paulat.pron@tiscali.co.uk.1330535426
18 years ago
Sponsor
fr.will@zen.co.uk.1330535427
18 years ago

Yeh, that's exactly my assessment of the situation, too. (And my assessment of what I probably ought to do, as well.)

Where I could kick myself is for asking in the first place. When I looked at the new SET(O) -- the old one didn't ask for traffic stuff -- I panicked and fired off an email to the IND. Only later did I think to write to the court and ask if I really had a conviction. By the time the court got back to me, the IND had already replied 'include it'. So when I wrote back saying, 'actually, they tell me it's not a conviction after all', the IND simply said 'tough. send it in anyway'. If I'd thought to write to the court first, then I wouldn't have this issue to worry about. (Let that be a lesson to anyone reading this!)

Fortuntely, since I had the Magistrate's letter, I was able, as I've said, to attach it to the separate statement (rather than tick the conviction box 'yes') -- and I put that statement on my official letterhead which says I am a priest!

Am I fair to suppose it won't be a problem, though, now? By the time I'm actually able to submit my Form AN, I'll have hit the two-year 'clear' period (June 2007) for my 'non-conviction'. Hopefully they'll  have the sense not to treat it as a conviction, anyway.  But, assuming the worst, do I need to ask for them to disregard it, or will they do it automatically? (The guidance you cited seems to suggest the latter, but that it isn't exactly a rubber stamp, either -- and that they're as much concerned with publicity as anything else!)

paulat.pron@tiscali.co.uk.1330535426
18 years ago
yusuftas69@hotmail.com.1330535427
18 years ago
No no no;

The guide states:"You must give details of all criminal convictions. These include road traffic offences, but not fixed penalty notices which have not been given in a court. Fixed penalty notices include parking and speeding offences. Drink driving offences must be declared."

A magistrate's court offence would need to be included. However, next to the 2 year clear time it also states;"*** The Home Secretary has some discretion to ignore a single conviction for a minor offence resulting in a bind over, conditional discharge or relatively small fine where the clear period has not yet expired, but the applicant is suitable in all other respects. Typically, these will be speeding or other ?regulatory? offences. Offences involving dishonesty (e.g. theft), violence or sexual offences are not minor offences. Drink-driving offences, driving while uninsured or disqualified are not minor offences either."

So hopefully being considered a minor offence you should be OK. But a second conviction will not be tolerated as it states "a single conviction".

I think this is too harsh...
paulat.pron@tiscali.co.uk.1330535426
18 years ago

"....criminal convictions. These include road traffic offences, but not fixed penalty notices which have not been given in a court."

1. If you look at the original post, you will see the the fixed penalty notice was offered as an alternative to a court hearing. It does not, therefore, qualify as a conviction for the purposes of the Guide.

2. You will also see from the original post that William received written confirmation from the court that his fixed penalty notice did not constitute a conviction. I think that officers of the court would know, wouldn't they?

3. I don't think I have ever started a post with "No no no;" I hope you can be persuaded to resist the temptation to do so in the future. Disagreement is fine; rudeness isn't.

paul
fr.will@zen.co.uk.1330535427
18 years ago

I agree, Yusuf; I'm probably o.k. on several counts: 1) it's not a conviction anyway; 2) even if they decide it is, I've hit the clear period; 3) it's just a single count, which falls within their discretion to disregard even if not in the clear period.

I just tend to over-worry these things. I've been here 10 years now (got my ILR on the long-residence provision), and I am *very* tired of these never-ending applications to the IND. It will be such a blessed relief when / if I get my citizenship, so I can get on with my life as a full member of the society in which I've chosen to live. So I freely admit I've got myself a bit wound up about it all. It's been a long, long decade.

One important thing that P Pron hit on, though, is that I'm probably best revealing it for the sake of consistency. In the link he posted above, it's very clear that *intention* is important to them in the matter of disclosure. If you'll notice, they have procedures for discretionary mercy when someone has been full and frank about their history, as well as procedures for discretionary caution (and refusal of applications) when someone has attempted to cover something up (even if, in the latter case, the application is otherwise o.k.). What's very important is not to look like you've got something to hide -- or else they'll wonder what else you're hiding.

In my case, I think it's amply full and frank to tick the 'no convictions' box and attach a separate statement disclosing the incident, together with the letter confirming it's not a conviction. 

FWIW, I've also written to the IND on paper (rather than email) explaining my circumstances and requesting clarification from the Nationality Group.  Whenever I should get a response, I'll post it, so others can know, as well. 

yusuftas69@hotmail.com.1330535427
18 years ago
fr.will@zen.co.uk.1330535427
18 years ago
I have recently been granted ILR (Aug. 2006) and am now turning my eyes towards the nationality application in a year's time. 

However, in June 2005, I was caught by a speed camera and received a fixed penalty (£60 fine and 3 points on my licence).  Formally the procedure goes like this:  you get caught; the court offers you a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (with the punishment above), which you can take, rather than go to court and face a larger fine.  Naturally, I took the fixed penalty. 

When it came time to submit my SET(O), I wrote to the Magistrate's Court Fixed Penalty Office, asking if this counted as a conviction, and they said 'no'.  Nonetheless, two different IND agents told me to list the incident anyway for the SET(O).  So, because I had the advice from the Fixed Penalty Office in writing, I answered the conviction question 'no' -- but added a separate statement describing the speeding incident and to this I attached the letter from the Magistrate's Office.  Seems to have worked, because they granted me ILR in the usual time. 

Regarding Form AN, however, I note that on p. 22 of the guidance, it says specifically that you DON'T have to mention fixed penalties in the convictions question.  Does this mean that the SET(O) people were wrong?  Or that different rules apply to Form AN?  Or does it mean that what I've had isn't quite what they're talking about? 

Seems an open-and-shut case to me:  if the court says it's not a conviciton, it's not a conviction.  But the Home Office doesn't seem to see it that way.  I suppose that, if I'm in doubt, I should do the same kind of thing I did for the SET(O)? 

What is the policy for overlooking these things?  I note that the guidance says that, on a discretionary basis, the Home Office MAY disregard a single traffic violation altogether -- or, alternatively, that it MAY allow people who have reached a "clear" time to naturalise, despite convictions.  What is the actual practice, though?  Do you have to make a case for yourself if you want them to disregard an incident -- or is it that the discretionary element just lets them keep their options open, but it's actually quite routine for them to disregard prior incidents that meet the stated standards ? 

Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic