Anonanon

On the application it states that you have to tell them about convictions - even spent ones.

On the Gov U.K. website it states that a caution is not a conviction.

So I would not have to state that would I? And mine is spent.
but I do know that in the police certificate it would come up as "no live trace" indicating that something has been removed right?

any insight would be great - thank you

Paul Hand

I would declare and explain.

paddy234

A caution is not a conviction so you would state no.

This will only become an issue once you apply for a visa that requires a police certificate. When they see no live trace they will then request a subject access form showing what the caution was for. It's no big deal.

Pollyana

No offence, but I think I would be taking the advice of the experienced migration agent.

paddy234

A caution is not a conviction. I don't understand how someone would have to use an immigration agent to tell them that? Why would someone tick yes for a conviction when they have a caution? This is incredibly basic stuff here. I was in the exact same scenario myself as I have a previous caution and no live trace and got my working holiday visa around 18 months ago. If one needs an immigration agent to sort out a working holiday visa then there's something wrong lol

Now if it asks about other non convicted criminal activity which I know it does In longer term visa's then they will need to check this box but in this case they will also need to provide a police clearance. My advice to the OP is that when immigration ask for a police clearance In the future and you apply for it, also apply for a subject access form which states what your spent caution was for. Send in the police clearance and if they ask for a subject access form because they see "no live trace" instead of "no trace" on your police clearance you have the subject access form ready to send rather than waiting a month to recieve it from ACRO while you only have 30 days to send it to immigration. It's less stressful this way

old.sparkles

The person who initially replied is a MARA agent.

paddy234

Oh right, i didn't realize. Well i'm assumed his advice was to declare no and explain in the box below about his caution just to be helpful. All i was stating is what is common sense, that a caution is NOT a conviction. If the question is solely about a conviction and does not mention anything to do with cautions/warnings why would someone tick yes if they merely have a spent caution? It doesn't make sense and they would be lying. Other visa's will ask about convictions and warning/cautions in which one should answer accordingly which require a police clearance. I have a spent caution myself. Would you say yes to a question asking solely about a conviction if you merely had a caution?

old.sparkles

Accepting a caution is admitting you were guilty of the offence, so whilst it is not a conviction I would still say yes and provide details as the safest option.

verystormy

You declare cautions as a conviction as it will show on the criminal record check.

paddy234

If the question asked is solely about a conviction it is asking if you were convicted of an offence. A warning/caution is just that, being convicted of an offence and given a warning are completely different things. I know myself when being asked solely about a conviction i ticked no however when asked about committing any offence and given a caution/warning i ticked yes as i have a spent caution similar to the OP. The OP would have to give us a word for word description of what the question is that is being asked so we better understand. He made out it is solely asking for convictions and nothing else. I got my working holiday visa 18 months ago, i'm near sure it just asked about convictions which i said no to. Later when i applied for PR it did ask about any offences including cautions in a character declaration in which i had to give a police clearance, a statutory declaration of what the spent caution was for and detailed description of the events and then provide a subject access form because the police clearance form doesn't detail what a spent caution is for. It will just say ''no live trace''
https://www.gov.uk/caution-warning-p...nother%20crime.

You have to admit an offence and agree to be cautioned. You can be arrested and charged if you don’t agree.

A caution is not a criminal conviction, but it could be used as evidence of bad character if you go to court for another crime.

paddy234

No you don't.
Why would you declare you were convicted if you were cautioned?
''A conviction is a formal declaration by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law that someone is guilty of a criminal offence''.

Caution

If you admit an offence, the police can give you a caution. A caution is not a conviction. A caution is a warning which stays on your record for six years if you’re an adult, or two years if you’re under 18.
https://www.gov.uk/caution-warning-p...nother%20crime.
https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles...e%20under%2018.

Immigration will generally separately ask if you have committed any offence which you may have been cautioned for which is no longer on your record, in this case you would tick yes however ticking yes to a question that solely asks if you were convicted because one may have a spent caution makes no sense. I don't see how anyone can confuse convictions with cautions

How did others answer this question who have had cautions on here?


At the end of the day if the OP wants to play it safe, just tick no to a conviction but describe in the box below that you have a spent caution and what it was for.

Pollyana

Having worked with criminal records for many years, I am aware of the differences between cautions and convictions.

However, I have also been on this forum (and others) for many years and have read similar discussions on numerous occasions. Almost always an agent will join in at some point - one way to tell the registered agents on here is that they are always asked to put their details in their signature block.

The advice from them has always been to declare everything.

paddy234

When the agents aren't sure themselves they will always ask that the person is more thorough just in case. I've talked to a few immigration agents when I came to Australia and they sometimes give different advice. Neither was wrong. Some were just more thorough even when it wasn't necessary. I understand why they do it. Like New Zealand I ended up going through the visa process myself only because my circumstances were much easier.

I've just never heard of anyone before claim that you should say yes to a conviction if all you have is a caution. I'm all for declaring everything which is great advice but not ticking yes to having a conviction when you know you don't have one and merely have a caution. It makes no sense. Usually Immigration will ask separately if there are any other offenses such as cautions spent or not however if they solely ask for a conviction then that's all they are asking for. It's an easy answer. There's no need to overthink this so much.

The OP Would need to quote word for word what the question is just so we are sure it is ONLY asking about convictions and nothing else.

From memory though when I did my working holiday visa application I'm near 100% sure it just asked about convictions to which I said no even though like the op I have a spent caution which is no longer live on my record. I do remember with my PR application last year it asked more thorough questions about any offences I may have committed whether it just be a caution spent or not which I replied yes. Of course for such visas this is why police clearances are necessary unlike a working holiday visa

verystormy

When we were moving to Australia I was in my 30's and had ticked no. My police check came back showing No Live Traace. This was regarded as an undeclared conviction by immigration. It was for a caution I had forgotten about that I recived when I was 13.

BEVS

Hopefully the OP will follow the sensible , knowledgeable and sage advice of the professional and those in the know with experience.

Clogging an immy or visa thread with misleading thoughts is bad form. It could land the OP in the poo.

Declare as has been advised several times.