone was suffering postnatal depression or grieve etc, it would not at all be fair to discriminate against them for something they may have done in that certain low point of their life. Be honest guys, and explain the reasons behind it. In my case it was because I was out with a group of friends, drunk and really quite unaware of what i was doing. Everyone has there reasons, just learn from it and dont worry about it affecting your careers, it wont! Good luck

I sympathise with everyone who is being made to worry about old mistakes that we should be able to forget about and move on from. I have a caution that is about 8 years old. It seems to be recommended that the police delete this from my record after 5 years although, from what I can gather, this does not always happen. I am about to be subject to a CRB check. Can anyone tell me exactly who I can get in touch with to ensure that this data has been correctly deleted?

It's a shame, the system appears to be failing us all. In 1992 at age 17 I made the biggest mistake of my life by committing a stupid crime. I was arrested by the police and accepted a caution. After spending the best part of a night in the cells it made me seriously reconsider the way my life was going. I made a drastic change to my life and my values. I started working as a cleaner for a property company. I worked like a dog and took every chance of promotion and education working my way up from cleaner, to security, to reception, to marketing, to project management and I put my old ways far behind me. In December 2005 I finally reached the top and was promoted to board level as a Director. Finally all my hard work had paid off, after 14 years of 8am until 9pm, working my butt off, weekends and late nights.... Then the company's Director of Security decided to do a sneaky beaky (old boy network) check on me with his daughter's husband. Who as I recently found out is in the Police force. After that he started dropping comments in conversation about previous convictions 'arrests' and 'cautions' to the point when I knew beyond all reasonable doubt that he knew my past. I had no alternative but to quit. Work had become at best uncomfortable and on occassion I was the 'silent joke'! I felt that I had lied to my bosses even though they never asked me about it in any questionaire or employment form. I was made to feel like dirt over a mistake I made at 17 years of age (technically as an adult) a very long time ago...I'm still looking for a job and fear that news is on the wire in the property community as I have made it through several interviews to final candidate status but keep getting turned down at the very last minute. I am fortunate to have a wonderful wife who's an emotional rock for me and fortunately earns enough to support us both (albeit not without a strain for us both and humilliation for me). Without her I would probably reoffend out of pure anger against a system that just doesn't work the way it should. The one thing I've learn out of this lesson is that if you've got a previous caution be upfront about it but don't expect to make it big for long because while there are written rules, the unwritten rules and old boy network always prevail...

please help me i am worried sick i have been with same employer for nearly 10 years within different departments currently work in admin within a college ages 11-16 i got caught shoplifting in 03 goods worth approx £2.50 which i deeply regret my employer has asked me to fill in a crb form i have only been working in this college just over 2 years i am sure they have done a police record on me before i started this employment but i have declared to my employer of having a criminal record i have not been in trouble before this incident or any thing after. I believe i got a caution for this incident which i believe stays on my record for 6 years will this show up on my record and could i loose my job? Please advise

PLEASE COULD YOU ANSWER THIS SOON AS POSS

"The system held by the CRB is known as a PNC Extract. The extract contains basic identifying details such as name and date of birth of persons included on the PNC. The extract does not contain any conviction information"

If the Extract does not contian any conviction information, how exactly the CRB checks your criminal records???

hi, sorry t ogo off track, but i have an enhanced disclosure that is clear (even tho i did get cautioned a few times many years ago) and have just applied for a usa visa,do they use the same system as the crb chaecks?
Thanks in advance

I had a warning for harrassment in 2005 I now want to work with Children as I am desperate to become a teacher. Will this come up in the check as it was a warning? Please answer asap am worried!

@ LJ - have you phoned the Criminal Records Bureau help line and asked them the hypothetical question "I have a friend who ... etc." ?

CRB Contact Channels page:
http://www.crb.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=422

No, not yet, I asked a friend of a friend who is a headteacher and she said she wouldn't be fussed if it came up so fingers crossed!

I was arrested in 2004 on suspicion of sexual assault. Something which i certainly did not do. I was never charged or even questioned. Can anybody give opinion as to whether this would show up on an enhanced check. Surely it would pass the relevance check. I have one coming up and should it show up i fully intend to take legal action. Any thoughts ?

[via email]:

Hi.

I just tried to post something on your website, asking a question and was not allowed to do so.

The internet does not work properly all the time.

I was cautioned in 2004 and would like to know when this will no longer be shown on a CRB check. Can you advise please? I contacted the police and they were unhelpful. They just said my record would remain for the rest of my life.

[...]

Thanks.

Karen [...]

That does seem to be the current policy, (see the "step down model" links in the article above) depending on the severity of the the offence, but regardless of charges or actual guilt.

You should contact the CRB helpdesk for more information regarding your personal specifics.

http://www.crb.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=422

well i have just finished my PGCE and started a job as a teacher for supply work in the school that i i will be working at. my CRB check is due soon and i am worried sick. i recieved a warning/caution last year in October for theft which occured in the previous year i havent disclosed this info on my form because im so scared. Will it show up on my enhanced disclosure. please reply asap.

