ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

New amendment - driving offences (fines) rehab is one year

Only for queries regarding Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). Please use the EU Settlement Scheme forum for queries about settled status under Appendix EU

Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix

John
Moderator
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:54 pm
Location: Birmingham, England
United Kingdom

Post by John » Thu May 03, 2012 2:57 pm

Can you explain to me the logical and sensible reason behind this decision that migrants for immigration purposes should never have spent convictions.
Well no, that is, if it were down to me section 140 would not have been put on to the Statute Book. So I cannot explain why the Government has done this.

However like it or not, it is on the Statute Book, albeit yet to be put into action. I still feel that the analogy to teachers is still a reasonable point to make, because it illustrates that needing to disclose spent convictions is not an automatic bar to success of the application being made.

The impression I get is that some feel that the need to disclose spent convictions is an automatic bar to success of the application. It is that fear that I wish to dispel.
John

Locked