Hi there. I was made redundant from a court job late last year, I was told that there was another vacancy available for me at the same court but I would need to do a fresh CRB check. I have a few minor convictions from when I was young that I informed the employer of, I was told this would not affect my application. All appropriate forms were filled and CRB sent off. It is now April and I have been waiting since December for the checks to be complete. Is this standard?! I was told that the checks would only take 6 weeks at the most. I have contacted those who are to employ me and they say they are still waiting for the complete checks and still want to employ me. Is there a way I can find out why there is a delay and whether it will go on longer (I read somewhere that someone's checks a few years back took 3 years!...) Any help or advice would be appreciated, I cant wait forever.

The part-time job I turned down was 23 hours per week by the way. The job centre knew I had the interview but I don't think I'd informed them that it was only part-time. Would they likely check up on this?

Thanks for the replies. My Jobseeker's Agreement doesnt seem to say anything about amount of hours- The only reference to hours is that the box 'I want to limit the days and hours I am available for work' is ticked 'no'. I am pretty sure that in the initial interview I stated to them that I wanted full-time work. Is honesty the best approach in terms of telling them about the job offers straight away? as some people have advised not to tell them yet as they haven't exactly been straight with me

I had a little bit of money saved from when my job ended - I put this down on my form so maybe that's why they're being so lackadaisacal. Most of it is now gone though due to paying my year's tax. i moved house during this six week period and have told them on three occasions of this and given all neccesary details and yet they still rang up today (the day when they said the money would be in my account) asking for details, saying the claim was not properly processed and that they did not know I'd moved. It's a complete joke.

I was made redundant recently and have been signing on for about 6 weeks yet still have received no actual money. I am due to sign on tomorrow and in the interim had a couple of job offers- the one is full time and yet they have not given me a start date due to CRB checks- I have been told this could take up to a month, the other job was only part time and I refused the offer due to the full time job offer. The job centre knew about the part time job interview. If I tell them about the full time job offer does that mean the JSA will stop (even though I havent even received any and for all I know the job may not even start until feb)...on the other hand if i dont tell them then does that mean any JSA would stop anyway due to refusing the part time job offer?

Thank you everyone for the helpful advice given. I sent a humble apologetic letter and received correspondence back saying they would settle if I pay the five pound ticket plus fifty five pounds admin fee. Probably the best result given the circumstances. Thank you all for taking the time to correspond to my enquiry and tolerating my occasional incredulous outburst!

The letter does not set out any charges, it's quite deadpan really, hence why I am in a quandary as to how to best reply! It basically states " A person giving this name and address was questioned by a member of rail staff about the payment of a rail fare" and then states that before they proceed further with the investigation of the matter they would like to give me the opportunity to respond with an explanation....

Yeah, there was a squad of 3 of the collector types. The letter does not mention the whole false addresses issue, does that mean I should avoid mentioning it and just say I tried to get a ticket on the train and was fined and then be apologetic, offer to pay fine and admin costs etc (as like Wriggler says they already know what happened etc) or will this seem like a further dishonest move, by not stating it will it seem like I am acting like it didnt happen?

What parts of the incident shall I mention then?? Just a brief explanation of not having a ticket and trying to pay? surely the false address element looks even worse if it seems like I supplied it in response to a standard penalty fare? (or is it one of those things where the crime cancels out the context in which it was committed?)

yeah, it was london midland...that's what confuses me, the conductor didnt give me a penalty fare, I asked if i could buy a ticket when the conductor approached, they refused and said they would have to fine me- no figures were spoken, I asked how much it would be and they said it would be sent in the post- it was then that i paniced and made the stupid mistake of giving the false details as I thought as no figures were mentioned that the fine would be hundreds of pounds. When I first mentioned it, people on this site said it was probably a company that doesnt do penalty fares but I now know that it IS a company that issues penalty fares! Should I make a big point of this in my response to the letter or will this just aggravate them and make them more likely to prosecute?

Thanks for the replies. The one thing I am still slightly confused about is why I didn't receive a Penalty Fare? I checked out the TOC's policy and they do penalty fares and it covers that line. Shall I mention that in my reply? Do I take a strictly apologetic 'I was in the wrong' kind of line in the letter or can I state some of the things that confuse me about the situation? (the fact I had money to pay, asked for a ticket straight away, was not penalty fared even though it is a penalty fare line...) Obviously the false address part is something that cant be excused

....and the fact that the letter came so quick- is this a good or bad sign? (like, is there a priority list of letters for '*******s that we will probably prosecute' or is it just random?)

Thanks Codja and Wriggler. I see your point. I have received forms from the TOC, it does not say about a fine or about a court hearing- just requests my version of events. Is this a good sign or just general procedure? I feel a glimmer of hope that maybe it could be settled out of court...if the TOC do agree that I pay a fine outside of court would that generally always be less than you would have to pay at the magistrates (out of interest)?...as my employment is fairly low paid...how would arrangements to pay be settled- or would it all have to be paid in a lump sum? (I might be jumping the gun in being hopeful here but would appreciate any info!)

Thanks Codja, and apologies for offence caused to anyone from my rant, just it's stressing me out a bit (and yes, I definitely would not use the 'rant' approach in court). So my best bet is to write to the TOC when I get the letter then? What about phoning them also, is that reccomended? Is there a rough range that can be indicated of what the fine would be(I think Stigy said around £350...) as i've heard it can be up to a grand.

Nice, Maxwell- more subtle patronising. I have seen court processes in action many times and not from the obvious stand point that you are assuming. I take point with the 'personalising' Wriggler but it seems you are doing exactly that with your unhelpful anecdote- how does this relate to my situation in any way? if anything it should support it- the fact that you list a load of assumptions about a guy the courts know 'only too well' means that I should be at least considered for not possessing stolen goods,not being known in a bad way to the courts, willingly wanting to buy a goddamn ticket etc..... re:Grotesque- I was travelling a journey I often do and always buy tickets for. My friend was going to pick me up from the station i normally get off at but couldnt due to work so I had a quick changeover on the next platform on a journey where prior to this the ticket guys always dished em out on the train with no problem(and for those who are claiming it is a dodged journey etc I have taken this journey many times,never had a 'free' ride, always paid on the train, always had a conductor give tickets). I instantly offered to pay and was rebutted , fined etc....I concede that the false addresses part is where i paniced and went wrong but for various self-righteous dickheads to try and slot me in a bracket with various people they consider habitual offenders/**** is ridiculous. These people are the same kind of sheep that brought Hitler to power. In my eyes the offence was the false addresses which i obviously regret whole-heartedly, can people leave their Daily Mail judgements to themselves. If anyone has anything helpful to say rather than judgements on class/'crime' etc it would be appreciated, the fact is it is me asking for insight, not judgement(again, apologies if this is 'personalising')