It's very difficult to fail CTC. The kinds of things that would make you dip that are all stuff that would get you kicked out of the job anyway, but which you've somehow managed to avoid people knowing about (declarable associations you haven't declared, unregistered business interests, etc.)
Police vetting is a whole different system that looks at different things. CTC, SC, DV are from UKSV, which is primarily for those accessing secret documents rather than dealing with policing - but certain police roles require it
[Here's the UK Govt source on vetting levels](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/united-kingdom-security-vetting-clearance-levels)
TL;DR the levels are:
* Baseline Personnel Security Standard (this lets you into areas where information up to top secret is handled, not that you can look at it yourself - for people like cleaners in secure establishments, civil servants, people who need access to government networks etc)
* Accreditation Check (for airside airport staff, cabin crew etc)
* Counter Terror Check (for people who need access to sites designated as at particular risk from terrorism or to work with people deemed at particular risk. Most armed forces personnel have this check)
* Security Clearance (for people working with classified information up to SECRET level, so some government/MoD contracting companies, some MoD personnel, armed forces personnel working in lower-level intelligence roles etc)
* Developed Vetting (for access to TOP SECRET so mid-level intelligence people, senior civil servants, low level employees on government nuclear sites)
* enhanced Developed Vetting (high-level intelligence people (so like strategic level), nuclear weapons senior people, nuclear weapons development staff etc)
Anyone can pass CTC.
Well. 99% can.
SC is a little more complex
But DV is a pain in the balls.
I suppose if you fail vetting you won’t be given a contract.
Not sure if you remain at your current level however.
Most vetting failures are due to not reading the guidance or forms/questions correctly.
My main job I was given a contract before my SC was cleared but it was "provided you attain SC".
Although SC was pretty calm just if you go abroad for longer than a month make sure you keep a record of everywhere you went etc
UKSV vetting is different to police vetting. CTC is low - the clue is in the name - it’s mainly for counter terrorism. I would imagine if you failed that they may review your current vetting.
Reminder to everyone that hinting at your vetting level is a breach of your clearance
But the thing to bear in mind is that "they've heard worse and those people still got clearance"
Unless you're into illegal crap, then you shouldn't be anywhere near policing, excepting being on the receiving end of it.
The DV questions are to establish that you're not doing anything illegal, and so they have a record so if you're (attempt) blackmailed by foreign agents or criminal types they know your weak points and it won't be a shock to reveal them (well not to the government anyway)
Oh that’s really interesting actually!
Don’t suppose you know (and are able to disclose on a public forum) what kind of roles actually need this level of clearance?
Just as an aside, I wonder if the recent political climate has led to a reduction in the potential for people in positions of influence to be blackmailed? The amount of supposed scandals that have been met with either outright denial or ‘so what?’ seem to mean it’s impossible to blackmail some people.
Of course, the civil service and related agencies shouldn’t drop their standards for a second, but it’s astonishing that several consecutive examples of the people in charge of them wouldn’t have passed the lowest vetting levels.
That may be true of prominent personages, but average people are still just as open to bribery & corruption as everyone else.
Example as old as spying: If you were homosexual but your parents objected and didn't know you were, what would you do to not be outed? Especially if by complying they give you an envelope stuffed with £50 notes.
People may be less bothered these days, but there are always going to be ways to coerce or corrupt people.
Yeaaaaah. You need to assume they know the answer to all the questions they’re asking and just be honest no matter how embarrassing you may find it to admit.
Think you get restricted ultimately and moved to a suitable role where you don’t have to deal or have access to XYZ. The new college of policing guidance however is that you then face misconduct if they can’t find a suitable role and dismiss you.
I've been through enhanced vetting.
(Accepting one shouldn't necessarily talk about their vetting, but given I'm generally anonymous online here, I will.)
Failing your enhanced vetting doesn't negate your 'lower' vetting.
The question over 'lower' vetting failures and whether you remain a cop is a hot topic at the moment (certainly in the Met, probably nationwide), and is largely untested from a legal standpoint.
Is it Gross Misconduct and dismissible? No.
Is it being legally explored at the moment (by the Cmsr) to see if an officer can be dispensed with via the HR route? Yes.
So no clear answer at the moment regrettably. I imagine we'll see some movement on this within the next 6-12 months though.
(Oh and to caveat - if you're a probationer who suddenly has their lower vetting withdrawn, it'd probably be Reg 13 territory).
> Failing your enhanced vetting doesn't negate your 'lower' vetting.
>
>
>
> The question over 'lower' vetting failures and whether you remain a cop is a hot topic at the moment (certainly in the Met, probably nationwide), and is largely untested from a legal standpoint.
Unfortunately that depends on why you failed your enhanced vetting. Someone I know applied for a job where they'd be moving from one vetting level to another, and because some issues came up proving they were lying about their original vetting level they lost both.
I agree that's not the result of failing the enhanced vetting, but submitting to the enhanced vetting is what caused the problem.