Hi, from what I have read it does seem that what you have done in the past does indeed come back to haunt you in a big way.I have yet to do a crb for my employee of 20yrs (nhs) but I did however declare my offences at interview, only to be told "don't worry about that you were only a young lad then" I'd actually had a turbulent 3yr period and was getting into allsorts of problems with the local constabulary.I also have another job with the "private sector". This employee asked me to do a crb check which I did and I again declared that I had had a series of run ins with the law. Luckily the boss of this outfit had known me for several years in the nhs and told me not to worry about it. So I am at present still employed by them! Great I hear you cry so what is your problem? My problem is that I have just heard that all employees in the Trust that I work for will be asked to complete a crb. The trouble is the people that I initially told about my criminal record have all left due to one reason or another, so I have no one to back me up. My current manager of about 7 yrs has no idea of my past and I would quite like to keep it that way as they are also a personal friend outside of work. Although my offences are over 20 yrs old I know that they will rear there ugly head yet again and could not only jepordise my lively hood but also several good relationships. What should I do?

hi

i got the sack from my last job as an oxygen delivery driver for failing a crb check. I was cautioned when i was 21 for possessing cannabis and ecstacy. im now 27, and always figured that my caution would have been deleted after five years. That obviously hasnt happened. Im now working abroad and intend to become a teacher within the next couple of years. Im way past the heady days of being a reckless student. Can someone put up here in a step by step fashion, how one in this situation can get his cautions removed. Im sure theres many in the same situation as id say the majority of students have experimented in thier youths. Thank you for your help.

jeff
just say you only had apuff but didnt inhale it works for mps

Hi everyone

Like some of you i'm worried sick at the moment. I was convicted and fined for a minor shoplifting offence 22 years ago. I was told under the weeding laws that my conviction would be weeded out and deleted after 10 years at the most.

Well guess what i did a subject access and the bloomin thing is still there. I believe it should have been weeded out by now and hope NACRO will help me do that

I've applied in clearing to do a PGCE after getting a good undergraduate degree, i didn't disclose the conviction because i didn't think it would still be there, silly me !!!

The details posted back from the NIS were the full conviction details. However, they stated the system may or may not have some of this information about me but didn't clarify exactly what. They said whatever was there could be deleted if it implied anyone else.

As you can imagine i'm very confused, they've picked up on the information but won't clarify 100% if its been deleted or not, so i don't know what to disclose to the education authority because i don't know what if anything will show up

Then to top everything off my local police sent me their part of the subject access clarifying that they didn't have any informationa about me that they were obliged to enclose

So please can you help me, the law isn't clear and i'm so confused about it all, should i wait to see if anything is picked up on the CRB check and in the meantime contact NACRO about my rights and the weeding laws

Please help

Jane

Jane - 26 August 2007

I was convicted of assault in 1997, the date of the assault 1996. I was a minor at the time and that has showed up on my crb. I'm gutted. Although it's a more serious offence than yours it was just a playground fight at school. I thought it cleared after 2 and half years (being a minor), so i never mentioned it but 11 years later and it's back to haunt me!! I love my job but topmorrow will probably be my last day when they get their copy of the crb disclosure.

Delli

I completely 110% relate to what each of you has said. I'm starting a Masters course in Forensic Psychology in two weeks time, but three and a half years ago I received a caution for damage to public property and possession of cannabis. It was a stupid drunken incident and completely out of character, and I was actually told by the police at the time that it would be wiped off my record after five years. However after reading this article and ringing various organisations (including the CRB), it's clear that this is not the case. As there is understandably some confusion over the procedure, I'll relay what I have learnt here:

At present, the CRB do not have DIRECT access to the Police National Computer. However, current legislation does allow them to request all offence details on the PNC relating to an individual. However this will soon be changing in favour of a 'step down' model (possibly as of October this year, according to May's edition of the CRB 'Disclosure News'). Offences will no longer be deleted (unless you reach 100!), but will be 'stepped down' after a certain period of time that varies according to the nature of the crime. When an offence is 'stepped down' only the police can see the infomation, and they are not 'obliged' to release it to the CRB for inclusion on the disclosure form.

Now this is where things get really ridiculous. Apparently the senior police officers will inform the CRB of a stepped-down offence if it is 'relevant' to the job being applied for. The exact criteria used in this so-called 'relevance test' is far from clear, and this is exactly the information that we need to know. For example, I KNOW that my offences will be 'stepped down' in 10 years time. But I DON'T know whether the police will consider them 'relevant' to the type of positions I will be applying for (although I can certaintly take an educated guess).

We are all in the same boat here, and it really upsets me to think that so much potential talent could be going to waste because of a stupid mistake. If anyone has found out any other information on this new *ahem* 'process' that I have not included here, please post it so that others can try to get there head around this fucking mess.

