Skip to main content
For people with criminal records
For people with criminal records

Category: News & Media

Monthly update – October 2020

We’ve just published our update for October 2020.

This months update includes:

  1. New information about the EU Settlement Scheme for applicants with a criminal record.
  2. An advice post on travelling to the EU after 1 January 2021.
  3. A personal story from James setting out his experiences of applying to university with a criminal record.
  4. A link to a discussion on theForum around sentencing and whether sentences are considered fair and just.
  5. A link to our autumn 2020 newsletter which provides an update on the news at Unlock in the last 3 months.
  6. Details of our next criminal records webinar on Wednesday 2 December 2020.

 

The full update provides a summary of:

  1. the latest updates to our self-help information site for people with convictions
  2. recent posts to our online magazine, theRecord
  3. discussions on our online forum
  4. other news and developments that might be of interest to individuals with a criminal record.

Read the October 2020 update in full.

Best wishes,

Unlock

Notes

Settled status – New information on what you need to know if you are an EU citizen and have a criminal record

The EU Settlement Scheme protects the rights EU/EEA citizens and their family members currently have in the UK, through the process of applying for settled or pre-settled status. 

As part of the applications process, there are questions about criminal records and checks are carried out by the Home Office. 

It is difficult to give clear information on how the Home Office will treat applications from people with criminal records. We do not know how the Home Office is applying its own guidance so this information cannot tell you categorically what to expect, although the Home Office appears to be taking a very long time to make decisions in many applications from people with criminal records. 

The vast majority of applicants with a criminal record should find their criminal record is not a barrier to settled or pre-settled status. That said, you may still be refused settled or pre-settled status because of the suitability criteria. 

That’s why today we have published information about the EU Settlement Scheme for applicants with a criminal record, as well as details of organisations that can provide specialist advice. You can read the information online.  

What you need to know about applying for settled status

  • Having a criminal record should not put you off applying 
  • It’s important to apply as soon as you can. The deadline is 30 June 2021, but you should apply as soon as possible 
  • If you have lived in the UK for five years or more and have no unspent convictions, it is unlikely that your criminal record will be a barrier 
  • If you have unspent convictions, or you have a criminal record and have lived in the UK for less than five years, you should get specialist advice. 

We’ve also published a one-page summary which can be downloaded as a PDF – which organisations providing advice to individuals can use as a way of raising awareness amongst those who need to apply and might be concerned about their criminal record.  

We’re continuing our work on settled status, to help secure the rights of EU nationals to settled status in the UK by ensuring that a criminal record does not unfairly exclude them.  

More information

  1. The information is available to read on our information site. 
  2. There is a one-page summary which can be downloaded as a PDF.  
  3. You can find out more about our work on settled status.   

Criminal records webinar Wednesday 2 December

Do you deal with criminal records in your work? You might be helping people with convictions who are applying for jobs, or working in recruitment/HR and making hiring decisions or carrying out DBS checks.  

If any of these apply to you, book a place and join us on Wednesday 2 December for our webinar on understanding the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and the disclosure of criminal records. 

The criminal records system in England and Wales is complex and often confusing. There are over 11 million people with a criminal record. The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is a piece of legislation that sets out when convictions become ‘spent’, and it’s important to know the difference between unspent and spent convictions and when they need to be disclosed.  


When and where? 

Wednesday 2 December, 2-4pm, Online
(Please join at 1.45pm to begin promptly at 2pm – thank you) 

Price: £49 (if booked before 1 November, normal price £59) 

Price includes a course pack with materials and useful resources which will be sent to you before the webinar. 

Places are limited, so book now to guarantee your place. If you wish to be notified on any future webinars, please email admin@unlockorg.uk 

Who is it for? 

The webinar is aimed at anyone who deals with criminal records in their work. You might be helping people with convictions who are applying for jobs, or you might be working in recruitment/HR and making hiring decisions or carrying on DBS checks. 

What it will cover

  • The levels of DBS criminal record check and what they disclose 
  • How individuals can find out about their criminal record 
  • The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and spent convictions 
  • The ‘filtering’ rules and protected cautions/convictions 
  • Good practice in asking about criminal records for employment and volunteering 

To find out more and to book, visit our Eventbrite page. 

Footer 

If you have any questions, email admin@unlock.org.uk. 

This webinar is part of the training that we provide. 

A smarter approach to criminal records?

On the 16th September the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published it’s much anticipated white paper “A Smarter Approach To Sentencing”. It is a mixed bag, offering  ‘tough on crime’ sentencing measures along with some more positive reforms to criminal record disclosure periods.    

The MoJ says that they want to improve employment prospects for people with convictions, and so reduce reoffending, which sounds great. Given that they have also announced some positive changes you could be forgiven for thinking that reducing disclosure periods might actually ensure better access to employment. Unfortunately it’s a bit more complicated than that. 

Seen in a vacuum the proposals are somewhat progressive. A significant number of people, 15,000 per year, would see their convictions become spent more quickly, and no longer have to disclose them for most jobs. Many other people who have been living with an unspent criminal record for decades would finally be able to move on, as the proposed changes would enable some sentences over four years to become spent. That’s a strong start.  

Here are what the proposed disclosure periods look like in more detail:

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are three things that really jump out.   

Firstly, some sentences over four years would have the opportunity to become spent. The asterisks are quite significant, with most violent, sexual and terrorist offences excluded, which means only about 30% of longer sentences are eligible. But in spite of this, it would still be a big change. At the last review in 2014, even this limited version seemed impossible. 

Secondly, disclosure periods would be generally shortened, which would reduce the period people face discrimination for. This is certainly better than nothing, but the periods are still quite long even compared to other proposals from within Parliament. Lord Ramsbotham’s 2017 bill proposed cutting four year periods to two years, for example, but the MoJ has chosen to ignore this despite cross–party support.  

Finally; the shortest period of disclosures would cover sentences under 12 months, instead of only six months. This is in line with the changes we saw in Scotland, with all magistrates sentences being spent at the same rate . This would result in far fewer cases where the differences between regions and judges leads to a major difference in disclosure length.  

To put these changes into perspective; MoJ figures show 7,980 people were given sentences between six months and one year in 2019/20. At present they have to disclose their convictions for four years; under these proposals they would only have to disclose for one year. Around 7,500 people receive sentences of over 30 months each year, and they would only disclose for four years instead of seven after these changes. 

However, while shortened disclosure periods will certainly help thousands of people get their lives back on track, the white paper still seems to have missed the point. The proposals are a general relaxation, but they do little to actually improve employment prospects.  

The critical time for employment is at the beginning of the disclosure period, not the end. Finding the first job is the hardest part, when discrimination is most felt. Reducing the period of discrimination is positive, but the discrimination is still there and will still hold people back. Even while the MoJ is making the right argument about employment, they don’t offer proposals to tackle this core issue. 

This can be seen in other places, especially in the rationale given for preventing most longer sentences becoming spent. The white paper justifies shortened disclosure periods by arguing that employment reduces reoffending. We completely agree, and the evidence backs this up. But a few paragraphs later, the paper says lifelong disclosure, and lifelong discrimination, is justified because reoffending would be particularly harmful. Surely if reoffending would be so bad it is even more important to do everything we can to reduce it, including improved access to employment? 

People with more serious convictions face more serious discrimination, and for longer. The MoJ knows this is a big factor in reoffending, but they are not doing anything to change it. Most alarmingly, by continuing with lifelong disclosure the MoJ is signalling that many thousands of people cannot be rehabilitated and always present a risk to the public, even after 40 or 50 years. 

In the end, while this paper says all the right things about employment and reoffending, the MoJ are content to leave the old system intact and not consider a genuinely new approach. They argue that discrimination is severe and needs to be addressed; but their proposals are only for less discrimination for some, and they don’t consider the possibility of zero discrimination. 

Of course, Unlock will be pushing for any change that helps people with convictions, even small ones. Better is still better. But our real goal over the coming year or two as the paper moves forward is to push the Government to be bolder and less restricted in their thinking, and to deliver a criminal records system that works for everyone.  

Written by Sam Doohan, Unlock Policy Officer

 

Read more:

 

Monthly update – September 2020

We’ve just published our update for September 2020.

This months update includes:

  1. An update to our A-Z of job roles and their eligibility for basic, standard and enhanced criminal record checks.
  2. A personal story from an individual who has been accepted onto a university course to study digital forensics following a conviction for assault.
  3. A link to a discussion on theForum from an individual sharing his experience of a whistle-blower disclosing his spent conviction to his employer.
  4. Unlocks response to the Ministry of Justice plans to make reforms to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
  5. A link to a report published by Unlock and the Prison Reform Trust exploring employers attitudes towards hiring people convicted of sexual offences.