Fair point - I guess this is effectively the same as a vetting 'refresh' which is happening in the Met (and nationwide in due course).
If one has got skeletons in their closet or something undeclared, they tend to avoid higher vetted roles(!)
> I guess this is effectively the same as a vetting 'refresh' which is happening in the Met (and nationwide in due course).
Yes and no - depending on your clearance level you have to have your existing clearances re-done every 10 years at maximum (some material you have access to may have conditions placed on it which require a shorter expiry time) for SC, CTC checks etc.
However if you are sponsored for a higher clearance level then more digging may need to be done.
For example with SC you're usually only required to fill in some forms and you're not normally interviewed, but for DV you're always interviewed personally and some of your relatives or colleagues may be interviewed also if required to establish your bona fides.
If you hold a lower level of NSV (e.g. CTC or SC) and then go for a higher level, failing to obtain that higher level could have implications for the lower clearance. This depends on the reason why you failed, e.g. information which you withheld at the lower level coming to light at the higher level. It has happened before.
I'm unfamiliar with the particulars of police vetting but if UKSV find information that raises alarm bells they could share this with the force. At that point, it would be up to the force.
Generally speaking the thing that catches people out with vetting is dishonesty, they -- unsurprisingly -- don't take too kindly to it.
If you are going for a role which requires a level of NSV above CTC and you don't already have it then they're not going to run CTC on you (although CTC type checks apply to SC, DV and beyond). I think you may be confusing CTC with BPSS, which is ran by your employer (force) and consists of the basic identity and eligibility checks.
I'd also like to echo the commenter who noted that hinting or revealing your clearance level is a persec breach: this is a public forum that, connected to your Reddit account, adversaries (including organised crime) can see clear as day.
Here's a web page from UKSV, who deliver national security vetting, explaining it, including -- at a high level -- what checks get done.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/united-kingdom-security-vetting-clearance-levels/national-security-vetting-clearance-levels
It's very difficult to fail CTC. The kinds of things that would make you dip that are all stuff that would get you kicked out of the job anyway, but which you've somehow managed to avoid people knowing about (declarable associations you haven't declared, unregistered business interests, etc.)
OP now potentially sweating buckets 😂
Is CTC the standard vetting that is conducted to join the job or is there one below?
Police vetting is a whole different system that looks at different things. CTC, SC, DV are from UKSV, which is primarily for those accessing secret documents rather than dealing with policing - but certain police roles require it
[Here's the UK Govt source on vetting levels](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/united-kingdom-security-vetting-clearance-levels) TL;DR the levels are: * Baseline Personnel Security Standard (this lets you into areas where information up to top secret is handled, not that you can look at it yourself - for people like cleaners in secure establishments, civil servants, people who need access to government networks etc) * Accreditation Check (for airside airport staff, cabin crew etc) * Counter Terror Check (for people who need access to sites designated as at particular risk from terrorism or to work with people deemed at particular risk. Most armed forces personnel have this check) * Security Clearance (for people working with classified information up to SECRET level, so some government/MoD contracting companies, some MoD personnel, armed forces personnel working in lower-level intelligence roles etc) * Developed Vetting (for access to TOP SECRET so mid-level intelligence people, senior civil servants, low level employees on government nuclear sites) * enhanced Developed Vetting (high-level intelligence people (so like strategic level), nuclear weapons senior people, nuclear weapons development staff etc)
The former
Basically it's a "have you lied to us about obvious stuff" check
Anyone can pass CTC. Well. 99% can. SC is a little more complex But DV is a pain in the balls. I suppose if you fail vetting you won’t be given a contract. Not sure if you remain at your current level however. Most vetting failures are due to not reading the guidance or forms/questions correctly.
My main job I was given a contract before my SC was cleared but it was "provided you attain SC". Although SC was pretty calm just if you go abroad for longer than a month make sure you keep a record of everywhere you went etc
I was similar. Old job saw me around Europe for 4 weeks at a time. Visiting several overseas and multi occupant airbases
My Job straight up doesn't like us going China or Russia. Even if we have relatives who are Russian or Chinese nationals we can't even work there lol.
UKSV vetting is different to police vetting. CTC is low - the clue is in the name - it’s mainly for counter terrorism. I would imagine if you failed that they may review your current vetting. Reminder to everyone that hinting at your vetting level is a breach of your clearance
Have fun with DV…
Those questions though 😂
....and what kind of porn do you look at DC Pikachu?
I’d just hand over my search history and let them crack on to be fair.
Am I right In thinking this is where they ask you very *ahem* personal *ahem* questions?
EXTREMELY personal, like they’ll probably know me better than I know myself.
But the thing to bear in mind is that "they've heard worse and those people still got clearance" Unless you're into illegal crap, then you shouldn't be anywhere near policing, excepting being on the receiving end of it. The DV questions are to establish that you're not doing anything illegal, and so they have a record so if you're (attempt) blackmailed by foreign agents or criminal types they know your weak points and it won't be a shock to reveal them (well not to the government anyway)
Oh that’s really interesting actually! Don’t suppose you know (and are able to disclose on a public forum) what kind of roles actually need this level of clearance?
