Reckless Driving Conviction and HSMP EC Application

[begster999]

Hi all -

I was convicted of reckless driving in 2005. It is considered a criminal offense in Virginia.

One of the questions on form VAF1 - NON-SETTLEMENT FORM is:
4.14 Do you have any criminal convictions in any country?

Does anyone have any experience or information as to how this might impact my entry clearance application for an HSMP visa?

Any and all help/information is very much appreciated!

Bob

[makon]

well, if it is a criminal offence then it may affect u adversely.
the only choice you have is to lie, and say that you have no criminal record.

those are the two options you have: say the truth and risk being denied, tell lie and risk being found out. both carries an element of risk, but the greatest risk in life is the risk of not taking any risk at all

but i doubt if they will ever found out, as resources are dedicated to more serious crimes such as terrorism

[gordon]

You should refer to the following:
http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/lawand ... ules/part9
I would argue that, in any case, the conviction should be disclosed, since non-disclosure (if discovered) could compromise your position later on. Having a criminal conviction is bad enough but not insurmountable; potentially being exposed as a liar (if you were to lie on the disclosures) cannot help the situation.

Grounds on which entry clearance or leave to enter the United Kingdom should normally be refused
...
[18] save where the Immigration Officer is satisfied that admission would be justified for strong compassionate reasons, conviction in any country including the United Kingdom of an offence which, if committed in the United Kingdom, is punishable with imprisonment for a term of 12 months or any greater punishment or, if committed outside the United Kingdom, would be so punishable if the conduct constituting the offence had occurred in the United Kingdom;

You would have to cross-reference the decision on your reckless-driving conviction with the equivalent sentence that would have been handed down had to committed such an offence in the UK. The details of your case would indicate whether it would qualify as 'careless driving' rather than 'dangerous driving' (and I hope it's the former), such that one would hope that the conviction would fall within the entry clearance officer's discretion to overlook for the purposes of granting entry clearance.

AG

[apeterso925]

You should refer to the following:

You would have to cross-reference the decision on your reckless-driving conviction with the equivalent sentence that would have been handed down had to committed such an offence in the UK. The details of your case would indicate whether it would qualify as 'careless driving' rather than 'dangerous driving' (and I hope it's the former), such that one would hope that the conviction would fall within the entry clearance officer's discretion to overlook for the purposes of granting entry clearance.

AG

As a lifelong resident of Virginia myself - and almost the not-so-proud recipient of a reckless driving charge once - I'll second gordon's distinction between careless driving and dangerous driving.

I can't speak for the laws in other states, but even just a speeding charge in excess of 20 miles over the limit is, in Virginia, "reckless driving." That's what mine would have been for, but the officer took pity on me, thankfully. I walked away with a plain speeding ticket instead. It's a matter of opinion of course, but I hardly see speeding as the same offense as running over a pedestrian in a crosswalk or something.

So I think it depends on why you were charged with reckless driving...and you should definitely explain that in your defense.

Amy

[begster999]

Thank you all for your comments!

I think my UK dream might be toast because I was originally charged with a DUI (my blood alcohol level was at the baseline of being considered legally drunk), however, my lawyer got the prosecutor to agree to a Reckless Driving charge.

Even though it was a RD conviction, my license was suspended for six months and I had to go to Virginia's ASAP program (I don't remember what ASAP stands for, but it is, obviously, alcohol related).

Reckless driving is considered a class 1 misdemeanor in Virginia which is punishable by 12 months in jail and other fines.

I don't want to lie on my application and telling the truth will probably get my application denied.

Take care,

Bob

[begster999]

but i doubt if they will ever found out, as resources are dedicated to more serious crimes such as terrorism

Makon, I wish this were true. These days you can get criminal record for anyone in minutes via the Internet, and I'm pretty sure UK govt would do this, as they should.

Bob

[gordon]

But your conviction, such as it was, may not *automatically* disqualify you. You should certainly disclose it and explain it, but you should not by any means think that such a conviction constitutes an automatic and categorical bar to entry. Most criminal convictions have rehabilitation periods before they are considered spent, and what you want to gauge is whether the equivalent UK sentence on your conviction rises to the level that an entry clearance officer would normally refuse your application for leave to enter.

However, when you are to explain it, I would recommend not discussing the initial charge (DUI) and instead speak only of the terms of the conviction (RD) and the sentence. And then affirm that you've not offended in this way before or since. It might have been much worse, but it wasn't. You may want to emphasise the sentence you did receive (which seems to have been materially less than the 12 months + fines etc).

My two cents, at least.
AG

[begster999]

AG -

Thank you for your comments and advise! I really appreciate it!

I think I'm jumping to conclusions too quickly -- force of habit, I guess.

In any case, I do not plan to hide anything, but also will not volunteer any additional information, unless, of course, asked.