 

The full update provides a summary of:

  1. the latest updates to our self-help information site for people with convictions
  2. recent posts to our online magazine, theRecord
  3. discussions on our online forum
  4. other news and developments that might be of interest to individuals with a criminal record.

Read the September 2020 update in full.

Best wishes,

Unlock

Notes

Some examples of people we’ve helped

Looking back over the last couple of months, we’ve written up a few examples of the people we’ve helped.

We hope they give a good idea of how we help people.

However, more importantly than our role, we think that these examples show how people with convictions are able to overcome some of the barriers that have been put in their way due to their criminal record.

We’ve posted the examples below as case studies in the support section of our website:

 

 

Bernie – The help I received from Unlock enabled me to work again

Ian – Unlock provided me with information and advice and introduced me to another business start up

Ulrik – Applying for a degree in medicine doesn’t mean universities are exempt from disclosure laws

Zara – People with a criminal record don’t always remember the details of their convictions: self-disclosure almost cost me my job

 

 

 

 

Criminal records: a comparison between England and Israel

We know that in the UK, people with criminal records can face stigma, discrimination and barriers which prevent them from being able to move on from their past and make a positive contribution to society. These barriers most commonly relate to employment, but people with convictions can also find themselves locked out of volunteering, access to housing and insurance.

Independent researcher Dana Segev wanted to look at how things could be done differently; in her article published by Unlock, she compares the treatment of people with convictions in England and Israel.

Download the article

Scottish Government Reforms criminal record disclosure

The Scottish Government has passed a significant reform to their criminal records regime. The Scottish system is separate from the one that applies in England and Wales, and had fallen behind the rest of the UK after Westminster made significant updates in 2014.  

The reforms that Holyrood have now passed make for interesting reading. The Scottish reforms, which come into force in November, give an insight into how criminal records are seen inside government and should be seen as a barometer for the rest of the UK.  

The new system does not just mirror England and Wales; It is broadly similar, but the changes are significant, especially when looked at in terms of the numbers of people who will be impacted. Note: the Ministry of Justice recently published a sentencing white paper, including proposed changes to the criminal records system in England and Wales.  

The changes in Scotland

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The most important difference is that the lowest tier for disclosing custodial sentences in Scotland now cuts off at 12 months, not six months as in England and Wales. This makes a significant difference, because short sentences are the most common, and those between six and 12 months are just under 20% of the annual total.  

As a result, about 2,000 more people per year will fall into the two year disclosure period, instead of the four year period they would face in England and Wales. 80% of all custodial sentences in Scotland will now be in the lowest tier for disclosure, compared to 62% if they had adopted the same system as England and Wales.   

This change also impacts the kinds of offences which will fall into the shortest disclosure period. Twelve months is the maximum sentence that can be imposed by a magistrate (summary process by a sheriff in Scotland). This means that all custodial sentences imposed by will have the same disclosure regime, which is a much fairer approach.  

Minor variations in sentencing between individual sheriffs or magistrates will not lead to multiple additional years of disclosure. There will still be discretion over sentence lengths, but not over how long they will be disclosed for. This also shows more joined up thinking. It makes sense that the existing division between magistrates and crown court is reflected in the subsequent disclosure. 

Another major change is that the Scottish legislation will allow – eventually – for sentences over 4 years to become spent. This will not happen automatically, but the Scottish government have committed to creating a review process to determine when, or if, they can become spent.  

This is a significant shift in position, and it is the first attempt in the UK to handle these more serious convictions on a case by case basis. While longer sentences are less frequent overall, the current requirement to disclose indefinitely means they impact people for decades, regardless of how much they have moved on. The ability to review a conviction and have it become spent is much fairer than blanket rules.   

We do not know what that review process will look like, or even necessarily the criteria that will be used, so there are still some hurdles to overcome. We are particularly concerned about the resources that will be available, because this will hugely impact how effective that system can be. However, this is still a big move in principle, and we hope it will be as meaningful in practice. 

These changes are not huge in legislative terms, but they will make a major difference to a large number of people. 22% of annual sentences in Scotland will have a fairer disclosure regime than in England and Wales. 2,500 people per year will have a more positive future because of a more progressive criminal records system, with easier access to employment and education, and fair access to insurance. 

How does this impact England and Wales? 

It is very encouraging for our reform work in Westminster that Holyrood has made this move. We can see that political and government circles are interested in a more progressive approach, and that they do see the positives associated with a less draconian system.  

