CRB - enhanced disclosure

dodgy_damo

I have been employed by a local authority for over 5 years. I deal with vunerable adults, children and work in the field of anti-social behaviour.
I have no criminal convictions, and have only recently got back my enhanched disclosure. I was shocked to see that in the final coloumn (details given at the discretion of the chief officer)there was details of an arrest that happened 4 years ago, which ended up in court. I was charged with GBH, but proved self defence at court. My job is not currently at risk, and my employer was informed of the whole situation.
I was under the impression that I proved my innocence in a court and this would be the end of that. A friend in the Police said that they were within their rights to include these details.
My problem is that the way it is presented, it goes into details of victims and witnesses and paints the whole situation in a bad light. It doesnt mention the fact that the alleged victim had 22 convictions including armed robbery, violence,etc. And that the "witness" had lost his job due to dishonesty.
I could deal with it saying I was arrested and then found not guilty, allowing me the decency to explain to a potential employer what actually happened, not what was alleged.
I know that there is a complaints procedure with the CRB, but I want to know if I am allowed to ask for ammendments?
In my opinion a Police chief has put his own take on things onto my CRB and it contains his opinion on information on the PNC.
Any advice would be appreciated.

eco123

I see where you are coming from, but if I were employing you I would like to know if you had a violent streak.

I'm kidding...you're right of course, you are innocent.

dodgy_damo

Ok thanks for that!
Any construcutive comments welcomed?

bkclive

Of my four CRB checks two wanted details of my 22 yr old speeding fine (!) and two didn't. It looks like there is a 'grey area' in these forms where individual forces can use their discretion as to what is included. This means that your friend could be right or wrong in what they say. Which means that an appeal for an ammendment might suceed or fail.
On a practical level, if your employer is OK with what happened then surely there's no problem? If the form says that you were arrested but there's no conviction then by default whatever you were charged with you must be innocent of, something that any future employer should be able to work out, but a quick note wouldn't hurt just to point it out. Who knows, if you apply for a job in a different council area it could just disappear anyway!

Savvy_Sue

Even though you weren't convicted, you might find it helpful to contact NACRO and ask for advice on disclosing safely, ie in a way which doesn't mean you don't get the job ...

If you can't get it taken off, it will always be better to disclose confidentially before the CRB check is done than not disclose and have it appear when a new employer isn't expecting it.

Luvly.cuppa.T

Wow- I can see how this info could be misconstrued.

Yes I would agree to hearing the missing 'victim's' convictions, but alas data protection probably would not allow it. After all they are not employing them, but you.

I guess the other hand would be someone who DID commit a crime, but got away with it and had a list of cases that seem to cover the same thing, it would ring alarm bells.

It's a difficult one isn't it? And not very nice to have to defend neither.

Sav sue yet again has good advice. Man, she's good!:D

Savvy_Sue

Luvly.cuppa.T wrote: »

Sav sue yet again has good advice. Man, she's good!:D

Been dealing with CRB checks since before the CRB existed ... had some interesting things come up! And can only say that a good employer will not automatically rule you out if you have a conviction, as long as the first thing they know about it isn't when they get your CRB check through!

dodgy_damo

Thanks for the reply's.
Sue the NACRO link was a big help. I rang them and they said that others had contacted them over similar things in the "at the chief officers discretion box"
Currently there is a test case going through the courts with a gentleman taking Thames valley police to court over a case that went through the courts
http://www.chrissaltrese.co.uk/press%20release%20-%20pinnington.doc

NACRO are watching this one closely as it could lead to a change in Law!
Advice recieved was to write to the CRB stating my complaint about innappropriate use of police info. There are other stages of appeal past this, but looks like I'm in for a long run, so wish me luck.

There have been a couple of jobs that have interested me that will invole enhnced CRB checks. What is the best approach as far as disclosing this information before the disclosure is done. Ie include it with the application form, or when offered the job (I should be so lucky!) ;-)

Savvy_Sue

Again, I would contact NACRO for advice on when and how to disclose this kind of thing. At work we ask on the application form whether the applicant has any criminal convictions or not, but this page is not seen by the shortlisters.

I have once had a list of criminal convictions offered in place of a 'supporting statement' - they were all for civil disobedience type things, protesting with CND etc - but we didn't interview because the application was not strong enough!

A couple of times there has been a sealed envelope with an application form, with disclosure enclosed. This wouldn't be opened unless we wanted to offer that person the job, and wouldn't be known to the shortlisters.

But while I think what I've described is 'best practice' for an employer, I don't know if that's how everyone would do it, or how NACRO would recommend doing it.

I suppose it's useful to have it at that stage, rather than waiting until we send the successful applicant a CRB form, because if there was a recent conviction for something which we felt made the applicant unsuitable, then we would by that stage have send 'sorry but no thanks' to all the unsuccessful candidates, one of whom might have been a good second choice.

musicsmith

Very interesting to read all your comments. What I find interesting is that after a certain time a conviction should be 'spent'. I have the problem that 20 years ago I got into various bits of trouble, did a little time and came afterwards vowing never to go back there again. Since then, 9 years ago, I did have a drink drive which I am not proud about but I have had no more convictions of any sort since. I am now married, a home owner, in employment as a chef and married to a Doctor. I have a good education and am now an ' Upstanding member of society' Before I got into trouble I was in the army for 7 years. I would say that a great many of the reasons I got into trouble with the law related to what I did and saw within the armed services. I recently had a CRB check done to work as a Chef in a care home. It came back with everything I had ever done including a conviction on my 18th birthday of 'urinating on a public highway' Needless to say, I didn't get the job. I have NO convictions for either violence or drugs and nothing in my past would suggest that I should not work in contact with either children or the elderly. A few weeks later I was in a local pub and a local I know said he knew about my past as the owner of the care home knew his wife! I TOTALLY AGREE we need a CRB of some sort but all of my convictions are spent and therefore should not have been disclosed to anyone unless it was relevant to the job I was doing. What is the point of having a Rehabilitation of Offenders Act if people who get into trouble are then never allowed to get away from their past. This does not help offenders and if we want to stop re offending we must give people the chance to change without their past biting their bum later in life

MissHobit

musicsmith wrote: »

all of my convictions are spent and therefore should not have been disclosed to anyone unless it was relevant to the job I was doing. What is the point of having a Rehabilitation of Offenders Act if people who get into trouble are then never allowed to get away from their past. This does not help offenders and if we want to stop re offending we must give people the chance to change without their past biting their bum later in life

I totally agree with you on this, I posted something on the same lines if it's relevant to the job then of course your possible future employer should be aware of your past but if it's spent and totally irelevant to the post then it shouldn't be.

How many people will be turned down for a job because of something they did in the past? I've read cases where offenders re offend because unable to find employment so it's a vicious circle.

I'm disgusted to read that someone in the local pub knew about your past who was unrelated, that is breech of trust, what happened to confidentiality? The person who read your CRB disclosure should NEVER have passed on any information about you, I would complain it's so wrong.