I recieved a police caution for shoplifting when I was 12,(7 years ago). I have got a job in a school that I will start when my crb comes through. I am losing sleep over this. I have to write to the school to explain the offence and it makes me feel the a criminal. I want to be a teacher and I am worried that something so insignificant like this will effect my future teaching career. I think the law should change for minor offences.

This site has worried me quite a lot i recently had a big argument with an ex girlfriend who was suicidal and a bit crazy. she ran off screaming in the middle of town and i had to hold her still to not create a fuss i was very drunk at the time and this all got misinterpretted and a nearby p[olice officer arrested me. my girlfriend obviosuly did not press charges or anything as i had doen nothing worng though because i was drunk i received a caution for assualt i am now really worried as i am going to uni to study a very ahrd course that this is all goin to come up again in the future. i dotn plan opn working with children or anythign though i plan on working in the competitive finance and accoutning industry is this caution going to affect that?

Alex, I worked in finance for four years and I have not been asked to disclose any offences. Even if you are asked, as the alleged offence is not relevant to a position in finance and accountancy, it is unlikely to affect your application as long as you clearly explain the circumstances on the application form and emphasise the fact that you were not convicted. In your case, I really don't think this will affect your future career. Hope this helps.

I'm 16 and got a caution for shoplifting a year ago. I work as a kitchen assistant in an old people's home and they recently did a CRB check on me. Will I be fired?
PLEASE HELP!!!

The UK government and its police force are in deed abusing the Human Rights of its own citizens by introducing legislation such as the CRB without creating a system to prevent abusing human rights by these systems.

By reporting things such as police investigations about family matters even if there are no convictions and even if the total case rejected by the Crown Court due to lack of evidence raised by some one against other one, by reporting these in the CRB is an abuse. This may destroy that individual and his family and may render him unemployed. Is this what the British government under Gordon Brown Labour Party and its Police forces are doing.

The aim of the CRB is to protect the community from criminals and not to report anything unless it is serious for the community. More than that in the US legislation and even in the UK there must be a time scale for reporting such things which should not be more than 3-5 years for non-convictions or investigation and if that individual had no farther records then it should be strike off his file and his CRB.

More important the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 10 prevent processing any data for third party if it is causing damage to the person such as damaging his profession of course taking in consideration the type of things included in CRB and its time scale.

Every one got such concern should write to the CRB commissioners mentioning the Data protection act, the human rights and the abuse resulted from the CRB. Also should contact his MP and Human Right orgnizations.

Indeed the CRB should change to consider the time scale of things and should not continue to report things until death! This is against the most basic human rights.

i was caution in 2001 for shoplifting with my friends. I have now finished university and became a register nurse. I am now concern if i can get a job. I need to know if CRB check is going to strike it off after 5 years?
PLEASE HELP ME!!!

Michelle, unfortunately your CRB check will definately show the caution you received. This means you will have to declare it on your application form.

Learndirect has some useful information on how to approach this matter on the application form and in the interview. Check out:

http://www.learndirect-advice.co.uk/helpandadvice/exoffenders/

The information on the above website is a bit outdated, and doesn't include info on the new step-down procedure. However it does give good advice on how to approach the matter of your criminal record when applying for work.

Hi,

I got a caution for travelling with a child travelcard last year. It's been about a year now. I intend on pursueing a career in law but want to know my prospects regarding the law society. I am actually really worried about this. So worried...you would not know. It means the world to me. By the time i am to apply to law society for membership, just over two and a half years will have passed from the caution. Does anyone know my prospects of becoming a lawyer? Im studying my degree at the moment.

It seems that the Information Commissioner has ruled in some cases to order the deletion of some old minor criminal records, rather than the "step down model".

However,the Police seem to be wasting public money and are appealing against this to the Information Tribunal.

See The Guardian:- Police told to delete old criminal records

It may well be worth appealing to the Information Commissioner if you have minor cautions or convictions from a long time ago, and nothing since.

My partner has just had a disclosure done when applying for a teaching job. A caution for shoplifting seven years ago showed up. she has never been in trouble with police for anything else, and was in her early 20's when it happened. I think this is unfair, that one person can decide whether a caution is relevant or not based on the age of the caution, and the type of offence.

I was given a police caution 2 weeks ago unfortunately for fighting i broke a fight up and got punched by a man who had been fighting so i hit him back and when he tripped up i kicked him now considering i am a woman and he was a big man i cant see how i done much harm. I was very drunk and after being in the cells over night and in desperate need of a fag I dont remember what was said to me except that I was cautioned I have been in contact with the police since to ask them to explain what the caution means and if it will show upon a CRB check as I do volunteer work helping families with under 5s and i also help out at my daughters school with trips etc but they have not got back to me .Also when i tried to file assault charges on the man who hit me I was told I was too drunk to be taken seriously but obviously not too drunk to have a statement taken and a caution given.I am a married woman with 2 children my youngest being autistic and having severe learning disabilities I would never harm a child but now I dont know if I can volunteer anymore.Anyone know what how I would find out for sure.