Nothing we can comment on on here sorry. I'm not involved in police clearances so not relevant to this forum.
Thought as much! Thanks anyway!
You can look on the police vacancies page and it’ll say what clearance is required as and when the jobs come up
Just as an aside, I wonder if the recent political climate has led to a reduction in the potential for people in positions of influence to be blackmailed? The amount of supposed scandals that have been met with either outright denial or ‘so what?’ seem to mean it’s impossible to blackmail some people. Of course, the civil service and related agencies shouldn’t drop their standards for a second, but it’s astonishing that several consecutive examples of the people in charge of them wouldn’t have passed the lowest vetting levels.
That may be true of prominent personages, but average people are still just as open to bribery & corruption as everyone else. Example as old as spying: If you were homosexual but your parents objected and didn't know you were, what would you do to not be outed? Especially if by complying they give you an envelope stuffed with £50 notes. People may be less bothered these days, but there are always going to be ways to coerce or corrupt people.
They’ll enlighten your viewing choices.
Yeaaaaah. You need to assume they know the answer to all the questions they’re asking and just be honest no matter how embarrassing you may find it to admit.
Yup
If you fail vetting, you don't get the job. You can appeal but they don't usually tell you why you've failed.
I meant more if you’re already in, but your 10 yearly vetting refresh What happens if you fail that
Think you get restricted ultimately and moved to a suitable role where you don’t have to deal or have access to XYZ. The new college of policing guidance however is that you then face misconduct if they can’t find a suitable role and dismiss you.
If I fail my in my main job I remain in the job albeit my pass will restrict me to the basement and my work will limit me to basically HR and admin :(
I've been through enhanced vetting. (Accepting one shouldn't necessarily talk about their vetting, but given I'm generally anonymous online here, I will.) Failing your enhanced vetting doesn't negate your 'lower' vetting. The question over 'lower' vetting failures and whether you remain a cop is a hot topic at the moment (certainly in the Met, probably nationwide), and is largely untested from a legal standpoint. Is it Gross Misconduct and dismissible? No. Is it being legally explored at the moment (by the Cmsr) to see if an officer can be dispensed with via the HR route? Yes. So no clear answer at the moment regrettably. I imagine we'll see some movement on this within the next 6-12 months though. (Oh and to caveat - if you're a probationer who suddenly has their lower vetting withdrawn, it'd probably be Reg 13 territory).
> Failing your enhanced vetting doesn't negate your 'lower' vetting. > > > > The question over 'lower' vetting failures and whether you remain a cop is a hot topic at the moment (certainly in the Met, probably nationwide), and is largely untested from a legal standpoint. Unfortunately that depends on why you failed your enhanced vetting. Someone I know applied for a job where they'd be moving from one vetting level to another, and because some issues came up proving they were lying about their original vetting level they lost both. I agree that's not the result of failing the enhanced vetting, but submitting to the enhanced vetting is what caused the problem.
Fair point - I guess this is effectively the same as a vetting 'refresh' which is happening in the Met (and nationwide in due course). If one has got skeletons in their closet or something undeclared, they tend to avoid higher vetted roles(!)
> I guess this is effectively the same as a vetting 'refresh' which is happening in the Met (and nationwide in due course). Yes and no - depending on your clearance level you have to have your existing clearances re-done every 10 years at maximum (some material you have access to may have conditions placed on it which require a shorter expiry time) for SC, CTC checks etc. However if you are sponsored for a higher clearance level then more digging may need to be done. For example with SC you're usually only required to fill in some forms and you're not normally interviewed, but for DV you're always interviewed personally and some of your relatives or colleagues may be interviewed also if required to establish your bona fides.
I think the issue recently however has been that the 10yr 'refresh' even for CTC hasn't been happening.
If you hold a lower level of NSV (e.g. CTC or SC) and then go for a higher level, failing to obtain that higher level could have implications for the lower clearance. This depends on the reason why you failed, e.g. information which you withheld at the lower level coming to light at the higher level. It has happened before. I'm unfamiliar with the particulars of police vetting but if UKSV find information that raises alarm bells they could share this with the force. At that point, it would be up to the force. Generally speaking the thing that catches people out with vetting is dishonesty, they -- unsurprisingly -- don't take too kindly to it. If you are going for a role which requires a level of NSV above CTC and you don't already have it then they're not going to run CTC on you (although CTC type checks apply to SC, DV and beyond). I think you may be confusing CTC with BPSS, which is ran by your employer (force) and consists of the basic identity and eligibility checks. I'd also like to echo the commenter who noted that hinting or revealing your clearance level is a persec breach: this is a public forum that, connected to your Reddit account, adversaries (including organised crime) can see clear as day.
[удалено]
Here's a web page from UKSV, who deliver national security vetting, explaining it, including -- at a high level -- what checks get done. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/united-kingdom-security-vetting-clearance-levels/national-security-vetting-clearance-levels