Section A: What is a Positive Verification Notice?
To avoid civil penalties and the possibility of criminal prosecution, employers are required to verify that all workers are eligible to work in the UK before employment starts and, where relevant, during employment. There are several prescribed ways to do this, including manual document checks and online checks. In some circumstances, when an individual cannot provide the required documentation or digital confirmation, the employer may need to request a Positive Verification Notice from the Home Office by using the Employer Checking Service.
1. Role of the Positive Verification Notice
A Positive Verification Notice (PVN) is a formal confirmation from the Home Office that a named individual has a current right to work in the UK in a specific role. It is issued following an Employer Checking Service request in the limited circumstances where a normal right to work check cannot be completed, for example because the worker’s status is held only on Home Office systems or an in-time application, appeal or administrative review is pending. In effect, ECS is the route and the PVN is the outcome document that the employer relies on.
In most cases, right to work is evidenced through standard checks. These include providing a share code so the employer can conduct an online check using the Home Office service, using digital checks through an approved identity service provider for eligible British and Irish citizens or providing the employer with certain acceptable documents, as prescribed within Home Office guidance. A document from List A of the guidance will demonstrate that the holder has an indefinite right to work in the UK without restriction and gives the employer a continuous statutory excuse for the duration of that employment.
If an employee produces a document from List A, such as a British passport, the statutory excuse will apply for as long as the person remains in that role and no further checks are required, unless the employer becomes aware of information that calls the person’s right to work into question. List B contains documents that demonstrate the holder has a time-limited right to work in the UK. In these cases the statutory excuse is time limited as well.
If an employee produces a document from List B, the employer needs to conduct a follow-up check when the right to work shown in the document or online result is due to expire in order to extend the statutory excuse. The follow-up check will usually be another online check or a further prescribed document check, depending on how the person’s status is held and recorded.
PVNs sit alongside these routes rather than replacing them. They are only relevant where an individual cannot prove their right to work through a share code, digital check or acceptable List A/List B document, but the circumstances fall within the situations set out in the Home Office guidance for using the Employer Checking Service. Section B explains those trigger scenarios in detail and when an ECS request is appropriate.
2. How long is a Positive Verification Notice valid for?
Where a Positive Verification Notice is issued, it gives a statutory excuse for six months from the date shown on the notice. During that period the employer can rely on the PVN as proof that it has taken the prescribed steps to check the person’s right to work in the role described. The notice is time limited, so employers need to diarise the expiry date and carry out a follow-up right to work check before the six-month period ends. That follow-up may be another online check, a further PVN or a new prescribed document check, depending on how the person’s status is held and what evidence is available at that time.
In some situations where an employer already has a statutory excuse from an earlier prescribed check, that protection can continue for a short period while a fresh check is obtained. Where the circumstances now require an Employer Checking Service request or a new online check, the guidance allows the statutory excuse to carry on for up to 28 days while the employer makes the request and waits for a response. That continuation only applies where a valid statutory excuse already exists, for example following a previous List A or List B check or a compliant online check, and is not a general grace period available in every case.
Prospective employees do not benefit from that 28-day continuation because there is no existing statutory excuse for a new hire. If a PVN or other prescribed check is needed before the employer can evidence the right to work, the safer course is to delay the start date until the check has been completed. Allowing someone to start work while waiting for a PVN or online result leaves the employer exposed if the person is later found to have no permission to work.
If at any stage the employer becomes aware, or has good reason to believe, that the worker does not in fact have the right to work in the UK, any statutory excuse falls away, even if the PVN has not yet expired. Continuing employment in those circumstances risks civil penalties and, in more serious cases, criminal liability where the employer knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the individual was working illegally.
3. Where PVNs fit in your wider right to work process
For most workers, employers will never need to use the Employer Checking Service. A correctly completed manual, digital or online check on a List A or List B document or a share code will provide the statutory excuse. PVNs are reserved for the smaller group of cases where status cannot be proved through those routes but the worker asserts they still have a right to work, often because of a pending application or because their status is held only on Home Office systems.