I have worked in social housing for nearly 13 years and am a post operative male to female transexual who incidently now passes very well.

Imagine my surprise when an enhanced crb check issued information I have no cautions or convictions making counter allegations of violence against me ( I was the one assaulted) following a hate campaign by neighbours and an attack in the street by a stranger who referred to me as a tranny and then preceded to punch me like a punch bag, despite having an independent witness who saw me being attacked the police chose to release these accusations against me.

I went through the appeals procedure no joy, via the information commissioners office ( waste of space), the police admitted that the information may be inaccurate but its historical so it does not have to be up to date - so where is the relevance to releasing the information, consequently not only did I have to suffer the humilation of disclosing my past leading to more employment discrimination when I did nothing wrong but I had my first permanent job offer at a senior level withdrawn my career destroyed and I am unable to get any job

I have spent 20k so far on legal costs and await whether a QC can help me fight this case because the home office guidelines have not been followed by the met police

For those of you who think it isn't going to apply to more jobs sorry but your misinformed the Safeguarding Vulnerable Persons Act comes in to effect in Summer 2008, all jobs working or voluntary with vulnerable people will require enhanced crb check with all information shown mandatory not voluntary - there was a need for more caution as a result of Soham but I still don't understand why my circumstances which occured as a result of neighbour prejudice when I went from a he to a she, and following botched facial surgery which has now been fixed should be compared to someone who worked as a caretaker for 2 months compared to my career of nearly 13 years.

Don't expect help from your mp or the data protection officer - the court will decide my case. I am now nearly 3 months unemployed too overqualified and unexperienced for other fields, I feel like I was convicted and sent to prison

Shame on this country - vote conservative because brown's government will have most people on the receiving end of malicious allegations out of work

I hope I can sue - my case I have been informed is likely to set a precedent - the police or rather the arrogant met police led by a visibly transexual director of information state that the met police can disclose what information they like - they said I was arrested when I ahve never been arrested and my details should not have been entered on the pnc it just seems very strange that 4 and 3 years down the line two linked incidents as a result of my unique circumstances can be issued - its a concern

I have been told by crb this will appear on every single crb - I assume life

Its not good and its not right

I want to add one thing

The police try to rely on an earlier West Midlands precedent case law 2004 as grounds for releasing allegations against someone working with vulnerable people and told me that should I go to court the court will allow the chief officer to decide these - my case will rest on proportionality, and relevance tests and also medical evidence whick proves that the malicious allegations are lies.

What I will say to any transexual or intersexed person don't report any crime to the Metropolitan Police, they are bigoted and very much against transexual and intersexed individuals - I could not believe it when I saw the notes I reported the incidents as the victims, have an independent witness who saw me being attacked, was attacked on my own doorstep had a neighbour who was warned about harrassment over my gender status at the time and yet I get classed as the suspect and a risk to working with vulnerable people

The notes have clearly and it is clear from the notes been altered - pray Ian Blair gets sacked because with him in charge of the metropolitan police there is no hope for anyone

By the way with regards to the Safeguarding vulnerable people act due in summer 2008 this will apply to any job where there be contact with vulnerable people say cab advice worker, or receptionist in hospital and it will be a criminal offence punishable by 5 years imprisonment if you try to apply or an employer take you on

Your enhanced CRB will release information where it is relevant the only good news for people is there will be a separate organisation taking the power away from the chief officer of the police force to an independent body which will determine whether someone is suitable or not to work with vulnerable people and you can make representations - if barred the bar lasts 10 years but people are judgmental

Moral of the story always get a solicitor and my advice to any ts or intersexed person don't report it to the police they really are bigoted especially the metropolitan police force Lambeth and Tower Hamlets in particular

I want to add one thing

The police try to rely on an earlier West Midlands precedent case law 2004 as grounds for releasing allegations against someone working with vulnerable people and told me that should I go to court the court will allow the chief officer to decide these - my case will rest on proportionality, and relevance tests and also medical evidence whick proves that the malicious allegations are lies.

What I will say to any transexual or intersexed person don't report any crime to the Metropolitan Police, they are bigoted and very much against transexual and intersexed individuals - I could not believe it when I saw the notes I reported the incidents as the victims, have an independent witness who saw me being attacked, was attacked on my own doorstep had a neighbour who was warned about harrassment over my gender status at the time and yet I get classed as the suspect and a risk to working with vulnerable people

The notes have clearly and it is clear from the notes been altered - pray Ian Blair gets sacked because with him in charge of the metropolitan police there is no hope for anyone

By the way with regards to the Safeguarding vulnerable people act due in summer 2008 this will apply to any job where there be contact with vulnerable people say cab advice worker, or receptionist in hospital and it will be a criminal offence punishable by 5 years imprisonment if you try to apply or an employer take you on

Your enhanced CRB will release information where it is relevant the only good news for people is there will be a separate organisation taking the power away from the chief officer of the police force to an independent body which will determine whether someone is suitable or not to work with vulnerable people and you can make representations - if barred the bar lasts 10 years but people are judgmental

Moral of the story always get a solicitor and my advice to any ts or intersexed person don't report it to the police they really are bigoted especially the metropolitan police force Lambeth and Tower Hamlets in particular

@ gymgymie - have you issued a Data Protection Act 1998 Section 10 "data subject notice" against the Metropolitan Police and / or the Criminal Records Bureau ?