Regards,

Bob

[gordon]

I'm not sure what the circumstances were, but the 12 months imprisonment plus fine in Virginia would have been a maximum sentence for drink-driving there, right? Given the actual sentence you received, you would want to argue that it would be equivalent to a careless-driving offence (for which sentencing options in the UK include fines and disqualification, but not imprisonment). This sounds like what you got, so there would be no point discussing the counterfactual if you'd been convicted of drink driving (because you were not). But even if your conviction were considered a drink-driving conviction, on the basis of the ASAP element of your RD conviction, I think the equivalent sentence would have been a fine and/or up to 6 months imprisonment in the UK. So again, not enough to constitute an automatic bar.

All this is to say that your conviction as characterised is not such that your entry clearance application would be normally refused. It doesn't help, to be sure, but if you talk fast you should be able to get through. But make sure the rest of your entry clearance application is beyond sufficient (loads of money in the bank account, make clear that you meet the HSMP criteria, etc).

AG

[begster999]

Hi AG,

Yes, 12 months would be the maximum imprisonment in Virginia for DUI/RD, unless there are some other aggravating circumstances also.
I like and agree with your reasoning.

The solicitor handling my HSMP application says my application is "pretty strong."

As for "loads of money in the bank account," how does one quantify that amount? I think the maximum I will have by the time I apply for my EC application, would be a tad over $20,000. Think that might be enough for the ECO?

Regards,

Bob

[apeterso925]

Hi AG,

Yes, 12 months would be the maximum imprisonment in Virginia for DUI/RD, unless there are some other aggravating circumstances also.
I like and agree with your reasoning.

The solicitor handling my HSMP application says my application is "pretty strong."

As for "loads of money in the bank account," how does one quantify that amount? I think the maximum I will have by the time I apply for my EC application, would be a tad over $20,000. Think that might be enough for the ECO?

Regards,

Bob

Didn't see this before I responded to the other thread - that should be enough, even with how pitiful our poor currency is right now!

[gordon]

I'm glad that your solicitor thinks that your application is strong, your prior conviction notwithstanding. I think a solid disclosure (with only basic details) should be fine, and you can just get on with things. And $20k should be more than sufficient for one or even two (unless the dollar depreciates dramatically by the time you apply for entry clearance, haha).

AG

[apeterso925]

Hi AG,

Yes, 12 months would be the maximum imprisonment in Virginia for DUI/RD, unless there are some other aggravating circumstances also.
I like and agree with your reasoning.

The solicitor handling my HSMP application says my application is "pretty strong."

As for "loads of money in the bank account," how does one quantify that amount? I think the maximum I will have by the time I apply for my EC application, would be a tad over $20,000. Think that might be enough for the ECO?

Regards,

Bob

Just to add one more tidbit...how long have you had the funds you plan to show? If it's been less than 3 months, you'll want to include an explanation as to how you obtained the money.

Otherwise, the ECO might suspect that you've merely borrowed it short-term for the purposes of your application and won't actually have the funds needed to support yourself.

[gordon]

If the funds are recently acquired, then one should either show their origin or supplement the current-account statements with, say, equities account statements. I had a low current-account balance (£4000) so I tossed in my stock portfolio and retirement account statements (with balances rather greater than £4000) as back-up. The ECO kept the first page of the most recent statements of each of my three accounts (Amy, did they do this with you as well?). Since the ECO retained nothing else, I might infer that this was the most crucial aspect drawing the ECO's attention.
AG

[apeterso925]

If the funds are recently acquired, then one should either show their origin or supplement the current-account statements with, say, equities account statements. I had a low current-account balance (£4000) so I tossed in my stock portfolio and retirement account statements (with balances rather greater than £4000) as back-up. The ECO kept the first page of the most recent statements of each of my three accounts (Amy, did they do this with you as well?). Since the ECO retained nothing else, I might infer that this was the most crucial aspect drawing the ECO's attention.
AG

Hmm - no...and I just went to check again, laughing as I went that I hadn't noticed that they were missing when I first checked the package (I was, of course, far more obsessed with the visa page of my passport at the time!).

All my statements were returned, I wonder if yours were simply misplaced? But I actually went the opposite direction. When I applied, I'd just taken a sizeable "loan" out of one of my credit cards because it's 0% and no fee for 6 months (so almost too good to be true, I am earning interest on a free loan from the bank! And I'll give them their principle back at the end of the 6 months )...but I was concerned that in doing so, I might appear financially irresponsible or something. So I made sure to do the transfer the day after my most recent statement, so it wouldn't even appear.

Net net, the funds I showed had been constant for the entire 6 months worth of statements I showed (though the money bounced back and forth across the 3 accounts I submitted), so maybe that's why? There was no notable change in my funds across the 6 months I submitted.

