If a DBS check appears to fail, act promptly. Review the certificate carefully and use the 14‑day DBS dispute window to challenge any inaccuracies with supporting evidence. Record dates, DBS reference numbers, and all communications. Consider the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and DBS filtering rules to confirm what should be disclosed for the level of check requested (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced, with barred list checks where lawful). Employers should pause any adverse decision while a dispute is ongoing, particularly where barred list information is involved. Ensure you have lawful basis and applicant consent, and maintain an audit trail to meet ICO expectations under UK data protection law. Where appropriate, seek guidance from the DBS or legal counsel. Taking structured, documented steps helps ensure fairness and compliance.
Introduction: 14-Day DBS Dispute Window
When a DBS result appears inaccurate or unfair during pre-employment screening, the applicant has 14 calendar days to raise a dispute with the Disclosure and Barring Service.
They should act promptly by submitting a formal challenge via the DBS disputes process and providing clear supporting evidence or context.
The DBS will assess the submission and, if inaccuracies are confirmed, issue an amended certificate.
Employers should pause adverse decisions until the dispute outcome is confirmed, in line with fair recruitment practices and ICO guidance.
If the dispute relates to inclusion on a barred list, note that the DBS maintains the Barred Lists and will consider evidence accordingly.
Timeframe to Dispute
Although the process can feel urgent, the Disclosure and Barring Service allows a strict 14‑day window from receipt of results to raise a dispute.
This timeframe begins when the applicant receives the DBS certificate, not when an employer views it. Acting within this period is essential, as late requests are generally not accepted.
The dispute should identify specific inaccuracies and be supported by clear documentation, as the DBS prioritises verifiable evidence.
Once a dispute is logged, the DBS will review the challenged entries. During this stage, the application may be placed on hold until a decision is reached. The DBS does not notify employers that a dispute is underway.
After the review, the applicant is informed of the outcome; confirmed errors result in an amended DBS certificate.
How to Raise
The 14-day window starts on receipt of the DBS certificate. The next step is to lodge a dispute promptly and methodically.
The applicant should contact the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) to open a dispute where a DBS check contains inaccurate information or reflects an ineligible level of check. They should clearly describe the inaccuracy and provide supporting evidence, such as court records, identity documents, or employer correspondence.
During the review, the DBS may consult the relevant police force to verify contested entries. The applicant can request updates, and the DBS must keep them informed of progress.
Retain copies of all submissions and record reference numbers. If the dispute is upheld, the DBS will issue a corrected certificate, ensuring accurate disclosure.
Timely action and organised documentation support a swift, reliable outcome.
What Is the DBS Dispute Window?
The DBS dispute window is a defined period—typically 28 days from receipt of the DBS certificate—during which an applicant can challenge inaccuracies relevant to safeguarding and criminal record disclosure.
Grounds include incorrect personal details, convictions recorded in error, or omissions. Disputes should be supported by evidence such as identity documents or court records.
To raise a dispute, the applicant must contact the Disclosure and Barring Service via the official dispute route, quote the certificate number, and submit supporting documentation.
The DBS will liaise with the relevant police force(s) and update the record if an error is confirmed. Applicants should monitor the case until resolution.
Organisations should pause pre-employment decisions that rely on the disputed content, in line with DBS guidance and UK data protection principles overseen by the ICO.
Timeframe to Dispute
Urgency matters when disputing a DBS result. Individuals who believe a DBS certificate contains incorrect information must raise a dispute with the Disclosure and Barring Service within 28 days of receiving it.
During this period, they should compile clear, relevant evidence addressing the specific entries challenged, such as identity errors, outdated cautions/convictions, or record mismatches. The DBS will acknowledge the dispute, assess the points raised with the relevant police force(s) or data holders, and typically aims to respond within about 14 days of receipt.
Timely organisation is essential. Late submissions risk rejection on procedural grounds even if the issue appears valid.
If the outcome is unsatisfactory, the individual may request a review or use the DBS complaints process. Employers should pause any adverse hiring decision until the dispute is resolved to meet fair processing obligations under UK data protection law and DBS Code of Practice.
Eligible Dispute Reasons
Within the 28‑day DBS Dispute Window, applicants may challenge specific inaccuracies on their DBS certificate. Eligible grounds include misattributed identity details, incorrect or outdated spent or unspent convictions or cautions, and erroneous non‑conviction information disclosed by police.
