SC Check - employement

Basically this - lie on your forms (or selectively remember) and you will fail when they pull your record.

If the conviction has no bearing on your clearance you will be fine - try and hide it and they will wonder what else you might be hiding on your form
 
I failed security vetting for South Wales Police because my wife at the time (9 years BEFORE we'd even met) was arrested for possession of drugs.

The world can screw you sometimes. Maybe come clean and pre-empt the check, so they know you're upfront and honest?
 
EVH said:
I failed security vetting for South Wales Police because my wife at the time (9 years BEFORE we'd even met) was arrested for possession of drugs.

The world can screw you sometimes. Maybe come clean and pre-empt the check, so they know you're upfront and honest?
Click to expand...

Did you declare that in your application?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Did you declare that in your application?
Click to expand...

I wasn't married to her at the time. She also didn't tell me until I had to fill in the form (see below) but yes, I declared it.

I applied 2+ years before I got asked to attend the assessment centre. It was only after the assessment centre, 2x medicals, 2x fitness test and an induction day that they sent a form out asking to complete a change of personal details. As soon as I did that... fail.
 
EVH said:
I wasn't married to her at the time. She also didn't tell me until I had to fill in the form (see below) but yes, I declared it.

I applied 2+ years before I got asked to attend the assessment centre. It was only after the assessment centre, 2x medicals, 2x fitness test and an induction day that they sent a form out asking to complete a change of personal details. As soon as I did that... fail.
Click to expand...

Did you appeal that decision?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Did you appeal that decision?
Click to expand...

Yes, I wrote a letter saying that I had not tried to conceal anything and that I was unaware of her past until this point. I also mentioned the time it took and the runaround I'd gone through to get to this stage but simply had a generic "we're sorry you've been applying for 2+ years but due to the data protection act we cannot give specifics or further details etc". It also went on to say that the decision stands and that I am excluded from ever applying again :rolleyes:

To put this in to some context, I've never had so much as a parking ticket. I don't drink unless it's one or two on a Christmas/birthday/new year, never smoked, very athletic / fit, and haven't taken a single unauthorised day off work. To be punished for something I had no control over and that happened before I ever met her seemed like a massive over-reaction.

I'll admit I was devastated... I'd trained and prepared for everything, so I knew my next step was a uniform fitting and start date. I was essentially waiting for the call. The silly thing is I could have ignored the letter and just updated my personal details after my start date (referencing my marriage status( and no one would be any the wiser. I purely did it on the letter just incase their check revealed that I was married and it caused problems (irony much?)

I'd imagine I'd be allowed to apply now as I'm divorced from her, but I've moved on and have no interest in going through all that again.
 
EVH said:
Yes, I wrote a letter saying that I had not tried to conceal anything and that I was unaware of her past until this point. I also mentioned the time it took and the runaround I'd gone through to get to this stage but simply had a generic "we're sorry you've been applying for 2+ years but due to the data protection act we cannot give specifics or further details etc". It also went on to say that the decision stands and that I am excluded from ever applying again :rolleyes:

To put this in to some context, I've never had so much as a parking ticket. I don't drink unless it's one or two on a Christmas/birthday/new year, never smoked, very athletic / fit, and haven't taken a single unauthorised day off work. To be punished for something I had no control over and that happened before I ever met her seemed like a massive over-reaction.

I'll admit I was devastated... I'd trained and prepared for everything, so I knew my next step was a uniform fitting and start date. I was essentially waiting for the call. The silly thing is I could have ignored the letter and just updated my personal details after my start date (referencing my marriage status( and no one would be any the wiser. I purely did it on the letter just incase their check revealed that I was married and it caused problems (irony much?)

I'd imagine I'd be allowed to apply now as I'm divorced from her, but I've moved on and have no interest in going through all that again.
Click to expand...

I think there must be another offence that has come up on the vetting other than a simple drugs possession many years ago. It just doesn't make sense otherwise. I have had a presentation a from recruitment about exactly what the process is and we spoke at length about the vetting process.

