How to dispute a mistake on a DBS certificate

A DBS certificate can be wrong in several different ways. A name or date of birth may be incorrect. A conviction may belong to someone else. A conviction detail may be recorded inaccurately. An Enhanced certificate may include locally held police information that the applicant says is irrelevant or should not have been disclosed. The correct route depends on the type of certificate and the part being challenged. The employer has a separate task: keep the recruitment decision fair and safe while the issue is checked.

The current GOV.UK dispute service says mistakes on Standard or Enhanced certificates should normally be reported within three months of the certificate date. The DBS dispute-form guidance, updated in September 2026, explains which sections to complete. A Basic certificate uses a different route. A dispute is also different from an appeal against a DBS barring decision and from an ordinary complaint about customer service. Start by choosing the right problem rather than sending sensitive details to every address you can find.

This guide shows what an applicant should preserve, when an employer or licensing authority may have a legitimate interest in raising a dispute, how an Independent Monitor review fits into some Enhanced disputes, and how to avoid treating an unresolved allegation as an established fact. It does not decide whether a particular disclosure should be removed. DBS, the police and where applicable the Independent Monitor make those decisions under the relevant law and guidance.

Identify the certificate and the exact problem

Read the certificate itself and check its level, issue date, certificate number, identity details and the information at issue. Record the discrepancy in a short, factual statement. “The conviction belongs to another person” is a different allegation from “The conviction is mine but the date is wrong.” “The police information is accurate but irrelevant to this role” is different again. A clear description helps the applicant select the right process and helps the employer avoid misinterpreting what is disputed.

The DBS form collection expressly says its certificate dispute form is for Standard and Enhanced checks, not Basic checks. The Basic applicant guide says a Basic certificate holder can contact DBS about incorrect personal details, incorrect conviction details or a conviction that is not theirs. Do not send a Basic challenge on a Standard and Enhanced form because it looks like the closest available document.

Check whether the problem is actually in the application submitted before the certificate was issued. If the employer or Registered Body entered the wrong name or address, DBS can still explain the correction process, but the organisation should also examine its identity verification and submission records. The DBS employer guidance warns against amending an applicant's form without their knowledge and agreement. A correction to future processes matters because another inaccurate application could reproduce the same problem.

If the person received a certificate they never applied for, use the separate DBS unexpected certificate guidance. An unexpected certificate may indicate an address error or misuse of personal information. It should not be treated merely as a typo in a legitimate application. Do not open a sealed letter addressed to someone else, and contact DBS promptly through its current official channel.

Act promptly, and understand the three-month window

For a Standard or Enhanced certificate, GOV.UK asks applicants to report a mistake within three months of the date printed on the certificate. Record that date when the certificate arrives. An applicant should not delay because a recruiter has not yet made a final decision, or because the certificate is being discussed internally. A registered organisation or licensing authority can also have a legitimate interest in accuracy, but should talk to the applicant and avoid treating the information as its own unrestricted data.

The Home Office statutory disclosure guidance says DBS advises applicants to raise disputes over information in an Enhanced criminal record certificate within three months. It also says an out-of-time dispute should still be considered where the applicant has a valid reason for delay and the role remains available. This is a specific provision in the disclosure guidance, not a promise that every late case will be accepted. Anyone outside the normal window should contact DBS immediately, explain the circumstances and ask which route is open. A new certificate application may be needed if the original role or licence application has moved on.

Keep the timing separate from employment decisions. A three-month dispute window is not the time an employer must wait before making any decision, nor does filing a dispute automatically make a certificate invalid for all purposes. The employer needs a documented, proportionate decision about the role and the unresolved information. In safeguarding-sensitive work it may need temporary duties or supervision; in other work it may be possible to defer a final decision. Legal and sector advice is important where a barred-list result or statutory prohibition is involved.

Use the right sections for Standard and Enhanced mistakes

The current DBS dispute guidance says a personal-detail error can be raised by calling DBS customer services or completing Section A of the certificate dispute form. A dispute about criminal record information uses the relevant part of Section B. The form also has sections for barring records and locally held police information. Section E asks for the reasons and supporting evidence for every dispute, so follow the current checklist in full. The applicant should use the latest form linked from GOV.UK and follow its checklist, rather than a saved older PDF with an obsolete postal address.

Describe the disputed entry precisely. If the record belongs to another person, say so and identify the entry. If a conviction date or disposal is wrong, identify the detail and the evidence available. If the issue concerns local police information on an Enhanced certificate, explain the claimed error, irrelevance or reason it ought not to be included. Avoid publishing a photograph of the certificate on a social network or placing it in an ordinary support ticket to a software provider. The official form and DBS instructions are the proper channels for sensitive supporting material.

