Worried

[Cinc026]

I am 19 years old, a university student who, on Friday night got incredibly drunk and acted a fool at a London tube station. It was the first time I have ever been involved with police/transport police, and I ended up receiving a caution for breaking railway byelaw 6 - unacceptable behaviour.

I have been told by a solicitor that it won't effect my future, and that it is unlikely to show up on even enhanced checks but I just want to clarify the extent to which this could possibly damage me or be disclosed in the future.
It was the result of a very, very stupid drunken mistake and I never intend to find myself in such a situation again.

Just to be clear - this is a caution, not a conviction; there has been no court order and on the documentation it expresses that it is a non-recordable offence.

 

[najaB]

I have been told by a solicitor that it won't effect my future, and that it is unlikely to show up on even enhanced checks but I just want to clarify the extent to which this could possibly damage me or be disclosed in the future.

It was the result of a very, very stupid drunken mistake and I never intend to find myself in such a situation again.

As long as you've learned from this and don't intend to repeat it, then you don't have anything to worry about. As it says on the documentation, a Byelaws conviction is non-recordable so wouldn't show up, a caution even less so.

The only way this would ever even come up in a job application is if you're applying for a job with MI6 or GCHQ (etc). So in future, go out and enjoy your Friday nights, just stop a couple of drinks earlier.

 

[cookie365]

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/q562.htm

Q562: What is a caution and how long does it last?

A caution is a formal warning that is given to a person who has admitted the offence. If the person refuses the caution then they will normally be prosecuted through the normal channels for the offence. Although it is not technically classed as a conviction (as only the Courts can convict someone) it can be taken into consideration by the Courts if the person is convicted of a further offence.

Cautions are covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and become spent immediately (apart from conditional cautions which will become spent after 3 months). Unless applying for particular types of work (see below), a person who has spent cautions does not have to disclose them to prospective employers, and employers cannot refuse to employ someone on the basis of spent convictions.

However, when applying for particular types of employment, for example, working with children or vulnerable adults, certain professions such as law, health care, and pharmacy, senior management posts within certain sectors and employment where matters of national security are involved, the application form will state that it is exempt from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. In these situations, you may need need to disclose your caution , and it may be disclosed on your DBS criminal records check. See Q89 for further guidance on whether your caution will be disclosed.

...

 

[Cinc026]

Believe me I have most certainly learnt from it. When I sobered up and they told me what I was doing I was utterly shocked, totally contrary to my usual character so yes, I will absolutely never find myself in such a situation again. Thank you for the reassurance

 

[34D]

We have another thread that poses this very same question.

If I quote from http://m.askthe.police.uk/content/Q89.htm?viewsinglecontentelementid=27840

The law protects people from having some old and/or minor convictions and cautions disclosed to employers, but sexual and violent offences will always be disclosed

You will need to tell us whether your caution was sexual or violent.

 

[SussexMan]

As it says on the documentation, a Byelaws conviction is non-recordable so wouldn't show up, a caution even less so.

What documentation are you referring to?

As I understand it a Police Caution would normally get entered on to the Police National Computer and therefore show up on DBS checks. What happens with a Caution for a Byelaw Offence? A conviction for a byelaw offence won't show up but what system is in place to ensure that a police caution doesn't, and where would that get recorded?

 

[Cinc026]

What documentation are you referring to?

As I understand it a Police Caution would normally get entered on to the Police National Computer and therefore show up on DBS checks. What happens with a Caution for a Byelaw Offence? A conviction for a byelaw offence won't show up but what system is in place to ensure that a police caution doesn't, and where would that get recorded?

The paperwork citing the caution itself - it's not a police caution, let me be clear here. It is a railway byelaw caution issued by the transport police.

 

[Cinc026]

Additionally, the paperwork itself states that it is a simple caution and the details will only be retained by police for potential future use.

 

[najaB]

What documentation are you referring to?

The documentation that the OP referred to.

I would find it perverse, though not beyond the conceivable, that a caution would show up for an offence that would not be recordable on conviction.

 

[Cinc026]

We have another thread that poses this very same question.

If I quote from http://m.askthe.police.uk/content/Q89.htm?viewsinglecontentelementid=27840

The law protects people from having some old and/or minor convictions and cautions disclosed to employers, but sexual and violent offences will always be disclosed

You will need to tell us whether your caution was sexual or violent.

The caution/offence was neither sexual nor violent
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I suppose my last remaining concern is whether this will have any impact on travelling - namely to the US. Would this prevent me from travelling via VISA waiver?

 

[najaB]

I suppose my last remaining concern is whether this will have any impact on travelling - namely to the US. Would this prevent me from travelling via VISA waiver?

I don't believe it would. As I understand it, you wouldn't be eligible if you had been arrested or convicted of an offence. Since I'm assuming you were given the caution without being actually arrested you should be fine.

 

[Cinc026]

Ahh, this is a thing. I was arrested for my own safety and relevant details were taken, but the caution provided was for unacceptable behaviour due to byelaw 6. Would this mean that in the future I would have to go through the Embassy? Also, even though I wasn't charged would the fact that I was arrested complicate anything, or is it simply the spent caution that will be recorded?