Practically, this means PVNs should be treated as part of a defined escalation process rather than a day-to-day tool. Managers and HR teams need to recognise the scenarios that belong in ECS, understand that a PVN is time limited and ensure that follow-up checks are completed before protection expires.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
Securing a Positive Verification Notice is only one part of the bigger compliance piece. The statutory excuse lasts six months, but the Home Office expects you to maintain full control over the process, including accurate record-keeping, diary systems and on-time follow-up checks. Without a reliable underlying process, a PVN will not protect you if the Home Office identifies gaps or weaknesses in your Right to Work framework.
Section B: When to Use an ECS Check
An employer is required to contact the Home Office in specific situations set out in the right to work guidance where an individual cannot provide acceptable documents or produce an online status for a prescribed check. The Employer Checking Service is used where the person claims to have a current right to work but cannot demonstrate it through the normal routes. ECS is not a general safety net. It is a targeted process for defined scenarios where status is held on Home Office systems or the worker is in a transition stage, for example with a pending application.
1. Situations where an Employer Checking Service request is appropriate
There are several scenarios where the Employer Checking Service is the correct route because a normal manual, digital or online check cannot be completed in line with the guidance. In these cases the Home Office expects employers to seek verification from ECS rather than relying on worker assurances or incomplete evidence.
- a Certificate of Application under the EU Settlement Scheme that states the employer needs to contact the Home Office to verify the right to work
- an Application Registration Card that indicates the holder may be permitted to undertake work, usually subject to restrictions, and the employer needs confirmation of the permitted type of work
- an outstanding in-time application, appeal or administrative review that extends existing leave under section 3C, but the individual cannot provide an online result or acceptable document to evidence this
- a long-term resident who arrived in the UK before 1988 and cannot produce other acceptable documents to demonstrate their status
- a technical issue with the individual’s eVisa or the Home Office online checking service that prevents an online right to work check from being completed
Where verification is required, the Employer Checking Service (ECS) can be contacted online. The ECS is free to use and usually responds within five working days with either a Positive or Negative Verification Notice. A Positive Verification Notice confirms that the Home Office has verified that the person has a current right to work and is permitted to carry out the type of work in question. An employer can rely on the notice to obtain a statutory excuse for six months from the date stated on the notice.
2. Pending applications, appeals and administrative reviews
Where a worker has a pending application, appeal or administrative review, their continued right to work depends on whether that application or challenge was made in time. An in-time application to extend or vary leave made before existing permission expires brings section 3C of the Immigration Act into effect. Section 3C extends the person’s existing leave, including any right to work, until the application is decided and through any in-time appeal or administrative review of that decision.
If the worker holds digital status that can be verified through a share code, the employer should carry out an online check in the first instance, which will then give a statutory excuse for six months. If the worker cannot provide an online result and the situation falls within one of the Employer Checking Service categories, the employer should request a Positive Verification Notice. The Home Office can usually issue a Positive Verification Notice where an in-time application or review is pending and the person continues to have permission to work, provided the caseworker can match the worker’s details to the underlying record.
Appeals and administrative reviews generally need to be lodged within 14 days of the original decision. If they are submitted in time, the right to work continues while the challenge is pending. A late administrative review does not preserve permission during the period before it is accepted. Permission only resumes from the date the Home Office accepts the late review, and the employer will need a Positive Verification Notice to evidence ongoing permission to work. Until that point, ECS cannot treat the worker as having continuing leave under section 3C.
If at any stage the worker can present a document from List A or List B: Group 1 confirming that their application, appeal or administrative review has been decided in their favour, the employer should complete the relevant prescribed check on those documents or through the online service. Only a prescribed document, an online check result or a Positive Verification Notice establishes a statutory excuse. A letter from a third party indicating that an appeal or review has been successful does not satisfy the requirements for a right to work check.
3. Choosing between an online check and ECS
For workers with digital immigration status, the default route is the Home Office online checking service using a share code. ECS should not be used where a share code works and produces a right to work result. ECS comes into play only where a normal online or document check cannot be completed, and the scenario matches one of the categories in the guidance, such as a pending in-time application that cannot yet be verified online, a qualifying Certificate of Application or an ARC with unclear work permissions.
