Police Caution sending letters

dctetsco

have a look on hpc - uk dot org and search for notifiable occupations...

It details why and for what occupations, offences are disclosable to employers.

Cheers
DCTetsco

(sorry - can't post links)

febes

I have not read all the posts, sorry.

But I have had a caution for shoplifting, but I was a minor. It has had no effect whatsoever on my life as an adult. I have got jobs I thought I wouldn't because of it.

To my knowledge, the police have never sent a letter, and I have been CRB checked.

I advise anyone to be as honest as possible when it comes to these. And I also think that if it is only a caution, and a long time ago (I work with vulnerable adults, and was told convictions have to be 3 years ago or more) it shouldn't really have an effect.

twinsmum2005

I presume by IET you mean Institute of Engineering and Technology?? It used to be know as IEE - the Institute of Electrical Engineering.

Can't possible see why you are worried in something being sent to them or a similar organisation.

superscaper

twinsmum2005 wrote: »

I presume by IET you mean Institute of Engineering and Technology?? It used to be know as IEE - the Institute of Electrical Engineering.

Can't possible see why you are worried in something being sent to them or a similar organisation.

Well I've seen it happen (not for IET specifically) which was the point in this thread. I used IET as an example simply as it was the closest thing if I were to use myself as an example.

superscaper

dctetsco wrote: »

have a look on hpc - uk dot org and search for notifiable occupations...

It details why and for what occupations, offences are disclosable to employers.

Cheers
DCTetsco

(sorry - can't post links)

Couldn't see any relevant occupations. And then should they be sending anything at all to a membership organisation rather than an employer?

DVardysShadow

Weirdlittleman wrote: »

Cautions, so I learnt here the other day, are spent under the ROHA as soon as they are given. So no grounds for a disciplinary.

Irrelevent for a discliplinary for a professional body. They are perfectly allowed to disclipline members they think are unsuitable for membership or bringing the institute into disrepute whether the conviction is spent or not.

You will find countless institutes which would dismiss for far less.

We are not talking convictions, we are talking cautions. If the caution is spent, then it is perfectly correct to deny having a caution. AFAICS, unless the professional body has an exemption from the ROHA, they cannot get involved.