Requesting DBS Update Service ID from An Ex-Employer.

Jonothon

Hi all,

I had been working in higher education as a tutor before Xmas 2023, and quit the job as the students were much more behaved than the vast majority of my colleagues. I have moved back to my hometown after Xmas and have an upcoming interview for a very similar position in a more chill environment.

My previous employer paid and applied for the DBS on my behalf when I started with them back in 2021. I was placed on the update service, but was never given any login details to use on the update service to check my status.

If I called my previous employer, do they have the right to withhold these details from me to use for a new employer? For context, after I left (and at the right time it seems) the director of the college ordered a private investigation into the HR operations of the college, so enough said of the organisation's behaviour.

However, I am just worried in case I call up to ask for the update service information and they try to withhold this info to screw me over. If they legally can withhold it, then fair enough; but I just want to know where I stand. If they are supposed to provide me this info on request, I will push for it.

Thanks everyone.

elsien

I’m on the update service  but I had to register for it myself.  How sure are you that they registered you with it as I understood it was for individuals to do for themselves. 

The DBS came to me, and I then had to use the information on it to register and then continue to pay the annual fee.

Have you tried phoning the update service to see if there’s a way around it?

Of you are sure I might also be tempted to quote this at them: 

“If a person leaves your organisation, moves to a position where there is no legal entitlement to the same DBS check, or withdraws their consent, you must stop any further status checks.

If you continue to carry out status checks on their certificate, you are breaking the law by accessing data you are not entitled to see.”

And asked the login be passed over to you to prevent any information breaches. 

EnPointe

individuals register on the  update service not employers 

Savvy_Sue

All the above, plus ...

No guarantee that any new employer would find use of the update service acceptable. The level of check and client group would need to be the same.

So I had 2 carried out, one for paid work (vulnerable adults) and one as a volunteer at church (children).

If I'd taken a new job working with both vulnerable adults and children, new check needed.

Undervalued

Savvy_Sue said:

All the above, plus ...

No guarantee that any new employer would find use of the update service acceptable. The level of check and client group would need to be the same.

So I had 2 carried out, one for paid work (vulnerable adults) and one as a volunteer at church (children).

If I'd taken a new job working with both vulnerable adults and children, new check needed.

Indeed. That is a very important point which is often misunderstood. The same applies to the level of checks an employer chooses to do in other areas such as the right to work in the UK. There are guidelines as the the minimum that is considered necessary but the employer can still be prosecuted if the employee is ineligible in some way, so many employers cover themselves by setting much higher criteria.

General_Grant

Undervalued said:

Savvy_Sue said:

All the above, plus ...

No guarantee that any new employer would find use of the update service acceptable. The level of check and client group would need to be the same.

So I had 2 carried out, one for paid work (vulnerable adults) and one as a volunteer at church (children).

If I'd taken a new job working with both vulnerable adults and children, new check needed.

Indeed. That is a very important point which is often misunderstood. The same applies to the level of checks an employer chooses to do in other areas such as the right to work in the UK. There are guidelines as the the minimum that is considered necessary but the employer can still be prosecuted if the employee is ineligible in some way, so many employers cover themselves by setting much higher criteria.

Because they don't seem to understand that if they have followed the guidelines, and kept evidence that all looked satisfactory to a reasonable human being, that is their defence so prosecution should not happen.

Undervalued

General_Grant said:

Undervalued said:

Savvy_Sue said:

All the above, plus ...

No guarantee that any new employer would find use of the update service acceptable. The level of check and client group would need to be the same.

So I had 2 carried out, one for paid work (vulnerable adults) and one as a volunteer at church (children).

If I'd taken a new job working with both vulnerable adults and children, new check needed.

Indeed. That is a very important point which is often misunderstood. The same applies to the level of checks an employer chooses to do in other areas such as the right to work in the UK. There are guidelines as the the minimum that is considered necessary but the employer can still be prosecuted if the employee is ineligible in some way, so many employers cover themselves by setting much higher criteria.

Because they don't seem to understand that if they have followed the guidelines, and kept evidence that all looked satisfactory to a reasonable human being, that is their defence so prosecution should not happen.

It is a variation on printing "This product contains nuts" on a packet of peanuts or "Contents may be hot" on a coffee cup. It is OTT but costs nothing and provides a little more protection against being sued!

A lot of organisations are very risk averse, however minimal the risk. So, assuming they get plenty of suitable job applicants there is no harm in making them jump through extra hoops.