Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So 2 days following the warrant issue.. Hermes finally contacted me to arrange payment and said they had not received my prior claim letters hence the lack of response? But they received this one though didn’t they before the bailiffs are in!   Am incredibly pleased and thankful to CAG! I didn’t know this great  community would be what I find back in Dec from a quick search! Really appreciate the time taken to help me on this and I wouldn’t have a clue without it! I have just donated. Its forums like these that really makes a difference to society, so we need to keep it going!   Key points to note: Hermes Parcelnet Limited (UK entity and HQ in Leeds - address to this) Don’t use packlink for high value items (it links ebay details to the courier selected) Never use Hermes for high value items EVER!
    • ???   you ignore them until they comply and we confirm the filing cabinet copy and paste bogroll they send IS enforceable. cause i bet you 100% it won't have come from them awaiting the OC to send it....their raiding their filing cabinets now i bet..
    • Still waiting for these diagrams. We've been dealing with this story for nearly 48 hours now and we are only starting to understand exactly what happened and we still haven't got information that we've asked for.  
    • Dx100uk well not really, considering he pulled out on me from the side of the road. He should have gave way. Why do you think he has told a different story to his insurance ?   Because he knows if he has said he pulled out on me he would be held liable.   He pulled away from my left hand side then braked- leaving his van in an angled position, it literally happened within the space of a split second  
    • Update: the lawyer friend sent a very good legal letter last week  The third letter will be sent over the next few days - here is the proposed text - your comments welcome as ever: Dear Will & John Letter Reference:xxxx I write with reference to your recent letter in relation to PCN numberxxxxx You threaten Court proceeding on behalf of your client yet your client’s rationale for charging me has no legal substance. An alleged parking offence as a breach of an alleged contract.  I have no contract or terms and conditions with your client.   Furthermore, the sum you are requesting is fictitious. I have no intention of paying any monies to your client. You had no legitimate reason to access my personal details so are already in breach of GDPR by texting me several times on my personal number which I have not given permission for you to use.  Coupled with the several letters you have sent your persistence amounts to nothing short of harassment. Should this continue I will have no hesitation in contacting the ICO to report the breach. The letters I have received will be useful as tinder for the open fire in my living room now the weather has turned cold again. Should you wish to take me to court, I will be seeking full costs through a recovery order under CPR 27:14 which will come in handy now I find myself in the unenviable position of redundancy as a result of Covid. Yours Sincerely   Copied to PCM UK "you don't want to be Gladstoned"   Thanks AJJM
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1582 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone.

 

About 4.5 years ago I was caught stealing some clothing from a high street store (tough period of my life, which I am luckily out of now. It was done to sell on to try and pay some bailiffs) The police were called, I was arrested and given a caution. I didn't have to pay an £80 fine.

 

I'm going to apply for a job now and as far as I know they perform fairly stringent checks on their employees. This role won't be handling cash, or being around vulnerable adults/children. I think they will do an enhanced DBS check at the least.

 

Will this be flagged up in the check? I'm lucky enough that I'm doing pretty well now, after quite a few hard and miserable years and I really, really want this job.

 

Hope you can help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The caution will more than likely appear on an "Enhanced" disclosure.

 

That said, most employers can't use the "enhanced" option unless you're dealing with vulnerable people, (teaching, care homes, police, NHS etc) or in an area of high security (MI5/SOCA, HMCS, Prisons, Airports, Military etc).

 

If it's just a standard disclosure, the records won't be included.

 

What's the company, or at the very least, the job description?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the speedy reply!

 

It's a private security firm who offer a variety of services including security in dangerous countries, background checks, hostage negotiation, intelligence gathering a so forth.

 

Probably not the BEST job for me to go for considering my past but I'm really keen on the job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the speedy reply!

 

It's a private security firm who offer a variety of services including security in dangerous countries, background checks, hostage negotiation, intelligence gathering a so forth.

 

Probably not the BEST job for me to go for considering my past but I'm really keen on the job.

 

They'll probably find out then if it's that involved. They may even do a SC or CTC level vetting.

 

Best thing would be to just come completely clean and give a very short explanation about the circumstances and how you learned your lesson. It may not necessarily prevent you from being successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that might be the case but really hoping someone might say otherwise!

 

I think it's best to come clean but I guess that means my chances of being hired are pretty scuppered. There just isn't a good way to make it sound alright is there? I'm not sure I'd want to hire someone who admitted to stealing. What an idiot I was. In the words of Cher: 'if I could turn back tiiiime'...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Fess up to the new employer. As this job is in an area of trust, they will apply for the enhanced DBS check and the chances are it will appear there. In a lot of cases, the Chief Constable will decide if the entry is relevant to the job being applied for and in this case, I feel he/she will disclose.

