Hi Tech 1982

You are not obliged in general to notify a potential new employer of a Trust Deed.

Some positions will require background checks.

Some positions will make the statement that it is not permissible to work in the role if you are Bankrupt etc.

Some companies may elect to ask you a question about your finances.
You are best to be honest in your answers.

Some organisations employ background checking companies to carry out relevant checks. They should tell you this as part of their recruitment process.

I recently learned that the information from the Credit Reference files available to employers is different to lenders (employers have restricted information).

What would you have to lose by applying? If you don't apply you wont get the job, if you do and it becomes a stumbling block you have not lost anything.

In my case, I am a trustee of Life assurance etc. When the accounts were set up the bank contacted me to check the validity of the Trust Deed information which was highlighted in a check. I had to make a statement of the circumstances that led to the Trust Deed and it was referred to Underwriters I believe. It was all okay in the end. Embarrassing but okay.

Good luck getting a great job. Onwards and Upwards in 2016!

Welcome to the forum Tech 1982.

I'm very much in agreement with Firewalker's useful comments.

There's no general obligation to tell a potential new employer about a trust deed.

However, any employer is perfectly entitled to have their own criteria about what must be disclosed to them and what may or may not be acceptable for any particular role.

You'd really need to confirm with this particular employer what their policies and procedures are in this respect.

I've always thought it is a nonsensical argument to say that someone in a trust deed or bankruptcy isn't suitable for working in a job that requires cash handling.

Is the suggestion that they may be tempted to steal money to alleviate their financial problems?? If so, surely the opposite is true? Once they are bankrupt/in a trust deed then their financial situation has been stabilised and the pressure should already be alleviated - that is the whole point after all isn't it?

Unfortunately Kevin anything surrounding money and debt sets alarm bells ringing where it really shouldn't.

I overheard a conversation in the pub over the holidays where a guy was in buying a few drinks, along with a female friend. It was along the lines of "aye, and he's been a bankrupt".

What relevance that had to him being in the pub buying drinks is beyond me.

There's all sorts of general ignorance and misunderstanding out there in this regard.

With financial organisations I think there is another important element however. They're required to have risk-mitigation policies and procedures in place, to minimise the chances that either their business or their customers will have their interests jeopardised by a rogue employee. These policies and procedures are required by regulators, such as the Financial Conduct Authority for example.

To a compliance or risk director, with no personal experience within the debt advice or debt solutions space, it might seem entirely logical that a financially stretched employee poses a greater risk of doing something inappropriate than an employee with more settled financial affairs.

They're very unlikely to understand the nuances of being in debt, being in a debt solution, or being discharged from those debts. They generally don't have the knowledge to make a distinction. They're probably just seeing the debt - and this is then equated with additional exposure to risk.

I'm not sure what the solution to that is - but my personal view is very much the same as Kevin's.

Hi Tech 1982,

I would apply for it. As Firewalker has advised you have nothing to lose by applying.

If you do apply please let us know how you get on and good luck!

Well summarized TDA. It is all about risk management and Duty of Care, (or CYA) particularly where money is involved.

And as you succinctly put earlier (better than I did), it is each individual company's right to specify the conditions of hire and contract (within the law of course).

Lack of understanding of Trust Deeds, IVAs, Bankruptcy etc. can lead to rigid application of protective policies. I guess it is viewed 'better to be safe than sorry' - and they covered themselves by carrying out checks.

Not all employers are like that though. Perhaps smaller, more personal, people focused employers would have a different and more flexible approach.

Good luck with your search Tech 1982. Don't let the fear of rejection for this reason hold you back. Be bold - and honest when required.