We’re looking for examples where DBS ‘filtering’ doesn’t go far enough
Following on from the recent Supreme Court judgement in T, we’re looking to pull together examples of where the DBS ‘filtering’ process doesn’t go far enough.
In short, the Supreme Court ruling applied specifically to the system in place before May 2013, when no filtering process existed. Since then, the DBS has introduced a system set up by the Home Office, but we know from our Helpline, and from the results to a Freedom of Information request that we made, that the system doesn’t go far enough.
As a result, we’re continuing to push for the Government to widen the filtering provisions. As part of this work, we’re looking for examples that show that the filtering system introduced in May 2013 doesn’t go far enough.
We’ve identified four key areas of the system that rules a lot of people out of benefitting from it, which are on the borderline of the existing rules. Types of examples we’re looking for:
- If you have two (or more) ‘offences’ as part of one conviction
- If you have two separate convictions
- If you were cautioned or conviction of certain offences that are not eligible
- If you received a short prison sentence or a suspended sentence
To find out more about the types of examples we’re looking for, and for details of how to send us your examples, click here.
Authors of posts
- Winter 2016/17 Activities Newsletter Posted on: Jan 4th, 2017
Today we've published our winter 2016/17 activities…
- Monthly update - December 2016 Posted on: Jan 3rd, 2017
We've just published our update for December…
- Looking back at some key moments in 2016 Posted on: Dec 20th, 2016
With the Christmas break almost here and 2016 coming to an end, I…
- Next 'criminal record disclosure' training - 22 February 2017 - Book now! Posted on: Dec 20th, 2016
Our popular 'criminal record disclosure' training workshops…
- Employers should be more open to employing people with convictions Posted on: Dec 19th, 2016