Home insurance and criminal conviction - confused

b56c

Family member living in my house has a criminal conviction which is spent. Been searching for cheaper policy than my renewal and found one m interested in BUT it has the following statement at the end:

No person to be insured has ever had any criminal convictions, police cautions or have any prosecutions pending

I thought that anything unspent had to be declared if asked for but this one uses the word 'ever' which suggests that they will only cover if all of the residents have NEVER had any conviction. I'm confused.

Quentin

Spent convictions never have to be disclosed whatever the question asks.

(But make sure it is definitely spent)

rich13348

According to the rehabilitation of offenders act if your conviction is over 5 years old it is spent and does not have to be declared. The rehabilitation of offenders act was mentioned when we got contents insurance from Santander it might be somewhere on yours.

HappyMJ

rich13348 wrote: »

According to the rehabilitation of offenders act if your conviction is over 5 years old it is spent and does not have to be declared. The rehabilitation of offenders act was mentioned when we got contents insurance from Santander it might be somewhere on yours.

It's not always 5 years. Some are spent immediately and something with a life sentence (and you're out on licence) always has to be declared.

b56c

rich13348 wrote: »

According to the rehabilitation of offenders act if your conviction is over 5 years old it is spent and does not have to be declared. The rehabilitation of offenders act was mentioned when we got contents insurance from Santander it might be somewhere on yours.

According to this : http://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/spent-now-brief-guide-changes-roa/

many are spent after 12 months/1year now which must be good news for lots of people.

jonesMUFCforever

Best advice I can give is to speak to the insurer - then you will get the right information.

Quentin

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

Best advice I can give is to speak to the insurer - then you will get the right information.

The whole idea is that you don't need to discuss a spent conviction at all with your insurer.


The best advice is that if the conviction is spent then despite the question you do not need to tell your insurer anything about the family menber's conviction!

Aretnap

Regardless of how the insurer phrases the question, if his conviction is spent he has an absolute right to answer "no". This is enshrined in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/53/section/4

(2)Subject to the provisions of any order made under subsection (4) below, where a question seeking information with respect to a person’s previous convictions, offences, conduct or circumstances is put to him or to any other person otherwise than in proceedings before a judicial authority—
(a)the question shall be treated as not relating to spent convictions or to any circumstances ancillary to spent convictions, and the answer thereto may be framed accordingly; and
(b)the person questioned shall not be subjected to any liability or otherwise prejudiced in law by reason of any failure to acknowledge or disclose a spent conviction or any circumstances ancillary to a spent conviction in his answer to the question.

There are exceptions which mean that he can be forced to disclose the conviction if he applies for certain jobs which require a high degree of trust (such as the police, accountancy, or jobs which involve working with children), but there is no exception for insurance companies.

As above you should make certain that you understand when the conviction becomes spent, and that it is spent, before taking the policy.

b56c

Thanks to everyone who replied.

Why don't insurance companies just make it easier for us all by only asking for what truly is required ?

magpiecottage

This is an issue which was dealt with by the old Insurance Ombudsman (a predecessor to the Financial Ombudsman Service) in the 1990s.

At that time, insurers loaded premiums for those convicted of drink driving for ten years. A complaint to the Ombudsman from somebody who was convicted over 5 years earlier resulted in a decision that, whilst the insurer could ask, unless it then ignored the information, it would be discriminating on the basis of a spent conviction and the complaint would be have to be upheld.

However, this makes an interesting point in the light of the recent case of Cirencester Friendly Society v Parkin.

In that case, the High Court clearly concluded that Parkin had defrauded Cirencester Friendly Society. However, it was not a criminal conviction but a civil litigation. Parkin may, or may not now be prosecuted but either way the civil case can never be "spent" as it is not a criminal conviction.