In practice, employers should ask three questions before deciding on an ECS request. First, can the worker provide a share code that generates a clear online result. Second, can the worker produce acceptable List A or List B documents. Third, does the situation match one of the specific ECS scenarios in the guidance. Only if the first two answers are no and the third is yes should an ECS request be made.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
Be clear on when ECS checks can and should be used. Caseworkers know that employers often turn to ECS because a manager is unsure or under pressure, or because the worker is insisting they definitely have status. The Employer Checking Service is not a catch-all or fallback. If you use it in the wrong situations, you risk signalling to the Home Office that your team doesn’t fully understand the rules and inviting closer scrutiny or even a wider investigation.
Section C: When Not to Use an ECS Check
Section B set out the limited situations where an Employer Checking Service request is appropriate. This section explains the opposite problem, which is far more common in practice: employers using ECS when a standard prescribed check would have confirmed the right to work. ECS is not designed to solve uncertainty, to compensate for an incomplete onboarding process or to speed things up when a worker cannot immediately produce evidence. It is a narrow tool, used only where the guidance directs the employer to the Home Office for verification. Using ECS outside those scenarios creates delays, causes avoidable NVNs and highlights deeper process issues during audits.
1. Scenarios where ECS should not be used
Employers regularly fall into the trap of submitting ECS requests in situations where the Home Office expects a normal online, digital or manual check. When ECS is used incorrectly, caseworkers often issue NVNs because the request does not match any valid ECS category. That leaves the employer worse off than if they had followed the correct route. The following situations are the most common misuses of ECS.
a. Share code available
Where the worker holds digital status and can generate a share code, the employer should use the Home Office online checking service. ECS should not be used in place of an online check even if the worker says the online route is slow, they are having difficulty generating the code or the employer prefers to use ECS. An ECS request in these cases signals that the employer is not using the prescribed routes correctly and weakens the employer’s position in any later civil penalty dispute.
b. Acceptable documents presented
If the worker provides a List A or List B document that falls within the prescribed categories, the correct approach is to complete the relevant manual or online check. ECS does not replace these checks. Employers sometimes turn to ECS because they feel unsure about the document or do not want to challenge gaps in the evidence. That approach creates unnecessary risk. The Home Office expects the employer to carry out the appropriate check based on the document presented, not to escalate the case to ECS.
c. Awaiting documents “later”
ECS is not intended for situations where the worker says they will produce the correct evidence at a later date. If the employer is simply waiting for a passport, BRP access code, Home Office email or other evidence already known to be required, the safe course is to delay the start date. ECS should not be used to bridge gaps created by internal onboarding pressures or incomplete document collection. An ECS request will not create a statutory excuse if the underlying scenario is not one that ECS is designed for.
d. Uncertainty about the correct check
Some employers submit an ECS request because they are unsure which route applies. ECS is not a diagnostic service and will not tell the employer what type of check should have been carried out. If the employer is unclear whether a digital, manual or online check applies, the correct approach is to pause onboarding and clarify the requirements rather than using ECS as a default option. ECS should only be used where the scenario clearly matches one of the categories set out in Section B.
e. Worker recently granted digital status
Workers who have recently been granted leave will usually be able to generate a share code. If the identity linking process is underway or the worker has not yet accessed their eVisa, employers sometimes submit an ECS request to “speed things up”. ECS is not intended for this purpose. If the grant is recorded in the Home Office system, the correct route is an online check. Using ECS in this situation may result in an NVN if the worker has not yet linked their identity, even though their status is valid.
2. Risks of using ECS incorrectly
Misusing ECS creates several layers of risk. First, it increases the likelihood of receiving an NVN where the worker does in fact have permission, simply because the request did not match an ECS category. Second, it signals to the Home Office that the employer lacks the ability to distinguish between the different types of right to work check, which is a common warning indicator during compliance audits. Third, employers who use ECS incorrectly often end up with gaps in their statutory excuse, especially where the ECS response is delayed or where follow-up checks are not done correctly.
Where ECS is used incorrectly and no PVN is issued, the employer has no statutory excuse. If employment continues without the correct check on file, any subsequent illegal working finding is treated as preventable. Sponsors are particularly exposed. A pattern of incorrect ECS use can escalate into broader questions about right to work governance, Appendix D record-keeping and management oversight. ECS is valuable when used in the correct scenarios. When used incorrectly, it becomes a red flag suggesting avoidable process failures.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
Making an ECS request in the wrong conditions can expose you to an illegal working investigation. Using ECS where the worker should have produced a share code or acceptable document creates an audit trail that shows the organisation was unsure and chose to bypass the correct route, which the Home Office may then use as evidence of weak right to work controls.
Section D: How Home Office Caseworkers Assess PVN Requests
Employers often assume that the Employer Checking Service is a quick confirmation exercise. In reality, ECS requests feed directly into Home Office caseworking systems and are checked against multiple internal databases. A Positive Verification Notice is only issued where a caseworker can confidently verify that the worker has a current right to work or that an in-time application or review extends that permission under section 3C. If any detail is unclear, inconsistent or missing, the caseworker will not issue a PVN. Understanding how these checks are carried out helps employers anticipate problems, avoid delays and reduce the risk of receiving a Negative Verification Notice in situations where the worker does in fact have a right to work.
1. How ECS caseworkers verify a worker’s status
Caseworkers examine several internal Home Office systems to confirm whether the worker has permission to work. These systems include immigration databases, caseworking logs, application records, biometrics and older archived records. The caseworker must be satisfied that the details submitted in the ECS request match the individual’s identity on those systems. A PVN can only be issued if there is a reliable match that confirms either a current grant of permission or a valid pending application that extends leave under section 3C.
Where the worker has digital immigration status under an eVisa or the EU Settlement Scheme, the caseworker will expect to find an online record linked to the identifying details provided. If the worker’s identity has not been linked correctly or if the details provided by the employer do not match the Home Office record, the caseworker may not be able to locate the relevant file. In those circumstances, the caseworker cannot issue a PVN and will issue an NVN instead.
a. Accuracy of the information submitted
Even small errors can prevent the Home Office from matching the request to the correct identity. Misspellings, incorrect dates of birth, outdated passport numbers, inconsistent use of middle names or name changes not reflected on applications are all common causes of NVNs. These issues typically arise where the employer has relied on verbal information instead of checking documents or previous evidence the worker already holds. Employers need to verify the details submitted with care and avoid assumptions.
b. Applications not linked correctly to the worker
Some workers have inconsistencies in their immigration history, such as previous applications made under different personal details or biometric records that were not correctly linked. These issues are more common in long-term residents, individuals who arrived in the UK as children and those who have made repeated applications across different routes. If the Home Office cannot reconcile the worker’s identity with the pending application, the caseworker cannot issue a PVN until that underlying mismatch is resolved.
c. Where multiple identities exist in Home Office systems
In some cases, the Home Office has more than one identity recorded for the same individual due to historical errors, variations in name spellings or past representations. This can prevent a clear match between the ECS request and the current record. Caseworkers will not issue a PVN unless they are satisfied that the request refers to the same identity as the one holding the permission or pending application. These issues can take time to resolve and employers should avoid continuing work until a clear prescribed check is obtained.
2. Common reasons why PVN requests fail
PVN requests often fail not because the worker lacks permission, but because the Home Office cannot locate or confirm the relevant data. Understanding these points of failure helps employers understand why an unexpected NVN might be issued and what corrective steps may be possible.
a. Late applications
If the worker submitted their application after their previous permission expired, leave does not continue under section 3C. The Home Office cannot treat the application as in time and cannot confirm any right to work until the application is accepted. ECS is unable to issue a PVN in these cases, even if the worker believes they submitted their application promptly.
b. Incorrect or incomplete worker information
If the identifying details provided by the worker or employer do not match what is held on the Home Office record, the caseworker may be unable to locate the correct file. Even one incorrect digit or an outdated passport number can lead to an NVN. Employers should verify documents and cross-check details before submitting ECS requests.
c. Digital status not correctly linked
If the worker has digital status but has not completed the identity-linking process, the online record may not be visible to the caseworker. This is common where a worker has been granted status but has not yet used the ID Check app or where the system has not completed the update. ECS cannot confirm permission in these circumstances and will issue an NVN until the digital status is linked correctly.
d. Technical or file access issues
Sometimes the relevant file is archived, under review or held in a different Home Office system. In these situations the caseworker may not have access to all information needed to confirm permission. These cases often require internal escalation and take time to resolve. Employers should avoid continuing work without a prescribed check while awaiting an update.