Vetting is all about risk management. If your ex had other convictions she didn't tell you about that were more serious or was known to be in contact with people who are shady, then that would account for the rejection, the fact they couldn't tell you the reason and very importantly, the suggestion that you would not be allowed to apply at a later date under the current circumstances.

I'm convinced there is more to this than you know now.
 
Were you charged or given a caution?

TBH minor offences mean nothing as long as they're declared. Of course some DV checks differ between vetting departments but this thread is about SC.

Feedback is something you won't get, and appeals are usually rejected if allowed at all.
 
Moses said:
Iirc it was a warning rather than being charged or given a caution, but it was so long ago and a bit of a blur. It's very minor and I wouldn't mind declaring it if I ever needed to, but I don't know if such a thing would still be on record.
Click to expand...

I may be wrong, but you would have to be cautioned for it to be on the PNC. In any case I would declare it, but I'd be very surprised if it caused an issue, even at DV.

Vetting works very much like credit checks. There are multiple factors that affect the decision, some more than others. No one knows for sure which agencies/departments like and dislike some of the criteria they look at.
 
The type of previous offense can have a bearing on whether you get the job, SC cleared or not. For example I work at one of the Justice services for the government where SC is required. Prospective employees are rejected even if SC cleared if our own baseline check shows a past offense that goes against the 'values' of our organization. Assault or shoplifting for example.

Bottom line. cross your fingers, be honest and wait and see I'm afraid. SC clearance for our staff takes approx 6months to come through, but that could just be because Worcestershire police who do our vetting are slow.
 
Moses said:
Is there a simple tool to establish if something is probably retained or not? So basically a webpage where you select the offence/incident/whatever, and when it happened, then it tells you if that'll still be likely to be retained?

When I was 15, some 14 years ago, I was caught with some weed and had the whole fingerprinting/DNA swabbing malarkey. I presume that'll still be on the system? I don't care about that, tbh. But I think I was also given some kind of warning - I can't remember properly - and I don't know if that's still on my record, or would show up. I got a disclosure from Disclosure Scotland which showed nothing, and in the past year have had a DBS check which showed nothing, but I have no idea if it'd show up on an enhanced disclosure.
Click to expand...

It's all defined in the Management of Police Information (MoPI) requirements. That sets the retention period of records based on disposal and offence. As you may expect, I'm not aware of anywhere that makes those rules easy to understand.

If you were arrested you need to understand what your disposal was, if it was cannabis, it could be a cannabis warning (which is retained on PND nationally for a period), Penalty Notice for Disorder (would have included a fine), caution or charge - or it may simply be no further action (NFA).
 
Last edited:
Well I hope I will be OK, as a job I applied for and interviewed with today are going to make me an offer according to the recruiter. I filled in some what I can only think are SC Check documents today prior to interview.

All it wanted me to do was fill in my name, passport number and residency information.

I didn't have to declare anything.

I cant start the role for 6 weeks whilst this check is conducted. Leaves me in a predicament, as there are other roles which I am interviewing for and another one on Thu who are very keen on me.

It's dependant on a technical test, but if they too make me an offer it will come down to money.

I just want to avoid the situation where I choose the company with the SC check I wait 6 weeks and then it comes back as denied!!
 
Last edited:
Yep. Just spoke to recruiter that was indeed a standard level clearance and if that is successful I would then have to undertake an SC Clearance.

Puts me in a predicament, like I said previously as there is another company which will make me an offer probably this Thu/Fri, which I know wont need any checks.

I'm going to ask the question again, as long as I declare it what do you think is the % chance that an SC clearance will be denied for being arrested in 2001 for a 'small bag of herbal marijuana'?

Also what if I am not 100% it was 2001? I can only really remember it was in the summer after my first year of Uni. I started in 2000, so I am assuming it was 2001.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom