DBS Disclosure Issue
I have three criminal convictions from a difficult period in my life 27 years ago. One of those convictions remains "unspent" so will always show up on a Basic DBS check. In general, have found it to not hinder my 25 year unblemished career as an IT contractor. While I normally just don't apply for roles requesting DBS checks, it's clear that such requests are rapidly becoming the norm.
I recently applied for a role via an agency, was interviewed alongside three other candidates, then offered the 9-month position. Only at that point and prior to signing the contract was I informed that a basic DBS check would be carried out. To avoid wasting everyone's time, I emailed the agency to state that I felt I would not be their best choice of candidate due to my convictions and offered a full personal resumé as to the circumstances. The agency replied sympathetically and offered to discuss the matter with their client company. A day later, the agency called me to say that, according to their client (a management consultancy who I will refer to as Client A), the conviction would be unlikely to be a problem as it was 27 years ago and irrelevant to the work I would be doing while contracted. I was also thanked for my honesty in disclosing my past history. On that basis, I was forwarded a contract between my limited company and the agency - which I signed and returned. I was also given written assurance by the agency that, in view of my advance disclosure, I should continue to complete and return any security-based questionnaires (including the request for a formal DBS check). The clear inference was that such matters would be a mere formality and simply placed on file for the contract duration.
Two days before my start date I learned that Client A would be sub-contracting me out to a defence-related organisation (Client B). Mindful of the increased likelihood of additional security formalities, I emailed my agency to seek their continued re-assurance from their client that no vetting issues would be encountered. I received an emailed reply that all was still in order and to simply go ahead and complete any requested formalities.
Four days ago, at 5pm, and after two months of diligent, well-received work, I was called into an office at Client A and told that I had been denied security clearance. No details were offered as to why and the interviewer did not request any from me. However, I was informed that "...because of the need..." for Client A "...to align its security policies with Client B...", I was being given ten calendar days' notice in line with the terms and conditions of my contract. I was then told that I would be expected to work up to the end of that period and would, of course, be paid. For what it was worth, I explained the background of the assurances that I had been previously given and that my overriding aim in disclosing my past had been to precisely avoid the very situation which had now occurred.
Overnight, I forwarded the thread of emails which had passed between myself and my agency and the following day I was emailed by the same person to advise that I was to :
Meanwhile, no acceptance of responsibility for the assurances I had been previously given nor an admission that whoever gave those assurances had done so without authority, was given to me.
In conclusion, this experience for both myself and my family has caused untold distress. Putting aside the shame in having events of 27 years ago feel like it happened just yesterday, the problem I see is that my contract was with the agency, not Client A or B. The agency acted in best faith upon the assurances given to it by Client A, Meanwhile, Client A (either of its own accord or to maintain an ongoing business relationship with Client B) chose to distance itself from any assurances given by one or more of its employees as to my conviction history and is now seeking to prevent the exact chain of events being exposed.
Any advice pertaining to my legal position (if any exists) would be gratefully received.
I recently applied for a role via an agency, was interviewed alongside three other candidates, then offered the 9-month position. Only at that point and prior to signing the contract was I informed that a basic DBS check would be carried out. To avoid wasting everyone's time, I emailed the agency to state that I felt I would not be their best choice of candidate due to my convictions and offered a full personal resumé as to the circumstances. The agency replied sympathetically and offered to discuss the matter with their client company. A day later, the agency called me to say that, according to their client (a management consultancy who I will refer to as Client A), the conviction would be unlikely to be a problem as it was 27 years ago and irrelevant to the work I would be doing while contracted. I was also thanked for my honesty in disclosing my past history. On that basis, I was forwarded a contract between my limited company and the agency - which I signed and returned. I was also given written assurance by the agency that, in view of my advance disclosure, I should continue to complete and return any security-based questionnaires (including the request for a formal DBS check). The clear inference was that such matters would be a mere formality and simply placed on file for the contract duration.
Two days before my start date I learned that Client A would be sub-contracting me out to a defence-related organisation (Client B). Mindful of the increased likelihood of additional security formalities, I emailed my agency to seek their continued re-assurance from their client that no vetting issues would be encountered. I received an emailed reply that all was still in order and to simply go ahead and complete any requested formalities.
Four days ago, at 5pm, and after two months of diligent, well-received work, I was called into an office at Client A and told that I had been denied security clearance. No details were offered as to why and the interviewer did not request any from me. However, I was informed that "...because of the need..." for Client A "...to align its security policies with Client B...", I was being given ten calendar days' notice in line with the terms and conditions of my contract. I was then told that I would be expected to work up to the end of that period and would, of course, be paid. For what it was worth, I explained the background of the assurances that I had been previously given and that my overriding aim in disclosing my past had been to precisely avoid the very situation which had now occurred.
Overnight, I forwarded the thread of emails which had passed between myself and my agency and the following day I was emailed by the same person to advise that I was to :
- Cease work immediately
- Return all company equipment and passes
- Not divulge details of what had transpired to colleagues either at Client A or Client B.
Meanwhile, no acceptance of responsibility for the assurances I had been previously given nor an admission that whoever gave those assurances had done so without authority, was given to me.
In conclusion, this experience for both myself and my family has caused untold distress. Putting aside the shame in having events of 27 years ago feel like it happened just yesterday, the problem I see is that my contract was with the agency, not Client A or B. The agency acted in best faith upon the assurances given to it by Client A, Meanwhile, Client A (either of its own accord or to maintain an ongoing business relationship with Client B) chose to distance itself from any assurances given by one or more of its employees as to my conviction history and is now seeking to prevent the exact chain of events being exposed.
Any advice pertaining to my legal position (if any exists) would be gratefully received.
Comment