3. Why understanding the caseworker process matters
Understanding how the Home Office verifies information helps employers identify issues early and avoid unnecessary NVNs. It also improves internal decision-making. Employers who appreciate how PVNs are assessed are better equipped to ask the right questions, verify details provided by workers, and resolve mismatches before they become compliance issues. This awareness is particularly important for sponsors, where wrong assumptions or repeated NVNs may lead to wider questions about right to work governance, record-keeping and oversight.
Ultimately, a PVN is only issued where the Home Office can confirm the underlying right to work. Employers who understand that process are better placed to manage onboarding risk, avoid enforcement action and maintain robust, defensible right to work systems.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
In practice, NVNs usually come from mistakes in the process or the information submitted, rather than from a genuine immigration problem. A typo in the date of birth or a mismatched name is all it takes. The difficulty is that these errors, even if unintentional and out of character for an otherwise strong compliance culture, tell caseworkers that your onboarding and HR verification processes aren’t robust enough. The Home Office assumes that if you can’t submit accurate details for a single worker, there may also be inaccuracies in your wider Appendix D records, sponsor licence or other compliance files.
Section E: When a Positive Verification Notice Is Nearing Expiry
A Positive Verification Notice gives a six-month statutory excuse. Once that period ends, the protection ends with it. Most penalties linked to PVN cases arise because employers do not manage the expiry cycle. Caseworkers focus heavily on PVN follow-up behaviour during audits. They examine diaries, reminders, internal notes and whether the employer took timely steps to obtain a new prescribed check. A PVN is only effective if the organisation monitors it, records it accurately and ensures that the follow-up check is completed before the six-month protection lapses.
1. Managing the PVN expiry cycle
A structured expiry process reduces risk and avoids unnecessary compliance investigations. A PVN should never sit in isolation. Employers need clear and predictable steps that begin well before the expiry date and involve both HR and the line manager. A reliable tracking system ensures continuity even if staff change, workload increases or the worker’s application becomes delayed.
a. Diarise expiry dates in multiple systems
The PVN expiry date should be input into the HRIS, any compliance tracking spreadsheets, the line manager’s diary and any onboarding or workflow management tools. These reminders should trigger at multiple intervals, such as eight weeks, four weeks and one week before expiry. Relying on a single reminder creates predictable failure points, particularly in teams with high turnover or split responsibility.
b. Contact the worker early for updates
Eight weeks before the PVN expires, the employer should ask the worker for an update on their Home Office application. The worker should be asked whether any new decision emails have been received and whether they can now generate a share code. This early engagement gives the worker time to address issues such as linking their digital status or contacting the Home Office about delays.
c. Assess whether a new ECS request is needed
If the worker’s application, appeal or administrative review is still pending and cannot be verified online, the employer may need to submit a new ECS request. Before doing so, the employer should confirm that the worker made the original application in time and check all identifying details for accuracy. A new ECS request should be made well before the existing PVN expires to avoid a gap in statutory excuse protection.
d. Move to an online check where digital status is available
Some workers will move onto digital status before their PVN expires. If the worker can generate a share code, the employer should complete an online check, which will provide a fresh six-month statutory excuse. Employers should not assume that ECS is still required simply because initial verification was done through ECS. Digital status updates may resolve the need for further PVNs.
e. Check whether the worker has now been granted leave
If the worker can present evidence that their application has been approved, such as a digital status record or List A/List B documentation, the employer should complete a prescribed check on that evidence. A grant of permission replaces the need for PVNs and provides either continuous or time-limited statutory excuse depending on the leave granted. Letters from representatives or third parties cannot be accepted as right to work evidence.
2. If a PVN expires before a follow-up check is completed
If the PVN expires without a follow-up check being completed, the statutory excuse lapses. Continuing employment without a current statutory excuse exposes the organisation to significant enforcement risk. A pending application does not protect the employer unless the employer has completed a prescribed check that evidences it. Without a PVN, online result or acceptable document, there is no protection.
