Points on license from 3.5 years ago, is it a clean license?

yak.h'cir

yak.h'cir

yak.h'cir

Soldato
Joined
26 Aug 2003
Posts
4,517
Location
The North
Might be a daft question but here goes. I'm applying for a job that requires a clean license. I have an SP30 dating back about 3.5 years ago now. Now I know the points must stay on the license for 4 years but they are no longer included in the totting up after 3 years.

So I can't remove the points yet, but they don't count on the totting up.

Would it be lying to tell the prospective employer that I have a clean license?
 
It's probably a moot point. Even if technically or legally it could be considered a clean license I bet most people would say it's not clean until the points are completely removed...
 
yak.h'cir said:
Might be a daft question but here goes. I'm applying for a job that requires a clean license. I have an SP30 dating back about 3.5 years ago now. Now I know the points must stay on the license for 4 years but they are no longer included in the totting up after 3 years.

So I can't remove the points yet, but they don't count on the totting up.

Would it be lying to tell the prospective employer that I have a clean license?
Click to expand...

No, you have a clean license, but if I were in your position and I had the opportunity I would make sure the employer knows that I have an SP30 that's still on the license though no longer valid.

If your only options are to say that it's clean or not clean, then say it's clean.
 
What are you on about totting up?
Have you been banned for totting up (12 points in 3 years)

If not, that has nothing to do with you getting 3 points for an SP30.

Endorsements must stay on your driving licence for 4 years (from the date of the offence)

Ergo if that was 3.5 years ago then NO your licence is not clean!
 
Last edited:
How does the employer requiring a clean license work legally?
There's all the religion/sexuality/disability/spent-criminal-convictions equality stuff these days that people moan and take employers to court for, so I'm surprised that stipulating a clean license is allowed... especially as moreless half the country has an SP30!
 
If it is a driving job - sounds like it is - if the license is clean, a few mistakes can happen before they can find themselves without a driver. If you already have 3-6-9-whatever, there is less 'chances'.

That would be my take.
 
Conanius said:
If it is a driving job - sounds like it is - if the license is clean, a few mistakes can happen before they can find themselves without a driver. If you already have 3-6-9-whatever, there is less 'chances'.

That would be my take.
Click to expand...
I can see their point :).

But, playing devils advocate... If they employ a woman of child-bearing age, and she then gets pregnant, they can find themselves without an employee and at least needing to arrange maternity cover or possibly a permanent replacement if she becomes a stay-at-home mum.

A policy of not employing women of child-bearing age isn't allowed by law, but the license points policy is? Surprised that none of the "offence on others behalf" brigade haven't tried taking them to court!
 
Fuzz said:
What are you on about totting up?
Have you been banned for totting up (12 points in 3 years)

If not, that has nothing to do with you getting 3 points for an SP30.

Endorsements must stay on your driving licence for 4 years (from the date of the offence)

Ergo if that was 3.5 years ago then NO your licence is not clean!
Click to expand...

I was referencing the totting up because I was taking it to mean that if the dvla feel that points over 3 years old no longer count towards the system in which you might be banned that they were no longer valid.

I think you're right though, I was just being optimistic in thinking that it could be ok. Frustrating!
 
Westyfield2 said:
I can see their point :).

But, playing devils advocate... If they employ a woman of child-bearing age, and she then gets pregnant, they can find themselves without an employee and at least needing to arrange maternity cover or possibly a permanent replacement if she becomes a stay-at-home mum.

A policy of not employing women of child-bearing age isn't allowed by law, but the license points policy is? Surprised that none of the "offence on others behalf" brigade haven't tried taking them to court!
Click to expand...

They are convictions. You have broken the law. They can ask for any conviction in the last 5 years.

https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/advice/planning/Pages/convictions.aspx
 
But they can do a running jump for anything after four as it is deemed legally spent. (had this with an insurance company many moons ago (I've been banned a number of times :D)
 
Fuzz said:
But they can do a running jump for anything after four as it is deemed legally spent. (had this with an insurance company many moons ago (I've been banned a number of times :D)
Click to expand...

Spent after 5 years. Not 4. See the 1974 act linked above.

That is why insurance companies will only ask if you have convictions in the last 5 years.
 
That's for if you murder someone and what not, that's when you get a criminal record.
Motoring offences are treated completely differently. It's a criminal offence.

DVLA hold the information about your drivers licence on behalf of Secretary of state for transport, or some such body.
DVLA remove those convictions after four years
That's the end of it.
 
Last edited:
Fuzz said:
That's for if you murder someone.
Motoring offences are treated completely differently.

DVLA hold the information about your drivers licence on behalf of Secretary of state for transport, or some such body.
DVLA remove those convictions after four years
That's the end of it.
Click to expand...

No, murders will have a statute of limitations of more than 5 years unless you got away with a fine.

The statute of limitations is 5 years and that is why insurance companies ask for any in the last 5 years. They haven't come to this number by accident, its the most they are legally allowed to ask for.

Doesn't matter what the DVLA do or how they tot it up, they are not the courts.
 
Edited my post above..

Criminal RECORD
Criminal offence

Very different
If you are found guilty of speeding, you have been found guilty of a criminal offence. It is not recorded on the Police computer system, and doesn't give you a criminal record.
 
Fuzz said:
Edited my post above..

Criminal RECORD
Criminal offence

Very different
If you are found guilty of speeding, you have been found guilty of a criminal offence. It is not recorded on the Police computer system, and doesn't give you a criminal record.
Click to expand...

It is a conviction and falls under the 1974 Act. I don't what semantics you are trying to argue but I am certain I am right on this.
 
speeding is a Non Recordable Conviction.

QUOTE
Convictions for minor offences

12. Minor (ie. non-recordable) offences, such as traffic offences that do not involve a prison sentence or disqualification of licence, are not recorded on the Police National Computer and need not generally be notified. If such cases come to light, the relevance test consistent with HOC 5/2005 should in all cases be applied to occupations in both Category 1 and Category 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom