DavidL7

I was wanting to take my daughter to NYC next summer for an 18th birthday treat, and whilst planning it all I've come to realise I'm going to need a Visa I think. I wouldn't dare risk an ESTA, and definitely not with my daughter with me.

In 1998 I was home on leave from the Armed Forces where i was a trainee guardsman. Shortly before my leave, my grandmother who helped raise me had passed away, and I'd felt the Army wern't very supportive to me.
Anyway whilst home on leave I had turned 18, and then found out my grandfather had terminal cancer. It was all to much for me to take, and on the day I was due to return, my mother dropped me off at the trainstation. My train arrived, and I just didn't get on it.
I didn't return home as my mother would surely have drove me there. Instead I just walked the streets of my town day and night. What money I had was soon gone.
Whilst walking the street at night cold, hungry and very tired I walked into a B&B and asked if they would accept a cheque, and they said yeah. My thought process was well I could just go overdrawn like I'd seen my mother do to get me trainers as a child, and when I get my wages it'll pay it (actually thought the army were still going to pay me) I didn't really understand how banks really worked.
I had used 2 cheques to stay at two B&B's. Finally when going to meet a friend the police were waiting for me and took me to a police station to wait until the military police turn up. when checking my pockets they found the B&B room key and asked about it. I'd left my bag there so the officer went to collect it, and when he came back he said the owner had tried to cash the cheque and it bounced so I was charged with fraud.

It went to magistrates court, and even though I pleaded guilty and told them my circumstances, and the fact I didn't realise I was commiting fraud, they found my guilty of fraud by deception. I was fined about £250 I think and given 28 days community service.

I've never been in trouble since.

Would it even be worth trying for a visa, as I think my conviction falls under their crimes against moral turpitude.

S Folinsky

A review of your record by a knowledgeable immigration attorney might be in order. You may very well be OK, and if not, it can probably be fixed.

civilservant

It was 24 years ago, a single offense, and you haven't been in trouble since. I would say that your chances of a visa are pretty good.

I agree that it does. Maximum possible sentence was 10 years.

S Folinsky

<sigh> With all due respect, you demonstrate why I recommend review by a competent attorney (and even then the answer may be indeterminate).

OP mentions Magistrates Court. My understanding is they cannot impose a long jail sentence. The offence may be what us California legal types call a “wobbler.” If so, it may very well be in the petty offense exception.

Also, OP does not mention what, if anything, the military did. Probably not much, but who knows. (From my military service, there was a big difference between AWOL and desertion. But not all militaries are the same).

As I mention, OP may be just fine. But it bears examination.

civilservant

Correct, 12 months max. However is that relevant? I was under the impression that it was the maximum possible sentence of the offense that was relevant to the exception rather than the maximum sentence available to the disposing authority - otherwise police cautions would all fall under the petty offense exception.

The use of the sigh kinda negates the next part. Say what you mean, you're not an attorney anymore so don't have to obfuscate to the point of saying nothing useful, ever.

Pulaski

For a single small offence 20 years ago, with a subsequently clean record, I would say that getting a visa is as close to certain as it is possible to get for anyone disqualified from ESTA due to having a criminal record. Certainly there are many people with a more serious record that have qualified for a US visitor's visa.
I would certainly encourage DavidL to apply, and not lose too much sleep about the risk of not getting a visa. He should still apply ASAP as he only has 9-10 months, which should be enough time, hopefully.
There might be a max possible sentence for fraud, but there are also deminimis amount that are dealt with in the magistrates courts, and for a few nights in a B&B it is likely that what he was changed with only had a maximum possible sentence of 6-12 months. Without more details nobody camn be sure, but I agree with Folinsky that a practicing lawyer would know the answers without needing to go digging into the legal references and sentencing rules.

S Folinsky

<sigh>

Why do you say “single?” The original post notes two, not just one NSF checks. And in different locations on different days. The petty offense exception applies to just one conviction. And there is a body of law on one conviction covering multi count convictions.

Also, it is pretty clear law that the maximum penalty that can be imposed by the tribunal determines the maximum possible sentence for the petty offense exception. It can even get weirder if one cranks in the California concept of misdemeanor by sentence. Been there done that.

Also, petty offense exception does not apply to prostitution or drug related offenses.

Also, I’ve seen situations where a UK National is aware of her magistrates court conviction and ignores a caution inasmuch as they don’t think of it as a conviction.

Civil Servant has a habit of giving erroneous advice with a high degree of certainty.

OP presupposes he is screwed. Maybe not or it can be fixed. There are questions to be addressed before reaching a conclusion.

civilservant

Let's not get into a discussion of 'habits' of this forum.

That I acknowledge I didn't know. Although by your own words ruling out the petty offense exception was correct because the OP acknowledges two separate offenses.

S Folinsky

Please do not twist what I write into something I didn’t say.

For all I know he very well might be entitled to the petty offense exception. Good chance he very well might be. But, then, again … There is a question.

Pulaski

Maybe there is a question, maybe there isn't, but so long as you keep posting riddles, none of us will know.

DavidL7

The Army didn't do anything apart from take me to one court appearance for the cheque fraud. They did however send me to the glass house for 14 days, for being awol. That for me is what made me decide the armed forces wasn't for me.
When I attended court the judge was asking the officer that attended with me questions regarding my pay. I don't know but I think If I'd have stayed in the army I'd maybe have just paid of the cheques and that would've been that. but when I left the army and went back to court as a civilian, there was a notable change in attitude.

I requested a subject access disclosure from the PNC on the 12th September, so I can see what exactly i'm working with. Then after that I think I need a police certificate?
I've been trying to recall everything, and I'm pretty sure that I got a conditional discharge as well as the fine and community service. I'm not to sure on that though. When I get the reply from the PNC i'll know for sure.

I've been reading into the Visa's and I hear the best embassy to visit is Belfast. for me it's actually the cheapest to get to as I'm in the north east of England, and travel to London is expensive.

Also my passport expires in March next year, Should I be looking into renewing it before a visa appointment?

tht

Many countries require that a passport be valid for 6 months beyond the dates of a planned visit.

The USA has exemptions for some countries to waive that 6 month requirement and the UK is included.

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/fi...2020220316.pdf

That said If you only have 6 months left on it and no travel planned before I would still recommend renewing the passport before getting the visa, or you will have to carry both passports to use the visa when you get a new passport or go through a new visa application.

S Folinsky

Obtaining the Subject Access Record is a good move.

Based upon my experience, UK reports may be a tad ambiguous at times as to the precise nature of a conviction. That is one of the reasons I suggested legal consultation. (My posts are often described as enigmatic or above as a riddle. It is the law that can be tricky or enigmatic at times. That bleeds into my posts).

On documentation required at entry are 1) a valid passport and 2) a valid visa. The requirements does NOT mean that the visa be in the same passport.