CRB advice if possible

Comms69

Sorry but GBH then Fraud, but claiming rehabilitated....

LHC1962

Thank you for taking the time to reply, all.
This person knows they have most probably ruined their young life and their future through one mistake. ‘There but for the grace’ and all that. This person also hoped to somehow limit the damage. Obviously this person does not want to re offend in any way - hence this post asking for advice. For some people who are quick to judge....This person has not committed fraud, and has served their time and been punished for their actions. This person is not a monster - this person made a mistake. All this person wanted through this post was an answer, which they have now got.

Thank you all for your time.

LHC1962

Savvy_Sue

Not in Bristol. Thank you for your kindness.

Comms69

What you’re suggesting is fraud

Savvy_Sue

LHC1962 wrote: »

Not in Bristol. Thank you for your kindness.

Then see if anything is available locally through NACRO, or another good organisation is CLINKS.

We could keep labouring the point about fraud, but the bottom line is that the DBS form asks for ALL names by which you have been known. (And, if you are female and give your title as anything but 'Miss', they certainly used to assume you have used more than one name, and you have to give your birth surname in the box which asks for other names used, or they reject the form.)

So any job for which a DBS check is required will mean this comes to light.

You can understand someone desperately trying to find ways to mitigate this. Using a different name isn't one of them, we've all made that clear.

Any job requiring a DBS check is likely to be impossible in the short term, probably medium term. And any job application is going to be tricky with a recent gap to explain. Working on how to disclose - even when it is not absolutely required - is the way forward.

Is the probation officer able to offer any advice or support in this area?

sangie595

OP, I think you are selectively hearing what is being said to you by people. Changing your name to avoid detection and for pecuniary gain is fraud! Your post indicates that you/ this person wanted to do that, so they were considering committing fraud. That was not suggesting that they are some kind of monster or passing judgement - it is a fact. That is what you/ they were saying they would do.

People make mistakes, yes. And they will have to live with the consequences of those mistakes. One of those consequences is that you will struggle more to gain employment. You may not consider that to be fair, but why would an employer want to choose someone whose judgement had been so impaired as to end up in prison for serious offences, rather than someone with the same skills who has not?

As I said to you, not all employers will hold this against you. But it isn't something that you pick and choose. The employer does that, and the best chance of doing that is to face up and man up to what you have done. You explain what you have done, you explain what this has meant, and what you have learned from the experience. You do not lie about it. If you lie about it, then that says that you learned nothing at all, and that you are simply untrustworthy. And the "untrustworthy" bit is now, at the time you are lying - not in history like the offence.

A few weeks ago I was privileged to meet a gentleman called Nigel Bromage, from an organisation called Small Steps. Not too many years ago, if I'd met him (and I probably kind of did), the politest thing I'd have called him was "scum" (and I also probably did). Your criminal record pales into insignificance compared to his past. He has rehabilitated his past by using what he was to become what he is now, and to stop others going down the path he did. He does it by telling the truth. What you have done is minor, compared to him - and to be clear, I am not excusing what you did in any way whatsoever- and if you can't overcome it and show that you have become someone better as a result, then why should I or anyone else believe it?

As someone else has pointed out, assuming this person is male (statistically likely) then imprisonment for a first offence suggests that the incident was very serious. Male first time offenders are rarely imprisoned. Of course, maybe what you mean is that it's the first time they got imprisoned, and there's a history behind that, which in itself would suggest a very different story than the one presented here. But if this is a single offence, with no history, and no recurrence, then yes, they can get past this. Given the statistics on male offending, most do. But they can't expect people to just ignore the fact, and they also can't ever expect to be let off for lying about it.

kingfisherblue

LHC1962 wrote: »

Thank you for taking the time to reply, all.
This person knows they have most probably ruined their young life and their future through one mistake. ‘There but for the grace’ and all that. This person also hoped to somehow limit the damage. Obviously this person does not want to re offend in any way - hence this post asking for advice. For some people who are quick to judge....This person has not committed fraud, and has served their time and been punished for their actions. This person is not a monster - this person made a mistake. All this person wanted through this post was an answer, which they have now got.

Thank you all for your time.

But if they fail to disclose different names and the dates that they were used, they are reoffending, and it will be fraud. I don't believe that anyone has suggested that he is a monster, but they have committed a serious offence (and paid for it). It would be stupid to then even think of committing fraud on top of that.

Savvy_Sue

kingfisherblue wrote: »

But if they fail to disclose different names and the dates that they were used, they are reoffending, and it will be fraud. I don't believe that anyone has suggested that he is a monster, but they have committed a serious offence (and paid for it). It would be stupid to then even think of committing fraud on top of that.

Actually, it's also worth remembering that initially at least people are normally out 'on licence', if they've been released before serving their whole sentence (which is very common).

I do not know what would be grounds for recall to prison, but I understand that it can happen for quite minor infractions.

nimbo

When doing pnc checks police will look at different spellings of names and will be able to see past names given. When asked during being processed there is a chance they will already have linked this persons two surnames if the person stated them both. Which would potentalially show on a dbs.

In some circumstances a person with gbh would still be employable to work with people. After some time. And a crime free period. I worked with a man who’s criminal past was massive. But he was still able to work where we did because he could demonstrate he was rehabilitated and that it was all years ago. But if he’d ever lied about it and then been found out he’d have been fired quicker than he could have said gross misconduct. He even went as far as to get his own pnc from the police so he couldn’t miss any of his convictions because he’d forgotten dates or anything.

I request pnc checks and dbs checks for people in my role and seeing a pnc check comes back with aliases it always makes me suspicious. (Unless It’s a Davies / Davis type moment where it could have been a simple misspelling or a missing middle name). It’s amazing what the police database can link up. until the other day I was winning the most aliases on a pnc check with I think 11 my colleague beat me with 13. Some of which were for example middle name missing and then surname misspelt a little bit the rest were very different and it just makes you wonder why they’ve bothered and what else that person may be hiding.

haras_nosirrah

Why doesn't the person apply for jobs not requiring a dbs check. This may not be in the same job he was in before but that happens when you commit a crime. If needing a dbs that indicates working with children or vulnerable people - they may never be able to get a job requiring dbs again but that doesn't mean they cannot go and get a job. I hear timpsons give ex offenders a chance. There are other companies who also work with offenders. May be worth looking at what they can do rather than focussing on what they can't