Once the Scottish system is in action it will provide a continuous stream of data showing the impact that reducing disclosure has in numerous different ways. If the figures show lower reoffending and improved employment, as the Scottish government believes they will, this will be powerful evidence for making similar changes in England and Wales.  

Equally, the Scottish Government has shown that the arguments that Unlock is making in Westminster do impact policy decisions. The Scottish Justice minister, Humza Yousaf, said: “Progressive changes to disclosure allow people to move on with their lives into employment, [and are] proven to reduce the likelihood of further offending. As a result, these changes] help keep crime down and communities safe.”  

These are exactly the arguments that Unlock make, and it is very positive to see officials citing these benefits as the reason for reducing disclosure. stance taken further, especially for intermediate-length sentences where Scotland will largely mirror the wider UK. 

In the coming year, our calls to reform the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act will certainly be strengthened by the Scottish reforms. The arrival of new legislation will shine a spotlight on the regime in England and Wales, and help to break the inertia, as well as providing real world data. Unlock will be building from Scotland’s example to deliver a truly fair criminal record system that works for everyone.  

Get involved 

Join the FairChecks movement, and call on the government to reform criminal records checking in England and Wales. 

Written by Sam Doohan, Unlock Policy Officer 

 

More information 

Open letter to Ministers Victoria Atkins and Chris Philp

Back in July, the government responded to a Supreme Court ruling from January 2019, requiring changes to the filtering system. This week these changes have finally gone through parliament – but we have learned that there will be a delay of several months before they are signed into law, ostensibly due to time needed for the DBS to prepare their systems. Together with Liberty and Just for Kids Law, today we publish the below letter sent yesterday to the ministers responsible:

Dear Ministers   

Re: Timetable for implementing response to the Supreme Court judgment: [2019] UKSC 3

As organisations involved in the above Supreme Court case on criminal records, we are writing to seek urgent clarification on the timetable for implementing the changes that the ruling required. 

This week Parliament approved two statutory instruments that the government had laid to amend the rules for criminal record disclosure, following the ruling of the Supreme Court ruling in January of 2019. These two simple changes will put an end to the disclosure of childhood cautions and will also end the automatic disclosure of multiple convictions as a result of the so-called ‘multiple conviction’ rule being abolished. The Home Office’s own analysis shows that, taken together, these two changes will help around 45,000 people per year to have a fresh start by having clear standard or enhanced DBS checks.  

However, these changes have yet to become law. We are deeply concerned at the potential for the changes to still not come into force for several months, as the Minister stated a “hope” for them to be “finalised by the end of the year.” This delay is simply intolerable, and we urge you, as Ministers with direct responsibility for delivering on the two respective Statutory Instruments, to take firm action.   

Given the amount of time that has passed since the Supreme Court ruling, we are concerned by the latest hold up. The verdict that drove the changes was delivered in January of 2019. This has given the Government ample time, at least 20 months, to make preparations. These are also not complex changes; they are minor updates to an existing rules-based system.  

Across England and Wales thousands of people are still being impacted each month by the current filtering rules. According to Home Office figures, over 45,000 people per year would not disclose any criminal offences under the new rules, but they will continue to do so until the new rules take effect. 120 people each day – 3,750 a month – are having their professional futures jeopardised by a disclosure regime which was described by the Supreme Court as having elements that were capricious, disproportionate and perverse. Many more will be putting their career plans on hold, waiting for the changes to come into effect before seeking employment – because of the stigma they know they will face if their criminal record is disclosed.  

It is critically important that the Home Office and Ministry of Justice are seen to respect the Supreme Court’s judgement. It reflects very poorly on the Government when it shows conspicuously little interest in realising the changes that have been ordered, and an indifference to the ongoing injustice.  

As three organisations who hear every day from people impacted by this system, Unlock, Liberty and Just for Kids Law strongly urge the Ministers to provide the necessary leadership to ensure that the Supreme Court’s decision is implemented immediately. We also urge you to investigate the cause of this delay, and reassure the public that your departments have not made any attempts to frustrate or undermine the Court’s ruling. Everyone deserves the opportunity of a fresh start.  

We look forward to your reply.  

Yours sincerely, 

Christopher Stacey – Co-director, Unlock

Enver Solomon – CEO, Just for Kids Law

Martha Spurrier – Director, Liberty

We want to make sure that our website is as helpful as possible.

Letting us know if you easily found what you were looking for or not enables us to continue to improve our service for you and others.

Was it easy to find what you were looking for?

Thank you for your feedback.

12.5 million people have criminal records in the UK. We need your help to help them.

Help support us now