This was originally introduced to clamp down on the "post code lottery" credit reference scoring systems which used to be abused so often by the finance industry.

Their treatment of you and your data certainly looks like "damage or distress"

Section 10 Right to prevent processing likely to cause damage or distress

(1) Subject to subsection (2), an individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing, or processing for a specified purpose or in a specified manner, any personal data in respect of which he is the data subject, on the ground that, for specified reasons—

(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply—

(a) in a case where any of the conditions in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Schedule 2 is met, or

(b) in such other cases as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State by order.

(3) The data controller must within twenty-one days of receiving a notice under subsection (1) (“the data subject notice”) give the individual who gave it a written notice—

(a) stating that he has complied or intends to comply with the data subject notice, or

(b) stating his reasons for regarding the data subject notice as to any extent unjustified and the extent (if any) to which he has complied or intends to comply with it.

(4) If a court is satisfied, on the application of any person who has given a notice under subsection (1) which appears to the court to be justified (or to be justified to any extent), that the data controller in question has failed to comply with the notice, the court may order him to take such steps for complying with the notice (or for complying with it to that extent) as the court thinks fit.

(5) The failure by a data subject to exercise the right conferred by subsection (1) or section 11(1) does not affect any other right conferred on him by this Part.

You can send such a Data Notification Notice letter quoting the Act yourself, at no cost (apart from recorded delivery mail) , to the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis Sir Ian Blair at New Scotland Yard , whose office will then diffuse it down through the vast police bureaucracy, which has to be seen to pretend to be non-discriminatory.

Who is your MP who has not, apparently, been of any help to you ?

Have you contacted your local Metropolitan Police Authority member, who may be more focussed on this sort of issue ?

To wtwu

Thank you for the information - I will take on board what you have said about section 10, but the matter has been investigated by the Information Commissioner who wasn't helpful, and I wrote to the Data Protection Officer at the Metropolitan Police who ignored my representations. Not sure if a section 10 notice was served or not - The argument of the Chief Constable is that their notes are accurate of a police investigation nearly 4 and 3 years ago where I reported the matters as the victim. They say historical information does not have to be accurate to be released as it is in the interests of the wider community that this information is released. The police are meant to use relevance and proportionality as per Home Office Guidance May 2005 in regard to processing Enhanced CRB checks, this hasn't been followed in my case.

My MP is Stephen Ladyman MP for South Thanet ( I come under a small village near Deal in Kent) but because of the boundary changes my MP is not the MP for Dover but the MP for South Thanet, he has tried to help but says it is for the courts to determine its just going round in circles. As of today, a cheque for another 4k goes to my solicitor to instruct the QC that I am seeing, at the end of the month, if I have a case and it appears the police can record what they like against anyone, I will get legal aid if my case is 65% or more. Litigation is very expensive cost to me so far is 24k, the humiliation is huge because as someone who is actually intersexed but had the same medical treatment for someone who is transexual I actually don't have any grief at all now, so you can imagine the embarrassement this caused me when I had to disclose the circumstances to a propsective employer and waited four months only for the job offer to be withdrawn.

Can an MPA member help me as I no longer live in London do you know ????

I will let you know if my case does go to court, it has been difficult finding a barrister to take this case on - no other similar cases have come to a barrister and its difficult getting someone with the knowledge and experience to help - legally - My case was also complicated by medical complications following botched facial surgery for which I have a case that is going to court in the new year - ( I have four titanium screws holding my jaw and chin together) for life so hopefully the two reports will assist me with the police case as well.

As for Ian Blair, I would not trust him with a barge pole, he is inept and incompetent to do his job - if I do have a case its likely to set a precedent as no previous cases have come before the court.

