What this means
Start with the exact decision in front of you.
Review is not automatically available simply because time has passed. The applicable review route, minimum period and evidence of material change, new information or error should be established first.
Immediate priorities
Organise the position before responding.
Confirm the review provision and eligibility
Collect evidence of material change since barring
Address the original decision and current risk together
Detailed guidance
The procedure, evidence and possible route from here.
01
Choose the correct review route
DBS guidance describes several review circumstances. A Paragraph 18 review can be requested after the applicable minimum barring period, but permission depends on evidence of changed circumstances. A Paragraph 18A review can be considered at any time where new information, changed circumstances or DBS error makes review appropriate. A separate route can apply to some pre-September 2012 cases where the test for regulated activity would no longer be met. Keeping that question separate makes the resulting submission clearer and more reliable.
The minimum period does not operate as an expiry date, and a bar does not disappear automatically when it passes. The current guidance states periods based on age, but eligibility and the correct provision should be verified for the individual case. Obtain the original barring decision, later correspondence and any prior review decisions before applying. Repeated applications can be restricted, making a poorly evidenced premature request consequential. The record should show how this point applies, rather than asking the decision-maker to assume it.
- Identify Paragraph 18, Paragraph 18A or another applicable basis
- Treat the minimum period as eligibility, not automatic removal
- Collect the full original and review decision history
02
Prove material change or new information
A review application should compare the risk picture at barring with the evidence now available. Material can include a successful conviction appeal, treatment, specialist assessment, relationship or lifestyle change, sustained employment, conduct over time and informed testimonials. State what changed, when it changed and why it alters safeguarding risk. The passage of time is context but does not demonstrate reduced risk without supporting evidence. That distinction prevents a general explanation from being mistaken for case-specific legal advice.
For Paragraph 18A, identify the new information, change or error precisely and explain why it was unavailable or not reflected in the original decision. Avoid presenting the route as a general second chance to repeat representations. If DBS previously refused review or retained the bar, address that reasoning directly. A new report based on the same incomplete history may add little unless it genuinely advances the evidence. Any response should connect this point to the documents and decision actually under consideration.
- Compare original risk factors with the present evidence
- Date and prove every claimed change
- Address any prior refusal or retention reasons
03
Permission to review and removal are separate decisions
DBS can first decide whether the threshold for a review is met and, if it proceeds, whether continued inclusion remains appropriate. Evidence sufficient to open a review does not guarantee removal. The barred status remains in place unless DBS confirms otherwise. Keep work and volunteering decisions compliant throughout the application and do not describe the person as removed while review is pending. Keeping that question separate makes the resulting submission clearer and more reliable.
Appeal rights also depend on what DBS decided. Its guidance distinguishes a refusal to conduct a review from a decision, after review, not to remove. The Upper Tribunal route is limited and is not available in the same way for every refusal; judicial review is a different public-law process. Read the final letter closely and preserve the evidence record before selecting any challenge. The record should show how this point applies, rather than asking the decision-maker to assume it.
- Distinguish permission from the substantive removal decision
- Remain compliant while review is pending
- Identify the exact post-review decision before considering challenge
Key questions
Keep the analysis tied to this stage.
Whether the review threshold is met
What has materially changed
Whether continued barring remains appropriate
Advice is provided only by the regulated firm that accepts a matter.
Common questions
Clarifying the route without assuming the outcome.
Does a DBS bar end after the minimum period?
No. The minimum period may allow a request for permission to review. Removal requires a further DBS decision under the applicable statutory route.
Can DBS review a bar before the minimum period ends?
Its guidance describes Paragraph 18A review at any time where there is qualifying new information, changed circumstances or error. That power does not guarantee review or removal.
Connected guidance
Continue through the topic map.
Use the hub for the full sequence or choose the connected route that matches the notice.
Official sources
Check the material for this question.
Sources checked 19 September 2026. Rules change, so compare the current notice and linked official material and tell the operator if a citation or summary needs correction.