[gordon]

How odd - in my case, I'd submitted statements for three accounts (current, equities, and retirement) for three months (March, April, and May), with a fairly constant balance on the current account, and rising balances on the other two, given regular savings and contributions. They *tore off* the first page of the May statements for each of the three accounts, and sent everything else back. The absence was rather noticeable; I wonder what this might mean.
AG

[apeterso925]

How odd - in my case, I'd submitted statements for three accounts (current, equities, and retirement) for three months (March, April, and May), with a fairly constant balance on the current account, and rising balances on the other two, given regular savings and contributions. They *tore off* the first page of the May statements for each of the three accounts, and sent everything else back. The absence was rather noticeable; I wonder what this might mean.
AG

Very odd indeed...though I doubt it has any huge meaning, they did stamp your passport after all and quickly too!

What was on the first page? The beginning and ending balances? Or perhaps this goes back to the whole thing that my poor ECO was handed 2 pounds of documents to sort through...and he may very well have done some skimming! Whereas maybe your lighter stack got a bit more scrutiny.

[gordon]

Yes, the ECO took the top sheets that had start/end balances, leaving the sheets that showed itemised activity/deposits/distributions. And yes, given how little I submitted as well as how quickly my application was approved, the ECO probably examined my account statements more closely and/or decided that it would be easier to tear off the relevant sheets than to photocopy them or whatever ....

Poor begster - I think we've hijacked his thread.
AG

[apeterso925]

Yes, the ECO took the top sheets that had start/end balances, leaving the sheets that showed itemised activity/deposits/distributions. And yes, given how little I submitted as well as how quickly my application was approved, the ECO probably examined my account statements more closely and/or decided that it would be easier to tear off the relevant sheets than to photocopy them or whatever ....

Poor begster - I think we've hijacked his thread.
AG

Yes, but the moral of the story is that even if they kidnap your documents, they may still approve your application!

And also relevant, you should receive your prized HSMP approval letter back with an *approved* visa...but make sure you make a photocopy of it because from what I gather from this board, in a refused EC application, the BHC/consulate keeps your original letter. So, should you choose to reapply, you'll need a copy of it!

[begster999]

Actually, AG, I think I sufficient information about my RD conviction, thanks to you and others!

Regarding the funds, I received severance from my previous employer, plus I am taking my pension plan as a lump sum payment. I'm hoping that by the time I apply for EC and visa, I'll have about $20K in the bank. BTW, my wife and my 14 year old daughter are not traveling with me until I find a job and get settled.

As I wrote the above paragraph, another question just popped into my head: Do you think the ECO will be concerned if I'm not taking my family with me? Could they be concerned by whether I'll have to support them in the US, as well as myself in the UK, even though my wife has a job and with the cash I'll leave behind for them, which is not part of the $20K I'll have with me, they'll be OK?
Amy, did you get a two year visa stamped on your passport?
AG, are you already in the UK?

Bob

[apeterso925]

Actually, AG, I think I sufficient information about my RD conviction, thanks to you and others!

Amy, did you get a two year visa stamped on your passport?
AG, are you already in the UK?

Bob

I don't have any advice on your family, as I'm still single and just had myself to contend with, but I did receive a 2 year visa.

My understanding is that with the new tier system starting next year and the fact that any HSMP equivalent replacement system won't really be addressed until 2009, all HSMP visas being issued from this point on will be for 2 years...perhaps solely so that the HO doesn't have to deal with any of us again until they sort things out.

However, on the EC application, when it asked how long I intended to stay in the UK, I said 2 years. It seemed like kind of a trick question, as I was tempted to say "forever!" But obviously the question was related to my current visa, not my long-term plans.

Amy

[gordon]

I'm not sure what would be best to do about your wife and daughter, but it seems to me that you can get their entry clearance with yours, and then they can enter later (but check to see whether there are any restrictions on that). I'm not sure what incentive there would be to wait on getting their dependant visas, but not applying for their visas alongside yours might give the impression that you do not intend to make the UK your main home, so there would have to be a bit of explanation on that point (your wife is completing her job at x point; your daughter is finishing out her current phase of schooling, etc). The money amount should not prove to be a problem, regardless of when your wife and daughter go over.

I'm not in the UK yet (still in NY). I plan to go over in exactly four weeks' time, in mid-August, by which point, with luck, I should have extracted myself from my work in the US.

AG

[begster999]

I'm not in the UK yet (still in NY). I plan to go over in exactly four weeks' time, in mid-August, by which point, with luck, I should have extracted myself from my work in the US.

AG

AG and Amy,

Thanks for your input and good luck with everything!!
If you'd like to keep in touch, my e-mail is begster2000@yahoo.com.

Bob

[avjones]

The advice to lie strikes me as most unwise. There is a specific offence under the 1971 Act of attempting to obtain leave to enter or remain in the UK by deception. It's a custodial offence, and in all but the most exceptional of circumstances would carry c. 12 month sentence.

[gordon]

Amanda - I had hoped you would weigh in on this. While it is clear that begster should disclose his reckless-driving conviction, would it be considered necessary for him also to disclose the initial charge (which was rather worse than the charge on which he was convicted) ? I would hate to think that I (or anyone else) had encouraged him to lie by omission, but on the other hand, one is not asked to disclose more than the actual conviction(s). AG