It is a ridiculous situation, I can understand it if I was a threat to vulerable people, but I worked in my field for nearly 13 years, the 2 incidents that arose arose due to my circumstances at the time - due to neighbour harrassment in the first instance and botched medical surgery in the second, I have had no further problems and I have lived in kent for nearly a year - Ian Huntley had a history, my own GP tells me next year they have to report on anyone working with vulnerable people who they have concerns about and that a whole load of people who have had false allegations made against them will be barred from working with other people the system will become unworkable - far from protecting the vulnerable they are blighting innocent people's lives

One more thing, the real reason why I believe my notes were tampered with is that I worked with an organisation in Lambeth ( it was Lambeth Metropolitan Police that issued the information about me over alleged two incidents in Tower Hamlets which had never previously been recorded on my enhanced crb) is that I WHISTLEBLEW on a womens organisation for good reason under health and safety legislation which put single homeless women at risk, and this organisation lost half its supporting people contracts in the london area and many jobs. This organisation is also funded by the Home Office and works closely with the Lambeth Metropolitan Police over sex trafficked women in to britain. I believe my notes were tampered with and it isn't unknown for this to happen because the investigation notes are clearly contradictory and don't make sense saying one thing then the other - the chief executive of this women's organisation is well in with Gordon Brown - it goes to show if you have powerful friends you can destroy people's lives I have emails to confirm my whistleblowing this will be shown to the QC for hopefully my case to go to court

I've been studying this exact area for a while since from the Bichard enquiry and it is a real bad mess.

My main issue is this: When will data protection policies cover 'ALL' systems that record sensitive data such as old conviction data?

Prior to March 2006 it was possible for people with minor convictions (ie those that are non-violent/not drug related/not sexual etc) to have their PNC record 'weeded' provided they hadn't reoffended within certain timelines. Very few people knew about this and there wasn't an 'automated' mechanism to weed these records from the systems.

The way the old weeding system worked was that you applied for your PNC record via Data subject access in the usual way (£10 via a Police station) and as a part of this process, The National Identification Service (NIS) dept. at New Scotland Yard reviewed the PNC record in accordance with the old ACPO weeding rules. If you passed the criteria, the record was weeded and you'd be sent a response back stating 'no information held about you in the Person Record category of the PNC'

However, if your record was weeded, this 'deletion of record' only took place on the PNC itself and does not apply to any 'local' conviction records which the Police hold within their own systems - computerised or paper-based.

What I mean here is say you were convicted of shoplifting 20 years ago in Leicester when you was a juvenile. Prior to 2006, you made a data Subject Access request via your Police station who then send the request to NIS in London. The weeding team deleted your record from the PNC as per the old ACPO rules. However, this does not delete the local Leicestershire Constabulary records relating to your conviction.

Why is this relevant? Well, say you apply for an enhanced disclosure during a recruitment for a Scout Leader etc. Where you thought the information would no longer be available, it actually is because the CRB would send a request to your local force and the force where you was born(in this example Leicestershire) who would disclose this information.

Also, even though people focus on their PNC record, in fact, the conviction details are held on other computer and paper-based systems forever. For example:

* The Court register (freely available - details all convictions from each and every court in the UK)

* The Home Office's Offender's Index (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/offenderindex1.html) - not quite as freely available but can be accessed if you know how!

* The National Criminal Record Archive - a service from the NIS within the Metropolitan police - this service is actively used by government agencies like the Security Services (MI5/MI6) and the Defence Vetting Agency for background checks/enquiries/security clearances. This is a separate historical system which uses update feeds from the PNC and other sources.

The Police and CRB may indeed now be using the new step down model - here's a few interesting reads for those that are interested in this area:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2007-11-13a.350.4

http://www.criminalrecords.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=4743#RETEN

There is one other thing I want to add

Not only does the release of this information not benefit the wider community in terms of relevance given my length of working in this field, but it also puts my personal safety at risk in terms of putting me at risk of violence and harrassment in the community.

I am not 5ft 11 with size 11 feet but 5ft 7, small build and very passable, I feel absolutely petrified by what the Metropolitan Police have done to me.

This country does not tolerate people like me very well unless you pass at the time these two incidents occured I didn't pass because of neighbour harrassment and then medical negligence which caused a lot of problems for me

There is discretion because I found out from a teachers union that the NUT successfully got information removed against a teacher which the police decided to release via the step down model.

In response to BD7447's message about the Step Down model,

I don't have any convictions, or cautions none at all.

I have never been arrested by the police which would be their only justification for entering data on to the PNC about me -
Like I said this is about inaccuate local intelligence data and I only found out about it this year

How can allegations which are clearly malicious be allowed to be put on someone's enhanced CRB without justification it is simply outrageous it really is

Have you or someone you know perhaps been given a Simple Caution, often referred to as a caution, within the last couple of years? If so, and you think it may not have been issued fairly or otherwise inappropriately, please get in touch with me. I can be emailed at
jonathon at orange at fr - that's fr for france
I need some case studies!

I got caught up with a bad crowd last year and was involved with a petty shoplifting case. We got caughtby the shop security, and police were called. Having only had about £2 worth of goods on me, I got to choose whether I went to the station and get it on my criminal record for 5 years or to choose to have an on the spot fine for £80, which would mean no further action. I chose the latter.

I am now having to send off a CRB form for something, and i am really worried. Will this fine come up on my check? or will there be no problems. I have put on the form that i have no criminal record etc... but I am hoping that this is nothing against me?

Thanks in advance.

