DBS Takes No Further Action in Minded-to-Bar Case Involving Assistant Head Teacher in Portsmouth

Outcome: The Disclosure and Barring Service took no further action and did not place our client on the Children’s Barred List.

An experienced Assistant Head Teacher in Portsmouth faced possible inclusion on the Children’s Barred List following convictions for battery and harassment arising from incidents involving his wife. The consequences for his career were potentially severe because a barring decision would have prevented him from undertaking regulated activity with children.

We prepared detailed representations which accepted the seriousness of the proven offending while addressing the issue the DBS still had to determine, namely whether the evidence showed that our client now presented a safeguarding risk to children which made barring appropriate and proportionate.

Following consideration of the representations and supporting evidence, the DBS closed the case with no further action.

Why was the DBS considering barring our client?

Our client had worked for many years in education and youth sport and was an experienced Assistant Head Teacher. He was referred to the DBS after convictions for battery and harassment arising from incidents involving his wife.

The DBS also relied on wider allegations of domestic abuse. Our client accepted responsibility for the offences to which he had pleaded guilty. He did not seek to minimise that conduct. However, he disputed broader allegations which he said were vague and insufficiently supported.

This distinction was important. The representations addressed the proven offending directly while challenging disputed assertions that went beyond the conduct established by the convictions.

Our approach to the minded-to-bar representations

The case was not presented on the basis that serious offending should be overlooked. Instead, the representations focused on what the offending, viewed alongside the later evidence, showed about present and future safeguarding risk.

We relied on evidence that the offending had occurred during an exceptional deterioration in our client’s mental health and within a specific domestic context. After the offences, he engaged extensively with treatment and psychological therapy, developed practical coping strategies and successfully completed the Building Better Relationships programme.

The supporting evidence demonstrated insight, remorse and reflection. It also showed the practical steps he had taken to address the circumstances and behaviour that had contributed to the offending.

Why future safeguarding risk was central

A criminal conviction can plainly be relevant to DBS barring proceedings. However, in a discretionary barring case the DBS must still assess risk and decide whether inclusion on a barred list is appropriate and proportionate.

Our representations invited the DBS to consider what harmful behaviour our client was realistically at risk of repeating, whether that risk translated into a safeguarding risk to children, and what weight should be given to the treatment, remediation and protective factors that were now in place.

That analysis was particularly important because the offending arose in a domestic setting, while our client’s professional history involved many years of working with children without professional safeguarding concerns.

Professional history and character evidence

Our client’s long record of working with children formed an important part of the overall picture. The evidence did not identify professional safeguarding concerns arising from that work.

We also submitted character references from people who knew him personally and professionally, including individuals with safeguarding experience. They described the offending as out of character, confirmed the positive changes they had observed and reported no safeguarding concerns in his work with children.

Taken together, the treatment evidence, insight, remediation, professional history and character material supported the argument that barring was not necessary to manage a future risk to children.

Outcome: DBS took no further action

The DBS closed the case with no further action. Our client was not placed on the Children’s Barred List and was not prohibited from undertaking regulated activity with children.

For an experienced education professional whose career depended on being able to work with children, the outcome was critical.

The case also demonstrates that receiving a minded-to-bar letter does not mean that a final barring decision has already been made. Properly focused representations can address the facts relied upon by the DBS, disputed allegations, rehabilitation and remediation, professional history, safeguarding evidence and the assessment of future risk.

What does this case show?

This case illustrates the importance of presenting a balanced and evidence-based response to a DBS minded-to-bar letter. Where offending is admitted or proven, credibility may depend on confronting it directly rather than attempting to minimise it. The representations can then address what has changed, what protective factors are now in place and whether the evidence supports a current or future safeguarding risk.

Here, the strongest feature was the cumulative picture: responsibility for the proven offences was accepted, broader disputed allegations were challenged, substantial treatment and remediation were evidenced, and a long professional history without safeguarding concerns supported the case against barring.

Comment from Jared McNally

“The serious conduct was not minimized.  Our client accepted responsibility for the offences. The key issue was what the evidence showed about risk now. We focused on his treatment, insight and remediation, his long professional record working with children, and the absence of safeguarding concerns in that work. The DBS ultimately took no further action.”

Jared McNally, Clifford Johnston & Co

Specialist DBS barring solicitors

Clifford Johnston & Co advises teachers, healthcare professionals, carers and others facing DBS barring proceedings, including responses to minded-to-bar and intended-to-bar letters.

If you have received a DBS letter and your career or ability to undertake regulated activity is at risk, our DBS Solicitors can advise on the evidence and prepare detailed representations addressing the allegations, future risk and whether barring is appropriate and proportionate.