Convictions

[orangecat]

When I took out Building and Contents Insurance with Liverpool & Victoria, a question arose asking if I have had previous convictions over past five years, to which I honestly answered NO, but I was convicted 36 years ago for a sexual offence, fined £50 and put on probation for a year which I did not reveal, and not required to, since then I have never broken the law. My question is: - As I wish to renew my House Insurance with another Insurance firm it appears that they all require all previous convictions declared. Should I declare the past 36 year old conviction or not? Personally I assume that this has now long been spent and is now history?, I fail to understand what relevance this has on the Insurance, bearing in mind I don’t want my data protection flouted by third parties. Do I have any rights? And do I still have to be punished for something which happened 36 years ago? Thanks to anyone who can give any advice, as otherwise I may as well stick to L&V so there will no controversy in the event a future claim has to be made?

[MissFM]

Re: Convictions

Hello Orangecat

This might help

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrig...mes-spent.html

However, it's mandatory to answer any direct question from an insurance company honestly if your insurance is to be valid. For example, if the questions is "have you ever had a conviction of any sort", you would have to disclose, however irrelevant it might seem. Otherwise, should you make a claim, they will invalidate the policy on the grounds of non-disclosure.

[Eloise01]

Re: Convictions

ALL convictions? For ever? Are you sure? Because that would not appear to be standard practice and would appear to be in contravention of the law.

[bluebottle]

Re: Convictions

ALL convictions? For ever? Are you sure? Because that would not appear to be standard practice and would appear to be in contravention of the law.

I totally agree with you, Eloise. It would appear the insurance industry either haven't heard of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act or, if they have, they seem to be under the impression it doesn't apply to them and they don't have to comply with it.

[MissFM]

Re: Convictions

What is their exact question please Orangecat?

[enquirer]

Re: Convictions

It would appear the insurance industry either haven't heard of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act or, if they have, they seem to be under the impression it doesn't apply to them and they don't have to comply with it.

This sort of aggressive and intrusive behaviour seems to be a trend.

[Eloise01]

Re: Convictions

I totally agree with you, Eloise. It would appear the insurance industry either haven't heard of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act or, if they have, they seem to be under the impression it doesn't apply to them and they don't have to comply with it.

It would be useful if the OP can provide the exact question. I have shed loads of insurances and have never seen one this extensive. It is usually either a fixed period, or unspent convictions.

[des8]

Re: Convictions

It is a fairly standard question on insurance policies.
Although the rehabilitation of offenders act is designed to prevent problems because of relatively minor offences, it must be remembered that the rehabilitation period varies according to the offence and the penalty. Because of the complications of framing a question addressing all the combinations Insurers insert a blanket question, but if the conviction is spent there is no necessity to divulge it to an insurance company:See the act Section 4 Effect of rehabilitation Para 2 (a) & (b)
Just make sure your conviction is spent, and remember some are never spent.

[bluebottle]

Re: Convictions

It would be useful if the OP can provide the exact question. I have shed loads of insurances and have never seen one this extensive. It is usually either a fixed period, or unspent convictions.

The only offences I know of that never get struck from the record are Schedule 1 offences. For those who are not familiar with what Schedule 1 offences are, they are the most serious offences under English Criminal Law.

[Eloise01]

Re: Convictions

Bluebottle is correct - there is no way that this conviction cannot be spent. But so was MissFM - if the question is that extensive then failing to answer truthfully may invalidate the policy if found out. The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act operates to prevent someone from being discriminated against because of a prior conviction, primarily, although not exclusively, in employment terms. Insurance is a slightly different proposition - you are buying a service, and it could be argued that in doing so it is a voluntary arrangement whereby you don't have to apply for it and they don't have to give it, so they can ask anything they want. Dunno - I do think we need the exact wording for a start.

[des8]

Re: Convictions

Not quite right.
The question can be asked, but if the offence is spent "the Question shall be treated as not relating to spent convictions...." & "the person questioned shall not be subjected to any liability or otherwise prejudiced in law by reason of any failure to acknowledge or disclose a spent conviction...." (Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 4 (2) (a) 7 (b)
The insurers cannot void a policy for failure to declare a spent conviction.

[Eloise01]

Re: Convictions

Doesn't it - as we have said several times, depend on what the question actually is??? In the OP's shoes I think they are wise to want to be sure what they are signing up to.

[des8]

Re: Convictions

Sorry Eloise, but I continue to disagree!
It doesn't matter how the question is worded. The policy will say it is governed by the laws of the UK and the 1974 Act clearly states even if questioned about them, spent convictions do not have to be declared, and that if they are not declared the offender cannot be prejudiced in law.
(There are some exemptions mainly to do with employment, adoption etc but not insurance)The insurance companies do not have the power to change UK law to suit themselves, even if sometimes they'd like it.
This is a standard blanket enquiry by insurers and in relation to spent convictions the law says they do not have to be disclosed.

[Eloise01]

Re: Convictions

Well as I said before - I have never seen the question asked in the way suggested anyway so it can't be all that standard, so I would like to know what the wording is. I am not suggesting that insurers can change the law. I am suggesting that they may not be doing at all! Without knowing what it says we simply do not know what the question is.

[charitynjw]

Re: Convictions

It seems like this is one of those 'utmost good faith' issues, which insurers use ad nauseum as a 'get out of jail free' card.

The doctine is based on Maritime Laws.