The form guidance's checklist refers to identity details, signatures, a photograph and specific supporting documents for certain overseas-offence disputes. These requirements depend on the section selected. A person who is unsure should use the current official instructions or call DBS rather than sending excessive personal data “just in case”. DBS may work with police forces or other record holders to investigate; a recruiting organisation cannot itself delete a police record from the certificate.

The September 2026 form guidance says a dispute can be raised by the applicant or someone with a legitimate interest in certificate accuracy, such as a countersignatory, employer or licensing authority. This does not make the employer the owner of the applicant's certificate. It should involve the applicant, explain the basis for the concern and use the least sensitive information needed. A person disputing their own information can contact DBS directly, even if an employer first spotted the apparent mistake.

Basic certificate errors use the Basic route

A Basic certificate has a different scope and a different dispute process. The DBS Basic applicant guide tells applicants to contact DBS if personal information is wrong, conviction details are incorrect or a conviction belongs to someone else. The Standard and Enhanced AF15 dispute form should not be used for Basic certificates. The applicant can use the current DBS helpline or Basic account guidance to find the appropriate steps.

Before asserting that a conviction should not appear on a Basic certificate, check whether the dispute concerns factual inaccuracy, identity or the application of rehabilitation rules. A genuine conviction can still be incorrectly shown if the legal disclosure rules were applied wrongly; a certificate can also accurately show a conviction the applicant hoped would be spent. The precise reason matters. The Basic DBS guide explains what a Basic certificate is designed to show, while DBS handles the actual correction request.

An employer should not promise a Basic applicant that an unwanted entry will be removed, or label the applicant dishonest because they disagree with disclosure. It can ask the applicant to explain the discrepancy and may obtain lawful specialist advice. The decision should account for the duties, the information actually known and the status of any dispute. Do not demand a different, higher check to “settle” a Basic dispute unless the role is legally eligible for that level.

Enhanced police information and the Independent Monitor

An Enhanced certificate may include locally held police information that a chief officer considers relevant and appropriate to disclose. The applicant may challenge whether the information is correct or whether it should be included. The Home Office statutory disclosure guidance sets the framework for police disclosure decisions. A dispute over relevance is not the same as saying the event never happened. Be explicit about which point is contested.

According to the GOV.UK dispute process, DBS works with the police on a challenge. If the police do not agree there is an error, an objection that information is irrelevant to the position or should not be included may be referred to the Independent Monitor. The applicant must first raise the dispute with DBS. They cannot simply skip to the Independent Monitor as an alternative first application. If the Independent Monitor agrees, the Enhanced certificate will be corrected.

The role matters when arguing relevance. Information that might be considered for one position may be inappropriate for another. The applicant should accurately describe the position applied for and why the disclosure is disputed, without assuming that every non-conviction allegation must disappear. The employer should not act as the appeal tribunal. It should tell the applicant what suitability concern it is considering, give a fair opportunity to explain where appropriate, and make a lawful decision about the specific work.

The Independent Monitor route described here concerns specified Enhanced certificate disclosures. It is not a general appeal from an employer's recruitment outcome, a shortcut for Basic certificate corrections, or an appeal from a DBS decision to bar someone. The DBS overview of disputes and barring appeals separates those processes. If a barring decision is at issue, seek the current barring review and appeal guidance rather than using a certificate-content form as the whole response.

When identity needs to be resolved with fingerprints

If an applicant says that all or some criminal record information on a Standard or Enhanced certificate belongs to another person, DBS may need a reliable way to distinguish the records. The current form guidance says fingerprint consent is requested for the relevant Section B identity categories. DBS aims to resolve disputes without fingerprints where possible, but says it may be unable to resolve a case if necessary consent is refused.

The applicant should read the consent section carefully. The guidance says fingerprints may be checked against police records and may also be used in speculative searches. It also explains when a photograph may help resolve identity and what consent is needed for an emailed form. If needed, police contact the person to arrange a station appointment, and identification documents may be required. An employer should not take fingerprints itself, tell the worker that giving them is automatically mandatory in every dispute, or attempt to infer guilt from the request. Fingerprinting here is an identity-resolution step managed through DBS and police procedures.

Where a person is concerned about the scope of consent, direct them to DBS and independent legal advice before they sign. A manager cannot answer detailed police retention or use questions from a recruiting spreadsheet. The organisation can record that a dispute is pending and review access to sensitive duties, but it should not store biometric material or a copy of the full certificate without a specific lawful basis.

A changed Update Service result is a different problem

The DBS dispute page tells subscribers who want to dispute an Update Service certificate change to call customer services for the relevant forms. An online status result is not the text of the new certificate. The employer should not guess what changed, assume the person committed an offence, or claim that “DBS failed” because the status is no longer current. It should follow the DBS Update Service employer guide and, where needed, arrange a new eligible application and review the new certificate.

