Level of Honesty in Security Clearance forms

**Liability** · 3 February 2009, 17:49

The shoplifting may be what keeps you from getting it.....but equally it was in 1984!

**TykeMerc** · 3 February 2009, 18:03

I'm not convinced that the Agent should have opened the sealed section, that bit is specifically for the DVA to look at and judge according to their guidelines. I realise that this isn't the question you asked, but I'm a little concerned by it.
For that matter the whole damn form is subject to strict Data Protection rules, I can't see why an Agent would have anything to do with the damn thing without your express permission, it should have been sent unopened to the Security Office of the ListX company or Ministry and then on to the DVA.

What I believe are called "spent" convictions will probably not make a huge difference, for that matter your full and frank disclosure will probably do your application far more good than harm as if they had turned up these items and you hadn't put them on the form it would have been pretty much an automatic rejection.

**scooterscot** · 3 February 2009, 18:14

Listen -

No other person should have access to a completed SC form unless that person is the security officer of the end client. If this was not the person you handed it too... well keep an eye on your credit record in the coming months.

Regarding your concerns, it's honesty there looking for. You could be tax dodging murderer as long as you don't try and hide it. Ok maybe not but you get the drift.

**BrowneIssue** · 3 February 2009, 18:19

Originally posted by djw View Post

In the form, there is a section asking for full and unconditional disclosure of past criminal activity which I filled in and sealed in a signed envelope as required. My agent opened this signed envelope (saying that they work with the SC vetting agents to help alleviate the workload and they're authorised to view this information - fine, I believe her)

Bollocks.

Some larger agencies have their own security bod who arranges the clearance with the DVA. They do NOT have access to the police files, court records, Special Branch records etc. that DVA can (probably

) access.

That is totally out of order. I would be inclined to complain to the client.

Originally posted by djw View Post

but then made measured comments about my disclosures, saying "well, it should be okay, but we'll just have to submit the application and see ..."

Complain. The implication here is that you are sort of being advised to withhold information. I would now worry whether that part of the form will be submitted by the agent.

Originally posted by djw View Post

do you think my declaration of:
<stuff>
would have an adverse affect on the vetting process?

Failure to disclose *everything* can result in a delayed process, more forms to fill in or being turned down. And when clearance is turned down, you do not get told why.

I bet that agent is now cacking themselves. I also bet the role "goes away".

Edit: I also bet the role "goes away", not because the DVA turn you down, but because the agent will 'lose' the form and never get back to you to cover up their cock-up.

**Board Game Geek** · 3 February 2009, 18:20

) a shoplifting conviction in Canada in 1984 (!!) - $200 fine
b) a formal caution *only* by Sommerset police in 2004 who confiscated certain "substances" found in my car (after I voluntarily disclosed them) on my way to Glastonbury

would have an adverse affect on the vetting process?

So basically, robbing shops and substance abuse ?

It may count against you if you are going to work in a Pharma or a Retail outlet, as they will rightfully assume you are well dodgy.

OTOH, if the job is in Parliament, you should be ok, since these are probably not seen as "convictions" but more "entry requirements".

**minestrone** · 3 February 2009, 18:23

It really is down to your hiring manager.

I worked beside someone in the police that had a previous assault charge. Know a teacher that has 4 BoP charges.

**AlfredJPruffock** · 3 February 2009, 18:25

OTOH, if the job is in Parliament, you should be ok, since these are probably not seen as "convictions" but more "entry requirements".

To the poster - your wee 'sins' are very trivial indeed - I wouldnt bother to declare them on those grounds - its ultimately your hiring manager who makes the decision anyway.

Repent and Sin no more (unless there is nobody looking) ...

**TykeMerc** · 3 February 2009, 18:28

Originally posted by minestrone View Post

It really is down to your hiring manager.

I worked beside someone in the police that had a previous assault charge. Know a teacher that has 4 BoP charges.

No it's not, SC clearance is granted (or refused) by the Defence Vetting Agency, the information on the form is confidential and nothing to do with the Client or Employment Agency.

Teachers don't generally have access to material marked as Secret or even Confidential according to UK Security requirements so they aren't subject to the same checks.

**scotspine** · 3 February 2009, 18:32

Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post

No it's not, SC clearance is granted (or refused) by the Defence Vetting Agency, the information on the form is confidential and nothing to do with the Client or Employment Agency.

Teachers don't generally have access to material marked as Secret or even Confidential according to UK Security requirements so they aren't subject to the same checks.

i agree. the info is strictly confidential and it seems that someone has not respected that.

Level of Honesty in Security Clearance forms