Where expiry has been missed, the employer should complete a follow-up check immediately and document the circumstances clearly. If the worker cannot provide the required evidence or the employer cannot obtain a PVN or online result, employment cannot continue. Employers should seek employment law advice before taking action, as dismissal decisions must follow a fair and reasonable process.
3. Why PVN expiry management is scrutinised during audits
PVN expiry management is a reliable indicator of an employer’s overall right to work control framework. Home Office auditors review whether employers: diarise expiry dates, act on reminders, contact workers in good time, complete follow-up checks and document decision-making. A pattern of missed expiries or last-minute ECS requests suggests weak governance and can trigger deeper inspection of HR systems, particularly for sponsors. A robust expiry management process is therefore essential both for maintaining a statutory excuse and for demonstrating that the organisation understands and applies right to work requirements consistently.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
Caseworkers treat missed expiry dates and late follow-up checks as evidence that your processes are substandard. A pattern of last-minute checks is even more damaging, because it shows managers only treat compliance as a priority when prompted, which is exactly the behaviour enforcement teams are trained to look for.
Section F: If You Receive a Negative Verification Notice
A Negative Verification Notice (NVN) means the Home Office cannot confirm a current right to work. In almost all cases this indicates that the individual does not hold permission. The only exception applies to workers with continuous employment since before 29 February 2008, who fall outside the civil penalty scheme. For all other workers, an NVN is a clear warning that the employer has no statutory excuse. Employers are expected to act quickly, request evidence, carry out the correct follow-up checks and decide whether employment can lawfully continue. Mishandling an NVN is one of the most common causes of high civil penalties and, in some cases, criminal exposure where the Home Office infers that the employer knew or had reasonable cause to believe the person was working illegally.
1. When an NVN is issued for a new recruit
Where an NVN relates to a new recruit, the employer cannot proceed with onboarding unless a prescribed check can subsequently be completed. An NVN confirms that the Home Office cannot verify any current permission. Employers should not rely on worker assurances, verbal explanations or letters from representatives. Until a compliant check is completed, the individual cannot begin work.
a. Request evidence immediately
The employer should notify the candidate and request any evidence they hold, such as Home Office decision emails, proof of an in-time application or attempts to generate a share code. Employers need to clarify whether the NVN is the result of an underlying lack of permission or due to incorrect or outdated details submitted to ECS.
b. Check whether an online result is now available
If the worker can now generate a share code or has received a Home Office decision, the employer should complete an online check. A valid online result confirming a right to work overrides the NVN and provides a new statutory excuse. Many NVNs occur where workers have digital status but have not yet completed the identity-linking process.
c. Submit a corrected ECS request only where appropriate
Employers should not submit repeated ECS requests with the same information. A corrected ECS request is only appropriate where the employer has identified new or corrected information, such as corrected personal details or updated evidence of a pending application. Submitting repeated requests without corrected information may delay matters and weaken the employer’s position during an audit.
d. Do not allow any work to start
An NVN removes any basis for employment. Allowing the worker to start without a prescribed check exposes the employer to illegal working allegations. The employer should confirm in writing that the start date is delayed until the correct evidence is obtained.
2. When an NVN is issued for an existing employee
An NVN for an existing employee requires urgent and structured action. The employer needs to review the worker’s evidence, verify whether any new information changes the position and take steps to prevent continued employment without a statutory excuse. The employer cannot allow the worker to carry on indefinitely unless a valid prescribed check is obtained.
a. Request evidence and meet with the worker promptly
The employer should meet the worker as soon as possible and ask for all documents relating to their immigration status. This includes Home Office acknowledgements, application receipts, decision emails and any information the worker has about the status of their application or appeal.
b. Check whether an online check can now be completed
If the worker can now generate a share code and the online check confirms a right to work, the NVN is resolved. The employer should retain the online check result and record the new six-month statutory excuse. The fact that the NVN arose does not prevent continued employment provided a valid prescribed check is now on file.