Being open and honest may assure the employer that you are forthcoming and have no other skeletons in your closet

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks so much to you both. I think I'll swallow my pride and fess up... better that than be caught out. Not sure how I'll broach it though.

Try to frame it as well I learned my lesson from that, police officers have done worse and kept their jobs.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably wrong advice from me, but I would go through the motion and let them get the dbs.

Sometimes things get mixed up and being a caution a slap on the wrist, maybe it won't show.

If you tell your employer that you were a thief they'll probably reply that you didn't meet the criteria for the job.

I don't preach to be dishonest, but sometimes keeping your mouth shut is better than tell everyone what you did in young and stupid years.

Many have been lucky to never be caught, but have done much much worse than shoplifting, believe me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably wrong advice from me, but I would go through the motion and let them get the dbs.

Sometimes things get mixed up and being a caution a slap on the wrist, maybe it won't show.

If you tell your employer that you were a thief they'll probably reply that you didn't meet the criteria for the job.

I don't preach to be dishonest, but sometimes keeping your mouth shut is better than tell everyone what you did in young and stupid years.

Many have been lucky to never be caught, but have done much much worse than shoplifting, believe me.

 

I disagree

The OP has to choose between 2 things they might be "caught" on.

 

1) An 'old' caution for shoplifting : which may not be fatal to their job application.

2) showing they CURRENTLY are willing to be less than open & honest.

 

Add to that that even if they hide the caution and it doesn't show up currently, they'll then spend the whole of their employment worrying if it will come out, which won't be an issue if they disclose it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree

The OP has to choose between 2 things they might be "caught" on.

 

1) An 'old' caution for shoplifting : which may not be fatal to their job application.

2) showing they CURRENTLY are willing to be less than open & honest.

 

Add to that that even if they hide the caution and it doesn't show up currently, they'll then spend the whole of their employment worrying if it will come out, which won't be an issue if they disclose it!

 

Yes, I know I'm probably wrong and I said so.

How can the caution come up at later date if it's not in the op's record now?

Can they add it years later and inform the employer?

Never heard of this happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I know I'm probably wrong and I said so.

How can the caution come up at later date if it's not in the op's record now?

Can they add it years later and inform the employer?

Never heard of this happening.

 

A change in role from one requiring a standard disclosure to one requiring an enhanced disclosure.

 

An admin error on the initial disclosure that later gets corrected.

 

I know of someone who didn't disclose a conviction for a very minor offence who took a role before CRB's (let alone eDBS's) were in use.

They lied on their job application though.

 

They are now so scared they won't move jobs / roles, as they are now "caught in the lie". They are also wondering if their employer will start to check existing staff who they realise have never had CRB's / DBS's.

 

The problem now isn't a minor offence as a teenager that no one would care about, but that they lied, and have never come clean.

 

It converts something that can be explained / mitigated by passage of time into something that is recent / ongoing and a breach of trust, that once started is very hard to get away from.

 

OP: do you always want to be "looking over your shoulder"??

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP : the employer is supposed to offer advice on what must be disclosed.

 

I need an eDBS for my employment (and tend to need one with sufficient regularity that I even use the "portable" eDBS update service).

 

Every eCRB and then eDBS application (and job application) has noted that the post is "exempt from the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders legislation".

Have you seen your job application / disclosure forms? Do they mention this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
A change in role from one requiring a standard disclosure to one requiring an enhanced disclosure.

 

An admin error on the initial disclosure that later gets corrected.

 

I know of someone who didn't disclose a conviction for a very minor offence who took a role before CRB's (let alone eDBS's) were in use.

They lied on their job application though.

 

They are now so scared they won't move jobs / roles, as they are now "caught in the lie". They are also wondering if their employer will start to check existing staff who they realise have never had CRB's / DBS's.

 

The problem now isn't a minor offence as a teenager that no one would care about, but that they lied, and have never come clean.

 

It converts something that can be explained / mitigated by passage of time into something that is recent / ongoing and a breach of trust, that once started is very hard to get away from.

 

OP: do you always want to be "looking over your shoulder"??

 

See your point.

I'm subjected to eDBS every 2 years, but many other roles at same employer get the first one when they pass interview and never again

Link to post
Share on other sites
OP : the employer is supposed to offer advice on what must be disclosed.

 

I need an eDBS for my employment (and tend to need one with sufficient regularity that I even use the "portable" eDBS update service).

 

Every eCRB and then eDBS application (and job application) has noted that the post is "exempt from the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders legislation".

Have you seen your job application / disclosure forms? Do they mention this?

 

I haven't seen the forms yet so I'm not sure. Does that mean the caution might be considered as spent? I'm trying to get through everything that' coming up on google but it's a struggle to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A change in role from one requiring a standard disclosure to one requiring an enhanced disclosure.

 

An admin error on the initial disclosure that later gets corrected.

 

I know of someone who didn't disclose a conviction for a very minor offence who took a role before CRB's (let alone eDBS's) were in use.

They lied on their job application though.

 

They are now so scared they won't move jobs / roles, as they are now "caught in the lie". They are also wondering if their employer will start to check existing staff who they realise have never had CRB's / DBS's.

 

The problem now isn't a minor offence as a teenager that no one would care about, but that they lied, and have never come clean.

 

It converts something that can be explained / mitigated by passage of time into something that is recent / ongoing and a breach of trust, that once started is very hard to get away from.

 

OP: do you always want to be "looking over your shoulder"??

 

I think that's a good point and no, I don't feel comfortable with the potential fear of being caught out hanging over my head every day.

 

It's really frustrating, this job is a huge opportunity for me, in a really interesting field with good pay. I've never even been considered for such a good job before and I'm so gutted with myself for doing something so stupid when I was desperate.

 

I'm not sure it could be overlooked if they found out about the caution either from me or through any checks they will do. They have a lot of applicants so I'm sure they would tell me to get lost in favour of someone who isn't a (reformed) thief! Bit gutting really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

some security staff are bulies and criminals

although the checks are strict. friend didn't pass last stage when the found out he was arrested without even caution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
some security staff are bulies and criminals

although the checks are strict. friend didn't pass last stage when the found out he was arrested without even caution.

 

How would they find that out, except for an arrest for specific offences (& even then : likely more than one arrest!)?.

 

It would have to be "other information at chief officer of police's discretion" ; which makes it only likely regarding a significant sexual offence / risk to children (a la Ian Huntley).

 

Can you be certain that was why, rather than another reason ("face didn't fit" or other candidate got the job!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on what the questions are

 

If you are ask if you have any unspent convictions then you can say no

If they say an enhanced dbs will be done then you need to fess up as they say.

 

There is a very good website to check

 

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

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites
How would they find that out, except for an arrest for specific offences (& even then : likely more than one arrest!)?.

 

It would have to be "other information at chief officer of police's discretion" ; which makes it only likely regarding a significant sexual offence / risk to children (a la Ian Huntley).

 

Can you be certain that was why, rather than another reason ("face didn't fit" or other candidate got the job!)

 

he was drunk waved his hands during arrest and was accused from asaulting police. there was court hearing but no convicion. he said it in the interview.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that's a good point and no, I don't feel comfortable with the potential fear of being caught out hanging over my head every day.

 

It's really frustrating, this job is a huge opportunity for me, in a really interesting field with good pay. I've never even been considered for such a good job before and I'm so gutted with myself for doing something so stupid when I was desperate.

 

I'm not sure it could be overlooked if they found out about the caution either from me or through any checks they will do. They have a lot of applicants so I'm sure they would tell me to get lost in favour of someone who isn't a (reformed) thief! Bit gutting really.

 

Not much I can say that will give you any certainty except : if you don't try you won't know.

The point you are making is that you've been there : made a poor choice & learnt from it. Would you make the same poor choice again? If not, let them see that.

 

I'm not saying they'd give a job to someone who got done for aggravated burglary a year ago, but your offence was more minor and longer ago.

Don't say "it doesn't matter" but present it with the positive of what you've learnt & how you've changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not much I can say that will give you any certainty except : if you don't try you won't know.

The point you are making is that you've been there : made a poor choice & learnt from it. Would you make the same poor choice again? If not, let them see that.

 

I'm not saying they'd give a job to someone who got done for aggravated burglary a year ago, but your offence was more minor and longer ago.

Don't say "it doesn't matter" but present it with the positive of what you've learnt & how you've changed.

 

excellent advice. thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't seen the forms yet so I'm not sure. Does that mean the caution might be considered as spent? I'm trying to get through everything that' coming up on google but it's a struggle to understand.

 

Sorry, missed that!.

 

Yes, if the job isn't exempt from the provisions of the Rehab of Offenders, then cautions can become 'spent'.

If they do say it IS exempt, then you'll have to 'fess up.

 

https://www.nacro.org.uk/resettlement-advice-service/support-for-individuals/disclosing-criminal-records/rehabilitation-offenders-act/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...