WTWU

I have seen a leading Human Rights QC and my case is a potential test case - so providing I get funding I have grounds for suing

when i was 15, i recieved a caution and a few hours in a cell for shoplifting. Now at 17 I wish to apply for a nursing course and am worried that the shoplifting offence may cause my application to be denied. I also have recieved warnings from police when drunk, and they took my name and address- does this sort of thing show up on a record at all??

i am confused and angry at the system!

A few people have posted on here, saying things like "I was cautioned/convicted of a certain crime X years ago, will it show up if I apply for a certain type of job?"

Well the answer is that if your job involved working with children or vulnerable adults, or as part of the legal system or higher-level accountancy, then unforunately it will. All cautions and convictions show up on both Standard and Enhanced Disclosures, and as such are never considered spent.

You can check this by going to your local police station, and asking to apply for a copy of your convictions from the Police National Computer. There is a £10.00 charge for this, and they will send you a list of all the information they have on you.

I should also mention that only details of the TYPE of offences are held. So an employer will only be informed of the TYPE of crime rather than the circumstances surrounding it. And all application forms give you the opportunity to list the circumstances surrounding the incident. The employer will therefore only have your version of events. If you get my meaning....

This is in response to Lee's information which is incorrect.

Anyone with an enhanced CRB check will not only have information released about convictions and cautions but any information that is held by the police as a result of investigations taken place.

This does include the circumstances of events but not necessarily your version of events but the police's interpretation.

I am awaiting in my own circumstances a decision to bring a test case against the police in the high court where a biased version of events can lead to long lasting and damaging effects on a career which it has done with me. I have very reasonable prospects of winning my case and should I win the case its likely that other people in my situation will also benefit from a change in the law where the West Midlands precedent did not apply to that particular case

Response to Gymgymgie.

That's interesting you should say that. I was doing voluntary work for a couple of years, and they requested an Enhanced CRB check and provided me with a copy. All it states is the actual offences I was cautioned for. No other information was given regarding the circumstnaces surrounding the incident. The information on these forms really is minimal.

Do you have a copy of your own Enhanced CRB check? If so, I would be interested to hear how detailed the information is on there. Perhaps the difference between us is that you were actually investigated, whereas I was just cautioned?

I just read through your previous posts, and I am absolutely disgusted at how you have been treated. I sincerely wish you all the best in your case against the police, and in your future career.

My question is regarding having a caution removed from a Disclosure cert.

This page (http://www.criminalrecords.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=4743#RETEN) has a downloadable copy of the ACPO's 'GENERAL RULES FOR CRIMINAL RECORD WEEDING ON POLICE SYSTEMS', which quotes:

"8. If there are cautions but no convictions on the record and no further cautions have been recorded for a period of five years, the record will be deleted, except where the caution is accompanied by an 'offends against vulnerable person' information marker."

However, WHO do you apply to to have the caution removed?

Do anyone know?

Thank you for any help in advance.

Hi S.E.

Have you checked that link recently? You can't download their rules on weeding, because this process is now extinct. The rules have changed I'm afraid. Weeding is no more, so your cautions will remain on your record until you are 100 years old. This means that they will show up on any Standard or Enhanced Disclosure Check. If you follow the link you posted, you can download "ACPOS'S Retention Guidelines Incorporating the Step Down Model" which will tell you all about these sickening new regulations.

I'm in the same position as you, and believe me we are not alone. Thousands of people are going to be screwed over by this, and face potential discrimination when applying for a variety of jobs.

I came across a transcript of a parliamentary debate that might be of itnerest to you:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2007-11-13b.350.4

Of particular relevance is the following statement made by Lord West of Spithead:

"My Lords, the position is that the data will be held until the person is 100 years old, unless they are removed in an exceptional case procedure. Any person can ask what data are held on them in accordance with the Data Protection Act and can ask for their data to be removed once they are spent. They are then looked at and they may or may not be removed, depending on a police officer at chief level within that constabulary, who makes that final decision. So data are effectively held there until the person is 100 unless they are removed."

This implies that you can approach a Chief Constable to request that your record is removed once it is considered 'spent'. However it will only be removed in exceptional cases, and believe me when they say 'exceptional' they really DO mean exceptional. Check out this story to see what I mean:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7072241.stm

Sorry I couldn't be the bearer of more promising news. I got cautioned over four years ago for two stupid (on my part) offences. I'm working towards a Masters in Forensic Psychology, where most of the work is in with the police or in the prison system! So this is really going to be an issue for me....

I do not believe it is proportionate and therefore is unethical for the PNC records of persons arrested or cautioned where people have been charged but found not guilty by a court to be kept for an excessive period of time and certainly not archived.
These records should be unrecoverabley deleted from the Police National Computer, the CRB and PNC extract.
I believe that it is proportionate to destroy arrest records 12 months after the time of arrest and to destroy cautions 12 months after the caution is issued, this time frame provides safe guards for the public and for the privacy rights of the individuals who have come into contact with the Police. If a Chief Constable wished to extend the period of time for data retention then he mush provide proof or evidence that this is necessary and proportionate, the accused should have a right of appeal against this request.

