dangerous driving ban- to declare on job application?

hbgirl

hello all

my OH got a 12 month ban for dangerous driving DD40 in March 2010. He has now has licence back, and it does not actually show in endorsements on his licence.

he is applying for a job which states;

We are required to ask if you have any convictions, cautions, reprimands or final warnings that are not 'protected' as defined by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1975 (as amended in 2013).

does he have to declare it?

i have tried my good friend google, but i can only find what convictions are never filtered, not those that are "protected" ie don't have to be declared.

anybody know? really appreciate any help
thanks

phill99

Was he fined?

hbgirl

he was fined £500, 12 month driving ban, and on probation for i think 2years.

on doing a bit more searching, i think it depends on the sentence, not the actual conviction?

i think, but am still not sure, that in this scenario it is "spent" as the ban period and probation are now completed?

thanks for answering

HappyMJ

Yes depends on sentence. If it's a job that requires a clean driving licence then it could have consequences for insurance but if driving is not involved then I wouldn't bother mentioning it.

hbgirl

thanks HappyMJ, yes, he has applied for some jobs that are driving based, and in those circumstances told them anyway at an early stage even if that specific question in my OP wasn't asked. he has found that smaller companies can't afford to insure him, but some larger companies have said it is OK, i think if they have a big insurance policy covering lots of drivers.

this is the first time that specific question has come up and i think this job is not a driving job. he would rather not declare it obviously, but definitely do not want to make any false declaration.

i am almost sure he doesn't have to declare it, but it does seem to be a complicated area :huh:

boiler_man

hbgirl wrote: »

he was fined £500, 12 month driving ban, and on probation for i think 2years.

Probation? Did he receive a suspended sentence? If under 30 months, the conviction is spent after 4 years after the end of the suspended sentence.

hbgirl

well, he has answered "no".

i read the actual legislation, which is a bit hard going, but i found a fine used to be spent after five years, but amendments in March 2014 reduced that to one year.

if there is a ban or probation, it is the end of the disqualification or probation period. i wasn't sure which applied, but in either case the time has now lapsed, including the four years which would be the maximum.

now i am wondering if the insurance has ripped us off, as thy asked about any convictions in the last five years, but that is another question i will look into.

Norman_Castle

now i am wondering if the insurance has ripped us off, as thy asked about any convictions in the last five years, but that is another question i will look into.

Acting on information given is not ripping you off. The act entitles you to not declare spent convictions. Unless they have misled you into declaring convictions which could have remained hidden they have done nothing wrong.
As your partner was on probation would the probation service be able to advise when the conviction is spent?.

ste_wilko

The rehabilitation period is 4 years. And because it resulted in a driving ban, it is from the date of the conviction. So from March 2014 the offence is now spent.

You are under no obligation to tell the truth about spent convictions to the insurance company. If they ask you if you have been convicted in the last 5 years they are referring to unspent convictions. It is illegal for them to treat you less favourably because of a spent conviction.

Have the insurance company charged you more because of it?

Undervalued

ste_wilko wrote: »

It is illegal for them to treat you less favourably because of a spent conviction.

Whilst that is true as far as the criminal conviction is concerned it may not apply if there were any civil matters or insurance claims arising from the same incident.

They would be entitled to ask if there were any accidents or claims in the past 5 (or more) years and that question would require a truthful answer.

ste_wilko

Undervalued wrote: »

Whilst that is true as far as the criminal conviction is concerned it may not apply if there were any civil matters or insurance claims arising from the same incident.

They would be entitled to ask if there were any accidents or claims in the past 5 (or more) years and that question would require a truthful answer.

The OP is only asking about the spent convictions