This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more
A candidate claimed a degree he did not have. The certificate he sent us carried a student number that belonged to a stranger on LinkedIn.
Read Blog
A candidate sent a genuine degree certificate in a name one letter from her own. Nothing on the page was wrong, and only the university could say whose it was.
A candidate returned his criminal record certificate in a day. It was dated five days before we asked for it, and the police database said it had expired.
The latest Verification Chronicles entry, “The Corrupt Constable,” recounts the story of a police officer caught stealing from a vulnerable person — and later exposed during a background check while applying for a finance role. The case highlights serious issues of trust and accountability within law enforcement, illustrating why independent screening and thorough vetting are essential to maintaining integrity across all sectors.
A recent real-world case revealed how a convicted sex offender was mistakenly hired as a supermarket delivery driver due to multiple process failures — from a missed disclosure on the application form to a delayed update on the Police National Computer. The incident underscores the importance of vigilance, accurate data handling, and robust verification systems to ensure hiring safety and maintain public trust.
Did you hear the one about the candidate who claimed to have been a Shop Manager… while applying for a role with a background screening company? Neither had we… until it happened to us! This edition of the Verification Chronicles takes a twist, focusing not on a case we encountered for a client, but one that hit closer to home. Yes, even a background screening company isn’t immune to attempts at deception.
In Alan Moore’s seminal 1987 graphic novel Watchmen, there’s a recurring question: “Who watches the Watchmen?”—derived from the Latin phrase Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?. Within the story’s context, it refers to costumed vigilantes who operate above the law. Translated into the realm of work, though, it raises a more corporate conundrum: who’s holding the “boss” to account? If we assume “the boss” is the authority who can “do what they want,” what checks and balances exist to ensure they abide by the same rules they impose on everyone else?
In this instalment of Verification Chronicles, we’re back in the academic realm, where candidates frequently embellish or outright fabricate qualifications, hoping their false claims slip through unnoticed.
While intriguing cases will always capture our interest, the repetition of familiar stories and themes can cause them to lose their impact. It’s easy to become jaded and desensitised, particularly when it comes to academic claims, where fraudulent claims are a common occurrence.