Readers of this blog might want to read home office circular 5 2005 which gives guidance to police forces on whether to disclose approved information to third parties on Enhanced CRB's

@ gymgymie - the text of this Circular and another relevant one:

Home Office Circular 5/2005
- Criminal Records Bureau: Local Checks by Police Forces for the Purpose of Enhanced Disclosures

Home Office Circular 6/2006
- The Notifiable Occupations Scheme: Revised Guidance For Police Forces

For WTWU

Cheers for this - I can't really say anything but legal proceedings were served in my case which is a precedent case - not sure how long it will take to get resolved or if the metropolitan police will fight it - I just don't know

I do hope it will get resolved because its gone on 15 months and has left me jobless, long term now in my 7th month, homeless and actually very near to a breakdown

WTWU

The only thing I will say without gettting involved in the legal side is that the guidelines clearly demonstrate in my case a prime example of a neighbour dispute ( which was exactly the case in my circumstances) where the circumstances of the matter were not taken in to account

I was also accused of having a conviction by the police when I have none - yet they still want to insist their notes are correct

I don't need to say what I think of the police because I think the circumstances behind this speak for itself - transphobia against me by metropolitan police in Lambeth - none of the criteria to justify disclosure against me apply - no not in terms of relevancy or in terms of proportionality but it seems whatever I say or the evidence I have and medical evidence appears to fall on deaf ears to the metropolitan police - they don't want to admit they made a mistake - I am suffering for their mistake in being tarnished along the lines for the name of soham despite 12 years of good and hardworking service in my field - even if I clear my name the damage done to me means I can't go back to my career thanks to their disclosure and outing me as a transexual

One more thing

I would like to ask your readers what a conviction means to them

In my case I have no cautions or convictions - in other words under these two sections it comes back blank my crb

Under any other information the police insist I have a conviction - yet the defitiniton of a conviction is that I either admitted wrong doing, was cautioned formally or went to court and was charged.

If my case does get to court - its basically about the right for the police to do what they want to people which it appears this government has allowed them to do exactly that - its about civil liberties, human rights and freedoms.

Its about balancing the rights of the community versus the rights of the individual and its about ensuring that a balanced disclosure is given not a one sided disclosure which clearly doesn't take account of the other side's story and a material circumstance - that I was the victim of an ongoing hate campaign and actually punched in the face and stomach on my own door step - because a counter allegation is made against me the police would rather believe that presumably because I am transexual and the implication is that I must be mentally ill - I hope this goes to court and I hope my QC will be allowed to represent me in terms of public funding so that this matter can be clarified in the wider public interest once and for all - I am sure if the police have done nothing wrong then they would welcome that public scrutiny by a law of court

West Midlands Precedent

This is a 2004 court of appeal case that allowed the police forces the decision to release data protection to third parties in the light of soham

The particular case was a social worker of 12 years who had allegedly been caught flashing to women

On being arrested he was charged and he also admitted this

My case rests on the fact I was the victim, I was never arrested though I notice the police tried to insist that I was yet they have been unable to come up with proof that I was

I was never charged and never admitted anything

So thats my arguement for stating that the west midlands precedent doesn't apply amongst others

Can anybody clarify the 'relevance test'?

WTWU

Your viewers may be interested in the firm of solicitors called chris saltresers and the Mr Pinnington Case where the claimant has won permission to challenge Thames Valley Police in terms of unfounded allegations against him which were reproduced by the police

I was dismissed from my job as a homecarer, last February 2007. Following allegations from a service user. Them allegations being, (that i had access to her financies) of getting involved in the financial affairs of a service user. I was instructed to do this by Social Services and the Company Superviser. Also, My role as a Support Worker entails getting involved in their financial affairs(shopping,paying bills, collecting their pensions ext) First i were accused of taking 400 pounds & then got changed to 800 pounds. There were not only me that had access to her affairs, her neighbour, other carers, family and even Social Services themselves. To cut a long story short. An investigation took place by the local police who dropped the case due to lack of evidence. This client had accused two people, only two months previous of the same allegation and again both cases being dropped due to lack of evidence. Clearly stating the Mental state of this clients mind. After applying for several jobs and getting nowhere, i discovered that this allegation was on my crb and the way the Police had disclosed this allegation, made it look like if this client had proceeded with court, then in their eyes i would of been commited. What ever happened to INNOCENT UNTILL PROVEN GUILTY! I was never Cautioned or Charged! I have at present got a Solicitor involved, who has written to GMP Requesting this information to be errased and if not then we are going to file for Judical review. Meaning, that if they dont remove this information or ammend(clearly stateing the facts) then we are going to apply to the High Courts to have a diff opinion of my case. I have read all the letters printed on this page and i suggest that some of you do the same thing. What can you lose, you've got a record by doing nothing, so get off your arses and do something about it! Wish me luck!