Conspiracy to defraud HM Revenue and Customs. conv
Conviction was in February 2005 with four year custodial sentence. The conviction was 'spent' in February 2012.
I have received a request to rate your answer but at present no answer has been received apart from the request for details of the conviction.
I have now had 8 requests to rate your answer but as I have not received an answer this is rather difficult. I am not sure why your system thinks that an answer has been given.
I was charged with a common law offence so that no section of the Taxes Acts were cited in the indictment. I hope this helps.
The convictions will show up on an enhanced DBS check. My question is ' can the CQC refuse to register my Company as a service provider if the convictions show up on the enhanced DBS check and I am deemed to fail a fit and proper person test?
They won't show on an enhanced.
The same rules apply for filtering to basic to enhanced
The only difference together with any information held locally by police forces that it is reasonably considered might be relevant to the post applied for
Does this clarify?
The convictions have already shown up on an enhanced DBs check as they always will even though they are spent. My question is' Will CQC refuse to register my company as a service provider once they are aware of the convictions?
Can they - yes.
But they must take each conviction into account and weight whether or not it would affect the safety of vulnerable people.
If they refuse you can always appeal and Judicially Review the decision where a High Court Judge examines their decision to see whether it is reasonable. A Judge can agree with the decision or remit it back for further consideration
But the CQC has to decide whether the conviction would have any effect on the vulnberable.
Does that clarify?
It does in part. What law or regulations can the CQC use to refuse the application? S17 Health and Social Care Act 2008 does not help them or cover my situation. The person R in this situation is a limited company and I am not the Nominated Individual. The offences of which I was convicted have nothing to do with a regulated activity as defined with the Health and Social Care Act 2008. The requirements of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009 have been fully complied with. I am not on the ISA Children’s Barred List or the ISA Vulnerable Adults Barred List.
They have a policy which states:
Our decisions will be made on the basis of an assessment of any risk to children or adults, rather than the simple fact that a conviction or other information is disclosed. However, where there is significant doubt, the decision will always favour the welfare of the children or adults using the service.
Therefore if you are a Director and not involved in the actual care you should be approved. They do not specify what criteria they use
If they go against you, you can Judicially review the decision
It needs to be a High Court Judge and then will see whether the decision made is legal and reasonable.
A Judge can agree with the decision or remit it back for further consideration
Does that help?
It does in part. Where can the detail of the policy you refer to be found? Certainly it does not readily appear on the CQC website.
Does that clarify matters/
That does help a good deal. However it does seem that the CQC are operating their own subjective policy that does not necessarily follow the law as laid out in the Health & Socal Care Act 2008 with the subsequent revisions and updates. The new proposed regulations that will require a ft and proper person test do not come into effect until April 2015. I am not a registered manager, nominated individual and not involved in the delivery of care. My role is to ensure delivery of a business plan and to oversee the administration and finance and to operate the company policy in respect of ensuring that the buildings are regulation compliant. I assume that if the CQC propose to refuse the application then they will need to give full reasons for their decision.Their published guidelines state that they only ever refuse registration after a process of discussion and guidance.
Thank you for your help.
I agree. This is why you may need to Judicially Review the matter if they refuse.
Can I clarify anything else for you?
Thank you for your help. We will have to await the next move from CQC.