 

[najaB]

Ahh, this is a thing. I was arrested for my own safety and relevant details were taken...

Were you subsequently de-arrested? Or were you released without charge instead?

 

[Cinc026]

Well, as I understand it the police have my personal information on the PNC as I was taken to a station, but the official end result was purely the railway byelaw caution. I don't know at what point I could have been considered to be 'de-arrested'
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Were you subsequently de-arrested? Or were you released without charge instead?

I was given the caution and released; that was the extent of my punishment.

 

[najaB]

Well, as I understand it the police have my personal information on the PNC as I was taken to a station, but the official end result was purely the railway byelaw caution. I don't know at what point I could have been considered to be 'de-arrested'
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I was given the caution and released; that was the extent of my punishment.

For the visa waiver programme, it doesn't matter if you were charged or not, just whether you were arrested for an offence that could have resulted in a fine or custodial sentence.

The US has no (official) access to the PNC so I *believe* that if you were officially dearrested then you would be okay to apply under it. I can only suggest that you speak with an immigration service as they would know the fine detail.

In the worst case, getting a B1/B2 visa isn't that hard and they are (or at least used to be) issued for up to 10 years at a time.

 

[Cinc026]

For the visa waiver programme, it doesn't matter if you were charged or not, just whether you were arrested for an offence that could have resulted in a fine or custodial sentence.

The US has no (official) access to the PNC so I *believe* that if you were officially dearrested then you would be okay to apply under it. I can only suggest that you speak with an immigration service as they would know the fine detail.

In the worst case, getting a B1/B2 visa isn't that hard and they are (or at least used to be) issued for up to 10 years at a time.

I wasn't de-arrested just to be clear; I was given the railway byelaw caution and then released [but not convicted or charged or whatever], which I presume would show up should I intend to travel to the US.

Thank you very much for all of your help. I did such an irresponsible, reckless thing and this is absolutely the first and last time that I will ever be involved in anything of the like. Just to clarify, by the sounds of it obtaining a B1/B2 Visa seems to be the most severe implication of this situation. Would that be correct?

Kids do stupid things and this particularly stupid thing has certainly made me grow up - this has all been very confusing and worrying

 

[najaB]

I wasn't de-arrested just to be clear; I was given the railway byelaw caution and then released [but not convicted or charged or whatever], which I presume would show up should I intend to travel to the US.

I'd double-check that with the Police/BTP as someone who is arrested for their own safety is often de-arrested later. There's no form to sign or anything like that, just "you're now dearrested and on your way".

Thank you very much for all of your help. I did such an irresponsible, reckless thing and this is absolutely the first and last time that I will ever be involved in anything of the like. Just to clarify, by the sounds of it obtaining a B1/B2 Visa seems to be the most severe implication of this situation. Would that be correct?

Yes. As long as you don't have a repeat performance there is no reason that this caution should have any other impact on your life.

 

[Cinc026]

Thanks you for your help. There definitely won't be

 

[DaleCooper]

Thanks you for your help. There definitely won't be

When you get to my age this will be one of the funny stories about your misspent youth with which you bore your friends and family, at least that's what I do.

 

[Cinc026]

I have a job interview for a temporary placement tomorrow. Will I need to declare this? If so, to what extent will it hinder my chances of receiving an offer? [The job does not include working with children or the elderly].

 

[najaB]

I have a job interview for a temporary placement tomorrow. Will I need to declare this? If so, to what extent will it hinder my chances of receiving an offer? [The job does not include working with children or the elderly].

Only if they specifically ask if you have received a police caution - most employers do not, they only ask about convictions.

 

[Cinc026]

Right okay, thanks for your help. It is my fault for rashly getting myself into this position, although I can't help but notice how utterly equivocal this appears.

I have read advice stating the disclosure of everything whatever it may be, other sources state that Railway Byelaws are Non-Recordable and won't show up, especially when spent. Due to the nature of this caution I don't know whether it will be exempt and nothing I have read has helped with this. If asked, I don't know how honest I should be and to what extent I may be discriminated against as a result.

The information I have read has accumulated into a huge heap of contradiction and ambiguity.

Sorry to press further, I am hugely thankful for all replies I have received.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Due to the nature of this caution I don't know whether it will be exempt and nothing I have read has helped with this.

. . . . .

The information I have read has accumulated into a huge heap of contradiction and ambiguity.

If I have correctly extracted the relevant facts of your incident from your opinions and expressions, then your 'Caution' will NOT have been entered into the Police National Computer (PNC).

If asked, I don't know how honest I should be . . . .

Honesty, like pregnacy, doesn't appear on any scale of degree. It is either absolute honesty with utter integrity or it is absolute deceipt with no integrity.

 

[najaB]

I have read advice stating the disclosure of everything whatever it may be, other sources state that Railway Byelaws are Non-Recordable and won't show up, especially when spent. Due to the nature of this caution I don't know whether it will be exempt and nothing I have read has helped with this. If asked, I don't know how honest I should be and to what extent I may be discriminated against as a result.