Disputes typically arise where entries do not belong to the individual, records are linked to a similar name, or information should have been filtered under DBS filtering rules. Applicants may also dispute factual errors in dates, outcomes, or disposal types, and contest local police disclosures that are irrelevant or inaccurate.
To raise a dispute, applicants should provide supporting evidence or clear reasoning so the Disclosure and Barring Service can verify the claim. If upheld, the DBS will amend or remove the error and issue an updated certificate.
Timely action is essential to avoid delays to pre‑employment checks. Organisations and vetting providers such as Checkback International or MyVetting can assist candidates in preparing dispute submissions in line with DBS guidance and UK data protection requirements overseen by the ICO.
How to Submit
Act promptly once a DBS certificate is issued. A 28‑day window applies to challenge inaccuracies or ineligible disclosures.
Within 28 days of receipt, the applicant may raise a dispute if the certificate contains incorrect personal details, inaccurate conviction data, or discloses spent convictions that should not appear for the level of DBS applied. For Enhanced certificates, this also covers irrelevant or inaccurate local police information.
To submit a dispute:
- Gather evidence: proof of identity, correct personal data, and documents demonstrating why an entry is inaccurate or ineligible.
- Follow the dispute route stated on the certificate or via the DBS online portal, quoting the certificate number and any reference provided by the employer or Registered Body (e.g., Checkback International or MyVetting).
The Disclosure and Barring Service will review the challenge, verify records with data sources, and issue an outcome. Missing the 28‑day deadline may forfeit the opportunity to correct the record.
For data accuracy concerns, applicants may also exercise rights under the UK GDPR with the DBS or relevant police force, overseen by the ICO.
Why the 14-Day Window Matters
The 14-day window is the candidate’s best opportunity to challenge certificate errors before an employer finalises a decision.
Acting within this period allows disputes to be raised promptly with supporting context or evidence.
Using the window effectively helps protect appeal rights and prevents hiring outcomes based on inaccurate information.
Because DBS sends a certificate to the applicant, requesting verification of the DBS certificate promptly can clarify discrepancies.
Challenge Certificate Errors
The 14‑day window matters because it is the formal period to challenge a DBS certificate when an error is suspected. Submitting a dispute within this timeframe ensures the DBS considers it under their review process, preserves appeal options, and reduces delays that can affect pre‑employment decisions in safeguarding roles.
A precise challenge should identify the specific certificate entries that are incorrect or misleading, explain why they are wrong, and include supporting evidence. The individual should contact the DBS, request a review, and follow the DBS instructions for submitting documents.
Maintain clear correspondence: record dates sent, DBS references, and responses. This audit trail supports the investigation and any escalation.
Missing the 14‑day window may limit remedies and delay corrections, with potential impact on conditional offers and start dates.
Raise Disputes Promptly
Swift action within 14 days of receiving a flagged DBS certificate is critical, as this is the formal window to challenge inaccuracies or the relevance of disclosed information.
Acting promptly helps ensure the DBS can review disputes before hiring decisions are finalised. The candidate should raise their dispute directly with the DBS, clearly identifying each inaccuracy and explaining why the information is misleading or not relevant to the role’s safeguarding requirements.
Practical steps matter. The candidate should gather and submit supporting evidence—such as court documents, identity confirmations, or employer letters—to substantiate the dispute.
They should keep records of all communications, dates, and documents to demonstrate diligence and assist the review. Missing the 14-day period may limit opportunities for correction and increase the risk of an adverse recruitment decision following a DBS check.
Protect Appeal Rights
Acting within the 14-day period does more than initiate a DBS dispute; it preserves the right to appeal. When a DBS certificate appears inaccurate, this window safeguards appeal rights and enables the DBS to review eligibility and investigate disputed disclosures, which can affect recruitment decisions.
Prompt action means submitting a precise challenge, providing supporting evidence, and retaining copies of all correspondence. Missing the deadline risks losing the ability to contest errors later, even if the data is demonstrably incorrect.
- Day 1: Shock → Request guidance from the DBS or your Registered Body
- Day 7: Resolve → File the challenge with evidence
- Day 14: Relief/Focus → Confirm receipt and next steps
Maintaining complete records throughout the 14 days strengthens any subsequent appeal, clarifies the audit trail, and supports a fair reassessment in line with DBS procedures and ICO data accuracy principles.
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
Under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, the distinction between spent and unspent convictions determines what may be disclosed on a DBS certificate.
For Basic DBS checks, only unspent convictions and conditional cautions are reported.
Standard and Enhanced DBS checks may disclose both spent and unspent convictions, subject to the DBS filtering rules set by the Home Office, and Enhanced checks may include relevant police information.
Certain roles are exempt from the Act’s disclosure limitations under the Exceptions Order, including roles involving work with children or vulnerable adults, regulated professions (e.g., healthcare, legal, accounting), and positions requiring a Standard or Enhanced DBS check.
In these cases, applicants must disclose relevant spent convictions unless they are protected by filtering.
Rehabilitation periods, which define when convictions become spent, vary by disposal and sentence length.
Some offences and sentences never become spent (e.g., prison sentences over four years), while specified offences are not eligible for filtering.
Employers should apply the ICO’s guidance on fair processing, consider only lawful and role-relevant information, and avoid asking about spent convictions unless the role is exempt.
DBS guidance should be followed to ensure compliant, proportionate screening.
Vetting providers such as Checkback International or MyVetting can support compliant DBS processing.
Spent Vs Unspent Convictions
Although the terms can be confusing, the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 draws a clear line between “spent” and “unspent” convictions and dictates what must be disclosed on DBS checks. Under this framework, spent convictions are not disclosed on a Basic DBS check, supporting fair recruitment while recognising rehabilitation. Unspent convictions remain within their rehabilitation period and will appear on a Basic DBS certificate.
Rehabilitation periods vary by offence type and the person’s age at the time, lasting from months to several years. Certain serious offences, including specified sexual or violent offences, may never become spent and must always be disclosed where legally required.
Employers should set clear, lawful policies distinguishing spent and unspent outcomes, apply decisions consistently, and assess role relevance to ensure compliance with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, DBS guidance, and ICO expectations on data minimisation and fairness.
For DBS processing and advice, organisations may engage vetted providers such as Checkback International or MyVetting.
Roles Exempt From Disclosure
Certain positions are exempt from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order, requiring Standard or Enhanced DBS checks rather than relying on spent conviction rules.
Typical exempt roles include work with children or vulnerable adults and regulated activity in healthcare, education, and social services.
Standard and Enhanced certificates may disclose spent and unspent convictions, cautions, reprimands, and warnings where legally permitted, enabling employers to assess relevant criminal history before appointment.
Given the safeguarding implications, employers must apply the DBS Code of Practice and Home Office guidance, ensure role-based justification for the level of check requested, and record proportionate, risk-based hiring decisions.
Misapplication of DBS levels or failure to handle criminal record data in line with the Data Protection Act 2018 and ICO guidance can lead to compliance breaches and undermine safe recruitment.
Employers should not request Enhanced checks unless the role meets the legal criteria, and should provide applicants with a fair opportunity to explain any disclosed information.
Filtering and Rehabilitation Periods
The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and DBS filtering rules determine what criminal history must be disclosed for pre-employment checks and when.
After the relevant rehabilitation period, some convictions become spent and will not appear on a Basic DBS certificate.
However, they may still appear on Standard and Enhanced DBS certificates unless eligible for filtering under DBS policy.
Filtering removes specified old and minor cautions and convictions, while serious sexual or violent offences are never filtered.
Typical rehabilitation periods vary; for example, fines can become spent after five years, whereas custodial sentences over four years are never spent.
Key points:
- Rehabilitation: Limits disclosure over time in line with the ROA 1974.
- Spent convictions: Excluded from Basic DBS.
- Filtering: DBS applies statutory rules to remove eligible records from Standard/Enhanced results.
- Challenge rights: Applicants can challenge inaccuracies with the DBS or the police via the DBS disputes process and exercise data rights with the ICO where appropriate.
How Filtering Rules Apply
Filtering rules determine when certain cautions and convictions are excluded from Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certificates. They apply to Standard and Enhanced DBS checks and are designed to balance rehabilitation with safeguarding.
Factors include the applicant’s age at the time of the offence, the time elapsed, and whether the matter is spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order. Serious specified offences, particularly violent or sexual offences, are never filtered and will always be disclosed. When filtered, the record remains on the Police National Computer but does not appear on the DBS certificate.
- Thresholds differ by age: offences committed under 18 may be filtered sooner if criteria are met.
- Specified offences and non-spent matters remain disclosable and will appear.
- Applicants may challenge disclosures via the DBS Independent Monitor and, where relevant, seek a review of local police information disclosed under the Police Act 1997.
Guidance also explains the role of the DBS Update Service in keeping certificates up to date.
Common Myths About Filtered Cautions
Filtered cautions are often misunderstood in the context of DBS checks.
Filtering does not erase all records; it only removes eligible cautions from disclosure, excluding specified offences such as serious violent or sexual offences.
Youth cautions are not automatically filtered; eligibility depends on the individual’s age at the time, the offence type, and the statutory rehabilitation and filtering timeframes set by the DBS and the Home Office.
Even when filtered, the caution remains on the Police National Computer and may be retained on local police records, but it must not appear on Basic, Standard, or Enhanced DBS certificates where filtering applies and should not be used by employers to make adverse decisions.
Employers and Registered Bodies must follow DBS filtering rules and ICO guidance to avoid unlawful processing or discrimination.
What Filtering Covers
Filtering is often misunderstood in the context of DBS disclosures.
It does not erase records; it removes certain “protected” cautions and convictions from being disclosed on DBS certificates under strict criteria set by the DBS and the Home Office.
Filtering applies to a limited range of cautions and convictions after specific time periods and conditions. Simple cautions may be protected after three months; conditional cautions after six months, provided there are no further offences.
The time elapsed and the individual’s age at the time of the offence both matter; some minor matters committed under 18 may qualify if the criteria are met. Serious offences, particularly violent or sexual crimes listed by the DBS, are never eligible for filtering and will always be disclosed where the level of DBS check requires it.
Filtering affects disclosure only. Filtered entries may still be held on police systems and could be accessible via subject access under data protection rights supervised by the ICO.
Youth Cautions Rules
Youth cautions do not remain on a record indefinitely. For DBS purposes in England and Wales, many youth cautions are eligible for filtering after two years if the individual was under 18 at the time. Once filtered, they no longer appear on Standard or Enhanced DBS certificates, which can support access to roles requiring safeguarding checks.
Not all cautions are eligible. Cautions for specified offences, including serious sexual or violent offences listed by the DBS, are never filtered and remain disclosable. Eligibility also depends on the individual having no subsequent convictions and meeting the DBS filtering rules.
These rules apply in England and Wales. Employers and applicants should refer to official DBS guidance and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (Exceptions) Order, as amended, to confirm eligibility and timeframes.
Organisations should ensure recruitment decisions comply with DBS Code of Practice and ICO guidance on the handling of criminal record data.
Disclosure After Filtering
Filtered Disclosures on DBS Certificates
Filtering removes certain old and minor cautions from what is disclosed on a DBS certificate, but it does not erase the underlying record. The caution remains on the Police National Computer and may appear in a subject access request under the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018, or in other lawful disclosures.
Eligibility for filtering is strict under DBS rules. Specified offences (primarily serious violent and sexual offences) are never eligible. A caution issued after any conviction is not filterable. Only one caution can be filtered if all criteria are met, and the relevant rehabilitation periods must have elapsed.
Employers conducting DBS checks must disregard filtered cautions when making hiring decisions, in line with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order and DBS guidance.
However, filtering affects only DBS disclosure content. It does not prevent lawful questions that do not rely on a DBS certificate, where permitted by law.
Organisations should ensure role-based justification for the DBS level requested and apply safer recruitment practices consistent with Home Office and DBS guidance.
Document Conditional-Offer Dates
One critical step is to document conditional-offer dates to create a clear timeline of the recruitment process and the effect of DBS outcomes on hiring decisions. Recording conditional-offer dates helps show when employment is contingent on satisfactory DBS check results and supports a disciplined documentation process.
Clear timestamps also establish a transparent trail for audit purposes and consistent treatment across candidates.
- State in writing that any offer of employment is conditional upon a satisfactory DBS check at the appropriate level (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced), and confirm this verbally to ensure understanding.
- Record the date the conditional offer is issued, the candidate’s acceptance date, the date the DBS application is submitted, and the dates of the DBS result and hiring decision.
- Store these records securely in line with ICO guidance, link them to the vacancy reference, apply role-based access controls, and review for accuracy to support legal compliance and resolve future disputes.
Applicants can apply online using GOV.UK One Login and the service is available from 8am to 11:30pm.
Audit Your Screening Trail
To audit the DBS screening trail, the individual should document each stage from conditional offer to the DBS certificate outcome, recording dates, correspondence, identity verification steps, and decision points.
They should confirm the legal basis for the level of DBS check requested (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced with/without barred list), aligned to the role and relevant legislation.
They should verify that informed consent was obtained, the DBS Code of Practice was followed, and data was handled in line with the Data Protection Act 2018 and ICO guidance.
They should retain copies of the job description, eligibility assessment, risk assessment, disclosure policy, and any correspondence regarding positive disclosures.
Where entries are flagged, they should compile supporting evidence (e.g., rehabilitation context, court documents) to clarify relevance and proportionality.
If using a registered body or e-broker (e.g., Checkback International or MyVetting), they should review service records and audit logs to ensure accuracy and compliance with DBS and Home Office guidance.
Map Every Screening Step
Although DBS screening can feel routine, mapping every step of the process creates the clarity and defensibility required if results are challenged.
Define the role’s safeguarding requirements to select the correct DBS level (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced, with barred list checks where eligible), aligning scope to duties and legal thresholds.
Document each stage: request initiation, candidate disclosure, identity verification, receipt of the DBS certificate, identification of relevant information, and evaluation against role risks and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order. Record who reviewed what, when, and why.
Maintain a clear audit trail to support transparency, consistency, and fair treatment under the Equality Act 2010 and ICO guidance on criminal offence data.
Use structured dialogues with candidates to clarify context before decisions.
Schedule periodic reviews to reflect DBS guidance, Home Office updates, and best practice, ensuring the process remains accurate, current, and defensible.
Consider engaging a vetted provider such as Checkback International or MyVetting to standardise workflows and evidence retention.
Verify Eligibility and Consent
With the process mapped, the next safeguard is confirming that the DBS check was appropriate and that the candidate agreed to it.
First, verify eligibility against the role’s statutory criteria and the DBS guidance from the Home Office and DBS. If the position was ineligible for a DBS check at the level requested, the disclosure may have been unnecessary and can be challenged.
Second, confirm consent. There must be dated, explicit consent from the candidate before initiating any DBS application. Absence of valid consent may render the processing unlawful under UK data protection law (ICO guidance).
Third, record the rationale: why the DBS check was requested, which level (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced) was applied, and the communications evidencing eligibility and consent.
Align with organisational policy and DBS Code of Practice to ensure consistency and compliance.
Finally, compare the disclosures expected for the role with what was issued and note any mismatch for escalation.
0-Day ICO Complaint Window
On day zero, act immediately to meet ICO time limits for complaints about DBS processing.
Preserve all evidence, including disclosure notices, DBS certificates or references, correspondence with the DBS or employer, system logs, and dates of applications and disclosures.
Maintain a precise timeline showing when the issue occurred, when it was identified, and each action taken.
Ensure data minimisation and accuracy under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
If using a third-party provider such as Checkback International or MyVetting, include their communications and processing records.
Act Immediately on Day Zero
Act Immediately on Day Zero
As soon as a failed DBS notification arrives, act the same day. Contact the employer to understand what was flagged, request clarification, and confirm any immediate implications for the role. Keep communication professional and documented.
Review the DBS certificate against your personal records to identify inaccuracies. Decide promptly whether to raise a dispute with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) if you believe the information is incorrect or not about you.
If the issue concerns local police disclosure on an Enhanced DBS, request clarification from the relevant police force via the process set out on the certificate.
Submit a subject access request to the relevant police force or the ACRO Criminal Records Office to understand the data underpinning the disclosure. If data accuracy concerns remain, note the ICO’s three‑month window for complaints following a final response and prepare a concise, evidence‑based complaint under the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018.
Early clarity and measured steps preserve options and maintain trust with the employer, particularly in roles requiring safeguarding assurances.
– Action: Contact employer
Purpose: Confirm implications and next steps
Immediate Outcome: Agreed plan and timescales
– Action: Compare DBS certificate with records
Purpose: Identify discrepancies
Immediate Outcome: Evidence list
– Action: Subject access request (police/ACRO)
Purpose: Understand source data
Immediate Outcome: Context gained
– Action: Note ICO timeline
Purpose: Prepare to challenge if needed
Immediate Outcome: Timely, compliant complaint
Preserve Evidence and Timelines
Every day within the three‑month ICO window counts, so disciplined record‑keeping is essential for DBS matters. Maintain a structured file to evidence what was disclosed, when, and by whom.
Collect all materials linked to the DBS check, especially where a result was flagged or disputed. This includes DBS certificates, update service status logs, correspondence with the DBS, the employer, or a vetting provider (e.g., Checkback International or MyVetting), and notes identifying the specific entries being challenged.
