"I have long argued that the giving of offence, and even hate speech, should be a moral matter but not a matter for the criminal law. That is as true on the football pitch as on the streets. We should always challenge racism. We should also always challenge attacks on liberties in the guise of faux antiracism." Kenan Malik

CRB Checks

FACT (Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers) calls for repeal of Section 115 Police Act

by m8barnes on July 28, 2010 at 10:30PM

I am national secretary of FACT (Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers) http://www.factuk.org and run their help line. Virtually every day someone rings us over CRB issues affecting Enhanced Certificates of Disclosure.

At present the law allows Chief Constables to share police intelligence with prospective employers for individuals who require an enhanced certificate of disclosure,

Enhanced CRB’s are required by all teachers, care workers, health care professionals, youth workers, workers engaged in community activities with children and/or vulnerable adults/groups – vast numbers of people.

The Chief Constable has absolute discretion to share what ever information he/she feels is relevant. This could include mere gossip, information shared with the police by other agencies e.g social services, or information gathered by the police in the course of their work and irrespective of whether the prospective employer was involved in criminal activity or not.

As a result the police now routinely record the fact that an allegation was made against the prospective employee on enhanced CRBs even though they may have been cleared of any wrong doing by an employer or by a Court.

They also routinely record the fact that a person appeared before a Court even if he/she was found not guilty and was told they leave the Court with their reputation intact.

Adverse comments on a CRB basically result in that person being unemployable. What is needed is complete repeal of Section 115(7) of the Police Act 1997 or some kind of system which allows for only such information to be placed on it for a limited time (as is the case in the rehab of offenders act)and provides for a proper appeal process. At the moment all you can do is make representation about the content of the disclosure which is invariably ignored. There is no right of appeal.


For further information you might like to read the report of the Children, Schools and Families Subcommittee Report in 2009 which touched on indiscipline in schools which referred to this matter and the Home Affairs Select Committee Report on Past Abuse in Children’s Homes (on which David Cameron served) which was published in 2002. Both these reports highlight some of the injustices felt by carers and teachers on these issues.

Our organisation FACT (Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers)would be pleased to provide further information mailto:sec@factuk.org


We also recieved this email..

My Daughter was subjected to bullying during her time at secondary school, every week I had to remove my Daughter 2 – 4 times a week due to the school not dealing with the problem, and her safety being in question and on two occasions collect her from A&E. There were 11 recorded incidents of this bully attacking my Daughter in one year.

On the 21.09.2005 I was asked to collect my Daughter from school due to an incident taking place, this particular day my Daughter reacted to one of the bullies and an altercation took place. I collected my Daughter and informed the school she would not be returning until they acknowledged that there was a serious problem and they could assure me of my Daughters safety.

We left the school and returned home to discuss the matter further; I called to see my grandparents which lived around the corner of the school, we then continued our journey to my Mothers passing the school.
Whilst stuck in traffic my Daughter spotted the girl that had continually bullied her she wanted to speak with her, she jumped from the car and a physical altercation took place between my Daughter and one of her bullies.

Two days later on the 23/09/2005 I was telephoned at home to ask if I would go to the Police Station, and informed that it was to discuss the altercation that took place between my Daughter and the 13 year old female.

I arranged care for my daughter went to Worksop Police station.

On arrival I was met with PC *** (deleted by request), he asked me into an interview room and asked if I was present during the altercation. I informed him that yes I was, after parking my car.

He went on to say that if I accepted a caution he would not go out and arrest my Daughter, I asked what I would be accepting a caution for, he stated the girl had said that I had taken hold of her.

It was at this point I realised there was a very serious situation occurring and informed him that he could not arrest my daughter whilst I was in the Station, and that I would discuss anything further until a solicitor was sent for.

There were irregularities that took place during the investigations, there were no statements taken from people that were present that supported the fact that I was not involved, no statement was taken from my Daughter.

The Police Officer only submitted statements to the CPS from three witnesses & the victim the witnesses of the so called victim was two best friends and a relation, the CPS would not look at the case until the PC submitted my statement.

The CPS lawyer formed the view that the witnesses gave conflicting accounts and there was not a realistic prospect of a conviction on evidential grounds, stating that it was not in the public’s interest to charge and refused charge.

I have worked in Care/Education for 23 years with an impeccable work record, working with Children Families, vulnerable adults and the Elderly.

I recently worked for an organisation whereby I dealt with child protection issues, safeguarding, behaviour, support, empowering young people to have voice and make change. I came aware of this on my ECRB in feb 2008.

I feel the information disclosed by one person that has not been present during any of the enquiry is unfair, I find it irrelevant to disclose and excessive when I have not been charged, received a warning, caution, reprimanded or convicted. The data controller states that under section 113B (4) of the Police Act 1997, provides that the secretary of State shall request the Chief Officer to provide any information which, in the Chief Officers opinion might be relevant for the purpose described in the statement under sub section (2) and; ought to be included. I do not see how this is relevant.

We actually had to move from the area because my Daughters life was threatened she was receiving threats via text and these were shown to the police officers, they did nothing about it, one night she was saved by a passer by because of the friends of this girls attempted to attack her.

On the ECRB it states : on the 24/09/2005 was arrested on suspicion of assault occasioning actual bodily harm on a 13 year old female. After leaving school a physical altercation took place between the Victim and Ms Turner’s Daughter, which was witnessed by a number of fellow pupils. It is alleged that Ms Turner encouraged her Daughter to assault the other girl and that she took hold of the victim punched in the face and pushed into a brick wall causing her to bang her head. During interviews Ms Turner whilst admitting being present denied encouraging her Daughter to assault the other girl and totally denied touching the victim in any way.

Please consider there was no physical evidence, no medical evidence and the girl went to school the next day, notes were taken from people that stated that I did not do this but because it did not support the police officer they never took statements.


‘C’ has set up a forum for people affected and in a similar situation which can be found by going to http://www.crbforums.com/

The issue of false accusations and gossip going on peoples CRB checks is one that is very much being overlooked and affecting hundreds of thousands of people, and a subject the trade unions ought to be taking more seriously…