How I Clear My Name From Previous Arrest Without Conviction

[simon202]

Hi, A year ago I was in a dispute with a neighbour that went on for 2 years, during that time I was subjected to numerous unfounded allegations aimed at me all to do with every keyword ( she studied law) like aggression. Racism and against her religion. None of which were true. Very long story short I was arrested when coming back from a night out. She had lied and i was arrested. Incredibly I was charged but a few days before the court it was thrown out, as all my other neighbors came forward to state the truth. Although I have no conviction I will still have the arrest on my record and feel this is unfair as I am planning on working with children but sure it will show on my CRB so will affect my chances with getting a job. Is there any way I can have this arrest removed from my record? Or anything I can else I can do. Any help is greatly appreciated.

[Peter Pedant]

currently going thro a bit of this myself - a tenant doesnt want to pay rent and is screaming harassment...

If you have been charged there wer two ways - dropping the charges quietly and entering a formal not guilty verdict.

The advantage of the second is that they cant be resurrected.

In terms of de-arresting - the view I think is that it happened and was recorded and so cant be unrecorded. AS it occurred as a fact - as also the dropping of the charges were a fact.....

So I pretty sure not. I dont know if the arrest shows up....I should know - I have seen enough CRB checks

How did it all end ? I would have thought that seeing you 'let off' and 'getting away with it' would have enraged her further ....

[Sycamore3House]

I always thought a CRB was to verify you are who you say you are & to check for any convictions only.

[New Judge]

No that is not so, certainly as far as Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Checks (which is what CRB checks are now called). "Locally held" information can also be included in the disclosure. This is an extract from the latest guidance on the scheme:

===========================================
What kind of information can be considered for disclosure?

An Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (EDBS) check can include Convictions, Cautions, Warnings and Reprimands all of which are, usually, disclosed automatically, as per the legislation, after old & minor records have been filtered and removed. But that is not all: an Enhanced Certificate can go further than that. The courts have considered just what the authors
intended by those words and concluded that 'any information‘ can include (but is not limited to)

- incidents for which individuals were never arrested, charged or prosecuted

- incidents for which individuals were found Not Guilty in a court of law (in certain circumstances)

- incidents which were dealt with other bodies other than the police (such as Local Authorities in their disciplinary processes; employers; schools; hospitals etc.)

- third party information

- information about people other than the applicant

Many people believe that only criminal convictions can be disclosed, but the legislation does not limit police in this way. It is also the case that, even if a person was acquitted of all charges (found Not Guilty), information may still be disclosed if the Chief Officer believes that it passes the required tests
==================================================

Jobs that involve caring for, supervising or being in sole charge of children (or vulnerable adults) call for an enhanced DBS check to be made and it is very likely that the sort of information simon refers to will be disclosed in that check. As Peter says, there is no way to remove such information from police records as it is a matter of fact.

There is an appeals process if the applicant believes that there has either been a mistake made or the applicant believes that information has been disclosed that should not have been:

https://www.gov.uk/disclosure-barring-service-check/appeals-and-disputes

However, although I have not checked, there are bound to be precedents where the sort of stuff simon mentions has been challenged. My view, looking at the latest guidance, is that such challenges are unlikely to succeed.

[simon202]

Thanks for all your answers. Peter about 3-4 days before the court date, after I had 5 neighbors statements to say they were coming to court because they had witnessed me being harassed instead of the other way round. The CPS could see there wasn't enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, so they decided to drop the case. I feel for you peter and its scary how one person can just lie and suddenly you are in a police drama that is stuck with you on record, for what seems to be the rest of our lives. I do feel it should be struck off the record if there is no proof and no conviction. I hope it all goes well for you and thank you to newjudge I understand and will probably have to change careers.

[simon202]

Oh as for neighbor she had moved a few weeks before it was dropped. Great timing as she would have put me through hell for that. Although I would have loved to have seen her face when she found out :)

[New Judge]

As you can see from the guidance, simon, whether there is proof or a conviction is not the issue. You were arrested and charged (however unjust that may seem) and that is a matter of fact and on the record. It is those facts that may be disclosed and those which may jeopardise any job applications you may make.

Of course, it is not necessarily the case that these facts will place you on the "barred" lists. You should read the rest of the guidance carefully as it gives a lot more information on the topic than I can provide here.

[themas]

NJ Based on what you say, I would suggest that what is wrong here is the reach of the legislation. I know of a somewhat similar case, where someone was arrested purely on false malicious allegations, bailed repeatedly for months & eventually told that no action would be taken. I assume that would also come up on a DBS check.

In my view this type of case should not be revealed - in fact I question whether they should be allowed to remain on record after a fairly short period. I also question whether the police practice of arresting at the outset in such cases is right - could they not question (under caution if necessary) without arresting - or would that come up on a DBS check as well?

[Peter Pedant]

I was "doing" PINs - police information notices - see my entry above.
These are doled out to victims of accusations of harassment.
Common for them to say - why havent you listened to my side of the story?
Acknowledged to be extra-statutory

and it may go on your CRB - under 'other'

No appeal against its award - like 'come on you havent heard my side of the story, because you cant be a+sed to investigate'
and since the PIN occurred, cant be scrubbed from my CRB

[I'm retired]