Create a clear timeline covering the DBS application, identity verification, certificate issue date, any requests for clarification, calls, emails, and submissions made to the ICO. Each entry should state the date, action, and outcome.
All correspondence should set out the complaint succinctly and reference the exact disclosure items or data accuracy concerns. Before sending anything, label documents, keep copies, and confirm completeness against the ICO’s submission guidance.
Retain all submissions, emails, and evidence throughout the ICO’s review to support the complaint. Reference relevant UK authorities only (DBS, Home Office, ICO) and ensure data handling aligns with the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
Frequently Asked Questions
What Happens if You Fail DBS Check?
A DBS certificate does not state pass or fail. It discloses criminal record information appropriate to the level requested (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced, with or without barred list).
The hiring organisation assesses any disclosed information against the role, its safeguarding duties, and its recruitment policy. Candidates are usually given the opportunity to provide context before a decision is made.
An employer may lawfully withdraw an offer or refuse employment if this is relevant, necessary, and applied fairly and consistently, in line with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order, DBS filtering rules, and its risk assessment process.
If a candidate believes the certificate is inaccurate or includes ineligible information, they can raise a query or dispute with the DBS. Where local police intelligence appears on an Enhanced certificate, a Representations process may be available via the issuing police force.
Employers must handle DBS data in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and ICO guidance, keeping it secure and only for as long as necessary.
What Happens if DBS Is Rejected?
If a DBS check is rejected or returned with adverse information, the employer may withdraw the offer or pause hiring to assess relevance to the role and safeguarding requirements.
Candidates should review the certificate for accuracy, context, and rehabilitation evidence, and may request a DBS review or raise a dispute if information is incorrect or appears misapplied.
Employers must apply a fair, consistent, and documented decision-making process aligned with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (as amended) and DBS filtering rules. They should:
- Assess relevance, seriousness, recency, and pattern of offences to the specific duties and level of contact with vulnerable groups.
- Ensure the correct DBS level (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced with/without Barred List checks) was requested lawfully for the role.
- Comply with the ICO’s data protection principles when handling criminal records data.
If the candidate believes the decision is discriminatory or procedurally unfair, they may use the employer’s appeals process, submit a Subject Access Request, seek advice from the DBS or ICO, or obtain legal advice.
Employers should record rationale, eligibility checks, and the outcome to demonstrate compliance with DBS guidance and UK law.
Can DBS Be Done Twice?
Yes. A DBS check can be repeated whenever required. Rechecks are common when:
- Starting a new role, especially in regulated activity or roles with greater safeguarding responsibilities.
- An employer’s policy mandates periodic renewals (often every three years).
- There is a change in circumstances, such as new convictions or cautions.
Employers may request a new Basic, Standard, or Enhanced DBS check depending on role eligibility under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order and Police Act regulations.
Individuals can also obtain a Basic DBS check at any time for personal use or to provide a recent disclosure to prospective employers.
Continuous monitoring via the DBS Update Service can reduce the need for repeat applications if subscriptions are maintained.
What Is a Red Flag on a DBS Check?
A red flag on a DBS check is any disclosed information that may indicate risk for a specific role.
Depending on the DBS level requested (Basic, Standard, or Enhanced), this can include unspent convictions (Basic), spent and unspent convictions, cautions, reprimands, and final warnings (Standard), and, for Enhanced checks, relevant local police information and barred list status where legally eligible.
A red flag is not an automatic bar to employment; its relevance must be assessed against the role’s duties, safeguarding responsibilities, and legal requirements.
Employers should:
- Conduct a role-specific risk assessment aligned with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (as amended) and the Exceptions Order.
- Discuss findings with the candidate to understand context, rehabilitation, and relevance.
- Apply a consistent, documented decision-making process, following DBS Code of Practice and ICO data protection principles.
- Only request the lawful DBS level for the role and handle disclosure data securely and proportionately.
Decisions must be fair, evidence-based, and compliant with UK law and guidance from the DBS and Home Office.
Conclusion
In closing, a failed DBS check is not necessarily decisive. Use the 14‑day dispute window to correct inaccuracies with the DBS. Apply the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and the DBS filtering rules to assess what an employer may lawfully consider. Record conditional-offer dates, decision rationales, and the screening audit trail to evidence fair process. Where data handling appears non‑compliant, raise concerns with the employer and, if unresolved, the ICO. With prompt action, accurate records, and a clear understanding of DBS guidance, candidates can challenge outcomes and preserve fair access to roles.