An applicant may dispute the contents of a new certificate. The employer guidance says DBS will not issue a copy to a Registered Body until 28 days after a dispute is resolved under the circumstances described in that guide. This is not a new general deadline for filing a dispute or an authority to retain a copy of a worker's disclosure. Keep the original certificate, status check, new application and content dispute as separate events in the case record.

A status check requires the person's consent and the legal entitlement to check the same level and workforce. It does not reveal the underlying change to the employer. The employer must decide what interim steps are proportionate for the role. It may need safeguarding restrictions, a review of suitability or a decision to wait for the corrected certificate. It should not tell colleagues the content of an unverified allegation. The Update Service guide owns the normal status-check mechanics; this page owns the error and dispute path.

What an employer should do while a dispute is open

Confirm the person's identity and the certificate's level and date. Ask which entry is disputed and whether the applicant has contacted DBS, while avoiding a demand for unnecessary intimate detail. Record the date and source of the concern, the applicant's explanation, any evidence offered, the current duties and the safeguarding risk. Limit access to the case. A certificate may contain criminal-offence information even where the person says it is wrong. The record-keeping guide addresses handling and retention.

Do not promise that a dispute automatically suspends recruitment, and do not promise that it must be ignored until DBS finishes. Neither blanket rule follows from the DBS process. The organisation should assess the actual work, any legal bar, the nature of the information, reliability, relevance, time elapsed, evidence from the applicant and the status of the DBS investigation. A school, care provider, licensing authority or ordinary employer may have different safeguarding duties and sector rules. Escalate to the designated safeguarding and legal advisers where necessary.

If a person is on a barred list and the role is regulated activity, the legal restrictions require immediate attention. An employer cannot put the person into barred work while awaiting a routine certificate correction as if the question were a harmless spelling mistake. Conversely, a disputed name, unrelated conviction or contested police narrative should not be broadcast through the organisation. Use temporary controls that match the risk, maintain a fair process and document the reason for the decision.

When DBS issues a corrected certificate or confirms the original, revisit the employment decision. Check the actual document and identity rather than relying on a verbal message that “it has been fixed”. Update the case record with the outcome and remove unnecessary interim notes under the retention policy. If the recruitment opportunity has ended, be transparent about what happened and avoid retaining disclosure data merely because it is already in a shared folder.

Five examples of a useful response

The applicant's middle name is misspelled. They can contact DBS or complete Section A of the Standard or Enhanced form. The employer should check whether its own submitted application contained the typo. If it did, improve identity validation for future applications. It should not speculate that the person has a different identity from a single spelling error without other evidence.

A conviction belongs to someone else. The applicant should raise a records dispute promptly and identify the entry. DBS may ask for fingerprint consent to distinguish records. The employer can consider proportionate interim duties and should not treat the disputed entry as a proven conviction of the applicant. It should document its decision and return to it when DBS responds.

The applicant accepts the event but disputes an Enhanced police narrative. They should state whether the issue is accuracy, relevance to the role or inclusion. The police consider the dispute through DBS; specified objections may reach the Independent Monitor if the police do not agree. The employer should assess the role-specific risk fairly and should not tell the applicant to “appeal directly” to the Independent Monitor before using DBS.

A Basic certificate lists an incorrect conviction date. The applicant should use the Basic DBS contact route, not the Standard and Enhanced AF15 form. The employer should verify the type of certificate before handing out a form. If a higher-level check is not legally available, it cannot order Enhanced merely to see a different answer.

An Update Service status shows a change. The employer should follow DBS's status-result process and consider a new check where appropriate. The result does not describe the change. If the new certificate's content is disputed, the applicant can use the certificate dispute route. The employer should separate the Update Service event, new certificate and any correction in its record.

Keep dispute records factual and private

A useful file note includes the certificate type and date, the exact field or entry challenged, the date DBS was contacted, the applicant's explanation, any temporary role decision, the review owner and the outcome. It need not include a scan of the entire certificate or a shared copy of police information. Limit access to people who need it for recruitment, safeguarding, licensing or legal review. Follow the organisation's criminal-offence-data and retention rules.

Avoid labels such as “failed DBS”, “DBS clear” or “conviction removed” until the actual outcome is known. DBS issues the certificate; the employer or licensing authority makes a separate suitability decision. A corrected certificate may change the facts available for that decision, but it does not retrospectively decide whether an employer's earlier process was fair. If a dispute exposes a recurring data-entry problem, improve identity and application procedures as well as correcting the individual case.

A restricted case record can help an employer track when a dispute was raised, who owns the interim decision and when the outcome should be reviewed. Complys describes document records and reminders, but a buyer should confirm how those features fit a process involving sensitive criminal-record data. This article does not present the platform as a DBS dispute service, police data feed, fingerprint handler or automated suitability decision-maker. A dispute-route checklist could direct a reader by certificate level and error type to the current GOV.UK instructions without collecting the certificate contents or predicting an appeal outcome.