Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Conditional Discharge
6 Answers
A friend received a conditional discharge in 2004 which was current until November 2005. She now wishes to become a carer and is completing a enhanced CRB disclosure. Her employer states that the discharge is no longer valid and therefore she does not need to disclose it. I feel she should disclose it because it will show on the CRB. Any legal eagles got any views??
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Law Man1856. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.If the post for which your friend is applying is exempt from the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (as it may well be, especially if an enhanced CRB check is required), then no conviction will ever be regarded as spent. In which case, you're friend is obliged to declare it on the application form:
http://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/rehabact.htm
As Bednobs states, the conviction will always show up on a CRB check anyway.
Chris
http://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/rehabact.htm
As Bednobs states, the conviction will always show up on a CRB check anyway.
Chris
The CRB check is designed to see if you're a risk to vulnerable people. There's a lot worse they could have been guilty of than fraud. I reckon it's worth declaring it, how long ago was it and what was their punishment? If it's an english disclosure anything she's ever done will show up on it apart from parking tickets i think. I was surprised when I got an english one back to find 2 breach of the peace charges and a vandalism charge on mine even though they were all dropped at a childrens panel I'd gone to because it was my step dad that called the police and it was down to terrible parenting that I'd done them in the first place, basically got picked up and thrown out onto the street without anything on my feet in the middle of a November storm so retaliated. I'm still able to work with young people but I don't know what ramifications fraud would have, best to be honest though.