c. Submit a corrected ECS request only where new information exists
If the worker can demonstrate that an in-time application or review was submitted but there was a mismatch in the ECS details, a corrected ECS request may be appropriate. Employers should verify all personal details carefully before resubmitting. Even minor discrepancies can cause NVNs.
d. Consider temporary paid suspension
Where employment law allows, the employer may place the worker on a paid, non-operational suspension while enquiries are ongoing. This avoids continued work without protection and reduces risk. The employer should document reasons and seek employment law advice where needed.
e. If no prescribed check can be completed, employment cannot continue
If a valid prescribed check cannot be completed and the worker cannot show permission to work, the employer cannot lawfully continue employment. Any dismissal must follow a fair process and be properly documented to avoid employment law claims. The employer should keep detailed records explaining each step taken and the reasons for the final decision.
3. Risks of mishandling an NVN
Mishandling an NVN exposes the employer to serious consequences. The Home Office treats NVNs as factual evidence that permission could not be confirmed. Allowing continued employment in the face of an NVN is treated as a warning indicator and can lead to higher civil penalty amounts. Where the employer ignored the NVN or relied on worker assurances in place of evidence, caseworkers may infer knowledge or reasonable cause to believe illegal working was taking place, triggering criminal investigation risks.
For organisations holding a sponsor licence, NVNs carry wider implications. A single mishandled NVN can trigger a review of right to work controls across the business, including Appendix D records, reporting processes and document retention practices. NVNs therefore have operational, reputational and regulatory consequences that extend beyond the immediate case.
Employers should treat every NVN as a priority, document their steps in full and ensure that decisions are based strictly on the evidence required under the Home Office guidance. Effective management of NVNs is a key indicator of a compliant, well-governed right to work process.
DavidsonMorris Strategic Insight
If you receive an NVN, what you do next usually matters more than why it was issued. Your judgement and process will be open to Home Office scrutiny. Hesitating because the worker is senior or in a critical role can be taken as wilful disregard. You are expected to prioritise compliance over operational pressure.
Section G: Practical Examples of PVNs and NVNs in Practice
PVNs and NVNs move from theory to real risk when they arise in live recruitment or employment decisions. Managers are often under pressure to get someone into role quickly, which is where errors are made and where the Home Office later finds easy targets during enforcement activity. The following examples illustrate how typical scenarios should be handled and where employers often expose themselves by taking shortcuts or relying too heavily on worker assurances.
1. New Recruit with a Pending Extension Application
A candidate has leave as a Skilled Worker that is about to expire. They say they submitted an in-time extension and provide an email confirming receipt of their application. They cannot yet generate a share code and have no new digital status to show. The role is urgent and the hiring manager wants them to start on the planned date.
HR should verify the key details in the application acknowledgment and carry out an ECS request if the scenario falls within the ECS categories. If a PVN is issued, the candidate can start work once the employer has retained the notice and recorded the expiry date. If no PVN is issued or an NVN is received, the start date should be delayed until an online check or acceptable document confirms permission to work.
The main error is allowing the candidate to start on the strength of the acknowledgement email alone. That leaves the employer without a statutory excuse and exposed if the extension is refused or the application is found to be invalid. Another frequent mistake is failing to diarise the PVN expiry, which later removes protection if the extension remains undecided and no follow-up check is completed.
2. Existing Employee with an NVN After a Follow-up Check
An employee has worked in the business for several years on a visa that required repeat checks. HR submits an ECS request near the end of a previous PVN period to confirm that a further in-time application has been lodged. The ECS response is a Negative Verification Notice. The worker insists their solicitor has filed the extension and says that “it will be fine”.
The employer should meet the worker promptly and request evidence of the application, such as Home Office confirmation emails, payment receipts or a reference number. If the worker can now generate a share code, an online check should be carried out. If the evidence shows that the ECS request contained incorrect details, a corrected request may be submitted. Where no prescribed check can be completed, employment cannot continue lawfully, and the employer should take advice on a fair termination process.
Allowing the employee to carry on working on the basis of promises from the worker or their representative is a significant risk. Caseworkers treat an NVN as a clear warning, and continuing employment without a new statutory excuse can lead to high civil penalties and, in some cases, criminal allegations where knowledge can be inferred from the file.
