Yep but they live with you for life on a DBS check, and you know that we brought up in a court of law if anything else happens to be against your favor
1. That is one reason why the rules were changed to reduce the level of recoding
2. It would only be disclosed on an enhanced DBS check, not basic or standard. This also applies to all other information the police have on you, not just NCHIs. This is just like the rules for disclosing something like a caution issued to someone in your household, an aquittal, allegations made against you, parking and speeding tickets etc.
"Non-crime information can be disclosed on an enhanced DBS check – which is limited to high-risk positions like teachers and carers – but only with the approval of a chief officer. The chief officer must have regard to statutory guidance issued by the Home Office and consider whether the applicant should be allowed to make representations before any information is disclosed."
If they're turning over all information the police have it makes sense this gets turned over... Or do you want the police to not have any record they spoke to you, so they'll come tomorrow and say the same thing again, and again, and again?
So what metadata would be appropriate? Just an incident regarding this person was reported? For a hate incident regarding this person was reported? That could easily make things worse as the risk is that people looking at the check would assume the worst.
Example H above is in my view a good example of something should be recorded. A single incident is not a crime, but repeating that conduct could constitute a criminal harassment.
2. It would only be disclosed on an enhanced DBS check, not basic or standard. This also applies to all other information the police have on you, not just NCHIs. This is just like the rules for disclosing something like a caution issued to someone in your household, an aquittal, allegations made against you, parking and speeding tickets etc.
"Non-crime information can be disclosed on an enhanced DBS check – which is limited to high-risk positions like teachers and carers – but only with the approval of a chief officer. The chief officer must have regard to statutory guidance issued by the Home Office and consider whether the applicant should be allowed to make representations before any information is disclosed."
https://www.college.police.uk/article/protecting-freedom-exp...
It is illegal to request a higher level of check than the guidance allows for a particular role.