It's really not as confusing as it appears - you never have to disclose anything that's not been asked. If they don't ask, then they can't hold it against you later. If the application form asks if you have any convictions (spent or unspent), you can truthfully answer that you have not. If, however, they ask if you have any cautions then you must answer that you do.

The only question to which I've not found a conclusive answer to is if a caution for a non-recordable offence would show up on a DBS check. I do not believe that it would, but haven't found an authoritative source to back up my belief.

 

[Cinc026]

If I have correctly extracted the relevant facts of your incident from your opinions and expressions, then your 'Caution' will NOT have been entered into the Police National Computer (PNC).

Honesty, like pregnacy, doesn't appear on any scale of degree. It is either absolute honesty with utter integrity or it is absolute deceipt with no integrity.

Misused an expression of quantity there - my apologies. The issue lay with providing an answer to the exact question that I may be asked. In this and most other instances honesty seems best, although from what I can glean it seems unlikely that I will be asked to provide the existent information to my detriment. Perhaps this is wishful thinking, but many thanks to everyone that advised me.

It's really not as confusing as it appears - you never have to disclose anything that's not been asked. If they don't ask, then they can't hold it against you later. If the application form asks if you have any convictions (spent or unspent), you can truthfully answer that you have not. If, however, they ask if you have any cautions then you must answer that you do.

The only question to which I've not found a conclusive answer to is if a caution for a non-recordable offence would show up on a DBS check. I do not believe that it would, but haven't found an authoritative source to back up my belief.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . if anyone is in a similar situation or for anyone looking to advise on similar posts I recommend this:

https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/advice/planning/Pages/convictions.aspx

I found it a very useful source.

I'm glad that you found it helpful.
However it would not be wise to recommend that document to others 'in a similar situation' as it is written solely in respect of Offences and Cautions brought forward by the Police and/or CPS, whereas Railway Prosecutions are 'private prosecutions' brought forward by Companies whom have different approaches to creating and updating entries in the PNC. [Other categories include Prosecutions brought by Local Authorities, National Agencies, Charities, and other authorised Companies operating Ports, Airports, etc..]

 

[Cinc026]

I'm glad that you found it helpful.
However it would not be wise to recommend that document to others 'in a similar situation' as it is written solely in respect of Offences and Cautions brought forward by the Police and/or CPS, whereas Railway Prosecutions are 'private prosecutions' brought forward by Companies whom have different approaches to creating and updating entries in the PNC. [Other categories include Prosecutions brought by Local Authorities, National Agencies, Charities, and other authorised Companies operating Ports, Airports, etc..]

Sorry should have clarified - the situation referred to regards concerns of future employment and disclosure, to which I think the link is relevant. It remains the most comprehensive official document I found on the matter, although yes, it won't deal with the exact repercussions of Railway offences. Having said that, it seems that an official source easily accessible to the public that does sufficiently deal with this area of the law is elusive at best. Substantiated with the advice of people like yourself on this forum, my issues have been resolved, so many thanks. However, at least 1 legal grey area did not escape attention.

From what I gather, this Railway Byelaw caution basically constitutes a regular caution and I would have to declare it if asked, on the off chance that it might show up. Regardless of the non-recordable/recordable debate, the ACTUAL issue here regards ethics, viz. honesty and integrity. Even if not compelled by the law to declare this due to its status as a Rail Byelaw caution (IE Non-recordable), it seems that I could be rejected if I didn't on grounds of dishonesty, due to the slight possibility/ambiguity whether or not it will show.

This, legally speaking, is ridiculous but possible.

 

[najaB]

The systems that record this information seem to operate beyond the confines of the law.

On the contrary, the controls on disclosure are very tight and strongly legislated. Consider this - the UK is one of a very small number of countries which has the concept of offences becoming 'spent' with the passage of time.

In the US there is no equivalent to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, so convictions/cautions present a permanent stain on the character. This is even more ridiculous considering that several states operate 'three strikes' laws which mean that a third conviction - no matter what the offence - carries a mandatory life sentence!

 

[Cinc026]

On the contrary, the controls on disclosure are very tight and strongly legislated. Consider this - the UK is one of a very small number of countries which has the concept of offences becoming 'spent' with the passage of time.

In the US there is no equivalent to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, so convictions/cautions present a permanent stain on the character. This is even more ridiculous considering that several states operate 'three strikes' laws which mean that a third conviction - no matter what the offence - carries a mandatory life sentence!

-----

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The systems that record this information seem to operate beyond the confines of the law.

They certainly do not!

See :
- National Police Records (Recordable Offences) Regulations 2000
- Part V of the Police Act 1997
- Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
- Sections 30 & 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998
- Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
- Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 [Exceptions] Order 1975
- Code of Practice for Police National Computer : 1 January 2005
- The "5 Chief Constables’ case" [2009] EWCA Civ 1079
- MOPI Code of Practice 2005 under Section 39 of the Police Act 1996
- ACPO MOPI Guidance (2nd Edition) 2010
- GC&C v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2011] UKSC 21
- European Criminal records Information System (ECRIS) in application of Article 11 of Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA