Can I Have a Record Deleted from the PNC? 

Spent and Unspent Convictions (Rehabilitation of Offenders Act) 

The term ‘Spent’ refers to when a conviction is considered rehabilitated and can be ignored. It mainly affects what is disclosed on a Basic DBS certificate and what you must disclose to employers. The information about the conviction will still remain on police systems.  

The charity Unlock have an online calculator which tells you if/when your conviction becomes spent.  

Record deletion from the PNC 

Record deletion is different. It is about asking the police to delete certain records from national police systems where the criteria are met and where retention is not justified. It is usually used for exceptional circumstances, errors, or particular non-conviction outcomes.  

There are a number of different categories to classify offences, and the level of the offence determines when the information can be reviewed for deletion.  

Group 1 offences are the most serious and high risk public protection matters as specified in Schedule 18 of the Sentencing Act 2020 these include murder, manslaughter, GBH, rape and other serious offences against children. The retention of these records are manually reviewed every ten years to ensure it is up to date and justified.  

Group 2 offences include other sexual, violent or serious offences that are not covered in Group 1. These offences should be retained whilst the offender or suspected offender is deemed to be a risk and should be reviewed after a ten-year clear period.  

Group 3 offences are all other offences that do not fit into the above categories and should be reviewed and deleted after a six-year clear period.   

However, an application for early deletion can be made to the police at any stage.  

When might deletion from the PNC be possible? 

Every case is considered independently, but the national guidance sets out a process for reviewing deletion requests relating to records held on national police systems, including the PNC. 

In practice, requests are more likely to be considered where one or more of the following applies: 

1. Mistaken identity or provable factual error If the record is incorrect, belongs to someone else, or contains a clear error, there may be grounds for deletion or correction through the relevant process. The RDP exists to review eligible records and is directed through ACRO to the owning force.
2. Arrest with no further action, and strong reasons retention is not justified Where you were arrested but not charged, or where the case was dropped, you may be able to apply for deletion of the arrest event and associated national records if the eligibility criteria are met.
3. Malicious or false allegations Where there is strong evidence that an allegation was malicious or clearly false, it may support an argument that continued retention is not proportionate. The decision remains discretionary and fact specific, but the process exists to allow review.
4. Exceptional circumstances and disproportionate impact Some requests focus on the ongoing impact of retention, particularly where the original matter is minor, historic, or linked to vulnerabilities at the time. The police will consider whether it is proportionate to retain the records.  National police information management principles emphasise proportionality and retention only for as long as necessary for the policing purpose, consistent with data protection principles.

When is deletion unlikely? 

It is important to be clear about the chances of success. Many people start this process hoping for a clean slate, and it can be disheartening to learn that the law and police guidance do not always allow deletion.  

Convictions: There is no straightforward “wipe” of a conviction from the PNC through a simple application, and many forces will refuse deletion of court convictions except through legal routes such as appeal or where the conviction is overturned. 

Serious safeguarding and high-risk cases: Where the information relates to a specified offence (serious violent or sexual offending or safeguarding risks), or where there is a clear ongoing policing purpose, deletion is less likely. The chances of success decrease further if there is more than one similar offence on record.  

DBS filtering guidance also confirms that specified offences and custodial sentences lead to disclosure in many contexts, which can align with a stronger public protection rationale for retention.  

Local force intelligence (PND): Even if a national record is deleted, there may still be information held on local systems known as the PND. ACRO confirms that, with the exception of custody photographs, the RDP does not cover deletion requests for local police systems, which must be requested directly from the relevant force. PND deletion is a separate and secondary application process.  

What does the Record Deletion Process cover? 

The Record Deletion Process can cover early deletion of certain offences and or records from the: 

• Police National Computer (PNC) 
• National DNA Database (NDNAD) 
• National Fingerprint Database (IDENT1) 

depending on criteria and eligibility. 

ACRO also notes that you can ask for your custody photograph to be reviewed for deletion, but other locally held records are not covered by the national process. 

What evidence should be included in a PNC record deletion application? 

A strong application is usually well organised and properly evidenced. Depending on your circumstances, helpful supporting material may include: 

• Evidence of factual error or mistaken identity 
• Documentation showing the case outcome (for example NFA) 
• Evidence the allegation was malicious or provably false 
• A clear impact statement, explaining practical consequences (employment barriers, professional registration issues, travel complications) 
• Where relevant, medical or expert evidence explaining vulnerability at the time (for example mental health, learning disability, neurodivergence), particularly when it goes to fairness and proportionality of retention 

National information management guidance stresses that data should only be retained proportionately and no longer than necessary for law enforcement purposes, which is often central to the way these arguments are framed.  

How long does a record deletion application take? 

There is no single standard timeframe, because the process involves checking eligibility, contacting the owning force, and applying national guidance to the specific facts—at a time when some forces are dealing with significant backlogs. If you are waiting on a decision for a job, a visa, or professional registration, that uncertainty can feel relentless. The key is not to wait and hope it resolves itself: the best way to protect your position is to move early and submit a clear, complete application with strong supporting documents from the outset.  

In practice, most straightforward applications where all supporting documents are complete and properly evidenced from the outset take somewhere in the region of one to three months from submission to a decision. There are forces that have a response time of a week or two and there are forces which have a response time of considerably longer.   

Once ACRO receives your application, they carry out an initial eligibility check before directing it to the owning force. The owning force then conducts its own review. There is currently no statutory deadline by which the owning force must issue its decision, which means delays are not uncommon, particularly within busy or under-resourced forces. 

PND applications are variable in length and this is entirely dependent on the force that was involved in your case. We track each force’s response time and can give you an indication of how long an application will likely take. The current longest response time was from the Metropolitan Police force and took just over a year.  

If you are applying for time sensitive reasons (for example a job offer or professional accreditation), do not leave it until the last minute. Seek advice early and gather your documents before you submit. Delays are often caused by missing information or unreadable attachments, and ACRO specifically notes that poor quality documents can delay applications. In time-critical situations, getting the application right first time can make all the difference and can protect opportunities you have worked hard for.

What if my record deletion request is refused? 

A refusal does not necessarily mean the end of the road, but it does mean you need to understand why it was refused. 

Possible next steps can include: 

Request full written reasons Ask the owning force for a full written explanation of the decision. Understanding precisely which facts were considered, which criteria were applied, and why retention was judged to be justified is essential before deciding on next steps. A vague or generic refusal may itself indicate a weakness in the decision-making process. 

Submit a further application with additional evidence Where the refusal identified gaps in your evidence, or where you have new material that was not available at the time, a further application through ACRO can be made. A second application is most likely to succeed where it directly addresses the reasons for the refusal and provides the supporting evidence that was missing or insufficiently compelling the first time around. 

Complain to the owning force: A formal complaint can be submitted to the owning force’s Professional Standards Department or Data Protection Officer where you believe the decision was procedurally unfair, failed to apply national guidance correctly, or failed to give proper weight to relevant factors. This can prompt a more senior internal review of the original decision. 

Complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO): Under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018, you have the right to complain to the ICO if you believe that personal data about you is being retained unlawfully or disproportionately. The ICO has the power to investigate complaints against police forces and, where it upholds a complaint, to require remedial action including deletion. The ICO will generally expect you to have gone through the relevant police process first. 

Court proceedings under the Data Protection Act 2018: Where other routes have been exhausted and you believe the police are failing to comply with data protection law, you may bring a claim in the County Court under section 167 of the Data Protection Act 2018. The court has the power to make a compliance order and to award compensation where damage has been caused by unlawful data processing. Court proceedings require careful legal preparation and carry costs implications. 

Judicial review: Where the police force’s decision is arguably unlawful, irrational, or procedurally unfair, judicial review may be an option. This is subject to strict time limits, usually three months from the date of the decision, and specialist legal advice is essential before pursuing this route. 

Please note, Olliers do not deal with complaints to the police, complaints to the ICO nor court proceedings nor Judicial reviews.  

If the issue is mainly about disclosure on DBS certificates, filtering rules may be the more relevant solution, because filtering can remove certain old or minor matters from Standard and Enhanced DBS certificates automatically at the point you apply for a DBS check, provided the rules are met. 

Do I need a solicitor to apply?  

You are not required to use a solicitor to submit an application. However, applying unrepresented carries real risks that are worth understanding before you decide. 

Legal support is particularly valuable where: 

• The facts are complex or contested 
• You need to address proportionality and data protection arguments 
• The outcome recorded does not accurately reflect what happened 
• There is sensitive context, for example malicious allegations, safeguarding issues, mental health, or neurodivergence 
• A previous application has been refused and you need to challenge the reasoning 

A poorly prepared first application creates real difficulties for any second attempt. Police forces are not obliged to give indefinite consideration to repeated or substantially similar applications. A first application that fails because it was poorly presented, insufficiently evidenced, or legally unpersuasive does not simply disappear: it forms part of the picture the decision maker has already seen. A second application must do more work to rebuild credibility from a weaker starting point.  

The strongest applications do not simply describe what happened. They engage directly with whether continued retention serves a legitimate and proportionate policing purpose, and they address the relevant factors under national guidance and under data protection law, including UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. Framing these arguments clearly, in terms that a police data management team will recognise and take seriously, is where professional input adds real value. 

For many clients, the record is directly affecting their career, their professional registration, their ability to travel, or their ability to pass enhanced vetting. In that context, the cost of a poorly prepared application is not simply a failed attempt: it can mean a delayed career, a lost job offer, or a prolonged period of uncertainty that a stronger application might have avoided. 

An experienced legal team can ensure that the correct legal and policy tests are properly addressed, that evidence is presented clearly and compellingly, and that if the application is refused, the right escalation route is identified and pursued promptly. 

Key points to remember 

• The PNC is a policing database, and it is not the same as a DBS certificate. 
• Some information may be filtered from DBS certificates without being deleted from the PNC. 
• There is a national Record Deletion Process directed through ACRO, but the decision is made by the owning police force. 
• Most straightforward applications take one to three months; complex cases can take considerably longer. There is no statutory deadline for a decision. 
• A refusal is not the end of the process. Escalation routes include a further application, a formal complaint to the force, a complaint to the ICO, court proceedings under the Data Protection Act 2018, and in appropriate cases, judicial review.  
• A well-prepared first application, with the right evidence and legal framing, gives you the best chance of success and avoids creating unnecessary obstacles if a second application becomes necessary. 
• The process does not automatically remove local force records, which must be handled separately.