Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx  
    • Well tbh that’s good news and something she can find out for herself.  She has no intention of peace.  I’m going to ask the thread stays open a little longer.   It seems she had not learned that I am just not the one!!!!  plus I have received new medical info from my vet today.   To remain within agreement, I need to generally ask for advice re:  If new medical information for the pup became apparent now - post agreement signing, that added proof a second genetic disease (tested for in those initial tests in the first case but relayed incorrectly to me then ), does it give me grounds for asking a court to unseal the deed so I can pursue this new info….. if she persists in being a pain ? If generally speaking, a first case was a cardiac issue that can be argued as both genetic and congenital until a genetic test is done and then a second absolute genetic only disease was then discovered, is that deemed a new case or grounds for unsealing? Make sense ?   This disease is only ever genetic!!!!   Rather more damning and indisputable proof of genetic disease breeding with no screening yk prevent.   The vet report showing this was uploaded in the original N1 pack.   Somehow rekeyed as normal when I was called with the results.   A vet visit today shows they were not normal and every symptom he has had reported in all reports uploaded from day one are related to the disease. 
    • Hi Roberto, Read some of the other threads here about S Sixes - they all follow the same routine of threats, threats, then nothing. When you do this, you'll see how many have been in exactly the same situation as you are. Keep us updated as necessary .............
    • Nationwide's takeover of Virgin Money is hitting the headlines as thousands of customers protest that they will not get a vote on whether it should happen.View the full article
    • unrelated to the agreement then, could have come from Lowells filing cabinet (who lowells - they dont do that - oh yes they do!! just look at a few lowell paypal EU court claim threads) no name and address for time of take out either which they MUST contain. just like the rest of the agreement then..utter bogroll that proves nothing toward you ... slippery lowells as usual it's only a case management discussion on 26 April 2024 at 10:00am by WebEx. thats good simply refer to the responses you made on your 4a form response only. pleanty of SPC thread here to read before the 26th i suggest you read at least one a day. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Criminal convictions + SC Clearance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2287 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Dear readers,

 

I'm currently making an application to obtain SC Clearance for a job I've recently been offered with a defense contractor in the UK.

 

My problem is, as a young adult I was convicted of assault on two occasions,

in both instances I received a fine as the matters were very minor.

 

I understand that criminal convictions are a very serious subject when it concerns matters such as security clearance and that it is likely my application will be rejected.

 

In general I'm a good citizen and a hard working individual I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

I'm in the process of writing up my PhD and have not since been involved in any trouble with the police.

 

Would having two convictions mean my application is rejected right away?

 

If so is there an appeal process I could go through?

 

Any advise on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

how long ago?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advanced crb?

 

don't let it come as a surprise to them. Tell them up front. Lying is worse than minor offenses.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were a juvenile you may not need to declare it and such offences will only show up on an enhanced (and maybe standard but I'm not sure) CRB check. It won't show on a basic check.

 

What is the job you're applying for? Does it require work with children or vulnerable adults?

 

What was the nature of the offence?

 

All of the above will be taken into consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Becky - "young adult" and "defence contract". more likely they are looking for anything that can be used for blackmail, or espionage related activity. Any defence organisation I have been involved with want top level of screening.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Becky - "young adult" and "defence contract". more likely they are looking for anything that can be used for blackmail, or espionage related activity. Any defence organisation I have been involved with want top level of screening.

 

True, therefore it depends very much of the type of offence and whether the OP was a juvenile when it was committed.

 

Unless the job is pot washing for a defence organisation, in which case it may not pose a problem at all! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Security clearance is completely different to a CRB check and comes under the Official Secrets Act. The papers are supposed to be handled in confidence without being seen directly by the employing office, so it shouldn't have any bearing on their decision. However, you must declare absolutely every conviction, caution, speeding ticket etc. you have ever had.

 

Provided you are honest, accurate and complete with your information, have not been in trouble recently, and have reliable references who will back this up, you shouldn't have anything to worry about unless you have ever been in prison, or have a very irregular financial or behavioural history. Irregular cases usually result in an interview where, again, the focus is on honesty, accuracy and completeness. People who have nothing to hide are more reliable and less subject to unwelcome influence. Rejections are rare and never automatic, although your clearance could come back with a recommendation for review or monitoring.

 

The fact that you're doing a PhD clearly shows that you went straight a long time ago, so have no fear and good luck with the application!

 

I would add that none of this changes your obligation to declare 'unspent' convictions, when asked, to any prospective employer, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. Non-custodial sentences are spent after five years, half that for juvenile (

 

If the work is with vulnerable people then you could be asked to complete a CRB check as well, although that seems unlikely for an MoD job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who have provided their advice on the matter thus far. In my application I've been very honest and unambiguous about the facts of the matters which relate to my convictions. If I'm correct in saying, would it be likely that I could be invited to attend an interview? I'm aware this is the procedure when making an application for DV Clearance. I was under the impression that SC Clearance did not require an interview.

 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant say what they do currently but in the past they were very hot on those who didnt tell all so even a parking ticket would be listed despite the paperwork saying you didnt have to mention minor motoring offences. They cant say you are hiding things and I dont see a problem with things that didint lead to a custodial sentence but it will be down to the individual who reads your paperwork.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is generally not an interview for SC but they reserve the right to do so, and they will let you know if one is required.

 

Again, thanks for this information. Would just like to confirm another point here. My application asks to disclose convictions but excluding parking and speeding related convictions I.e. penalty points for speeding etc. However it then goes on to request the applicant to disclose any fixed penalty notice recieved. Does this mean I'm required to declare speeding points etc after all? The questions have left me very confused!

 

Cheers

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
They clearly ask you to list the motoring fixed penalties in a separate section now, and you should definitely do so.

 

Hi sorry for bringing up this old thread but to get SC you need to do this

 

Baseline Personnel Security Standard

Departmental/Company Records Check

Security Questionnaire

Criminal Record Check

Credit Reference Check

Security Service Check

 

In the BPSS where it asks about criminal convictions but states the "rehabilitation of offenders act" do i need to declare them when filling out that form. I realise I need to fill it out on the SC questionnaire but so i do it on both?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

5yrs old...

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...