3. Long-Term Resident with No Documents
An individual has lived in the UK since childhood and has worked for various employers. They now apply for a role and say they arrived before 1988 but cannot produce any passports or status documents. They believe their position is lawful because they have always lived in the UK and paid tax.
The employer should carry out an ECS request, as this is a recognised scenario for using the service. If the ECS issues a PVN confirming the right to work, the employer can rely on that notice for six months and should advise the worker to resolve their underlying documentation in parallel. If an NVN is issued, the employer should not proceed with employment and should recommend that the individual seeks advice on regularising their status.
Some employers accept payslips or past employment as evidence of a right to work. That approach provides no statutory excuse and can lead to liability if the worker is later found to have never been granted permission. The long residence narrative can be persuasive, but without a PVN or formal status evidence, the risk sits entirely with the employer.
4. ARC Holder with Unclear Work Permission
A candidate presents an Application Registration Card that states “work permitted” with a remark about shortage occupations. The hiring manager is unsure whether the role offered is covered by that condition and is under pressure to fill the vacancy quickly.
The employer should use the ECS to confirm the scope of the person’s permission, including whether the type of role offered falls within the permitted work. The PVN will confirm both the existence of a right to work and the nature of any restrictions. If the ECS cannot confirm permission or issues an NVN, the employer should not proceed until a different prescribed check gives a clear basis to employ.
Employers sometimes treat any “work permitted” wording as a blanket approval. If the role falls outside the permitted category and the worker undertakes it regardless, the Home Office may treat this as illegal working. The employer then faces penalties even though the worker held some form of permission, because the work exceeded the terms confirmed by the Home Office.
5. Digital Status with a Share Code Problem
A worker with pre settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme has been employed for some time. HR needs to complete a routine review of records and asks them to provide a new share code. The worker attempts to generate a code but the online service displays a message saying that further checks are required and no right to work result is produced. The worker is worried but believes their status is still valid.
The employer should treat the online message as a sign that the Home Office systems need to be consulted. If the scenario falls within the ECS categories, a request should be made so that the Home Office can verify status. If a PVN is issued, the employer regains a statutory excuse for six months and should keep a record of the technical issue encountered. If an NVN is issued, the employer needs to manage the situation in line with the NVN guidance, including urgent clarification with the worker and potential suspension or termination if no prescribed check can be completed.
A frequent mistake is to take a screenshot of the incomplete online message and file it as if it were a full check. That does not provide a statutory excuse. Employers also sometimes assume that earlier checks on the same worker will protect them indefinitely. Without a new result or PVN where there are clear warning signs, the Home Office may conclude that the employer ignored obvious indicators that the person’s status had changed.
6. PVN Expiry Overlooked in a Busy Team
HR obtained a PVN for a worker whose application was pending. The expiry date was recorded on a spreadsheet, but the responsible manager left and the reminder was never actioned. A year later the Home Office carries out an audit and identifies that the PVN expired six months earlier and no follow-up check was done. The worker’s application was eventually refused and they continued working during the period after refusal.
The correct process would have involved multiple diary entries for the PVN expiry, shared responsibility between HR and the line manager, and an agreed protocol for follow-up checks. On realising that expiry has been missed, the employer should immediately complete a check where possible, assess the period without protection and take advice on how to manage both the worker’s position and the enforcement risk.
The most common error is assuming that an initial PVN protects the employer indefinitely or for as long as the underlying application remains undecided. In reality, once the PVN expires, the statutory excuse lapses. Any illegal working identified after that point is treated as fully within the employer’s control and often leads to higher penalties and deeper scrutiny of the employer’s wider HR controls.
Section H: Summary
Positive Verification Notices sit at the sharp end of Right to Work compliance. They exist for situations where normal checks are not possible but the worker says they still have a right to work, usually because an application or review is pending or their status is held only on Home Office systems. Used properly, PVNs give a time-limited statutory excuse and close off one of the main routes to heavy civil penalties.
For employers, the real risk lies in the gaps. Allowing someone to start before a PVN or online result is obtained, letting a PVN expire without a follow-up check, treating an expired BRP as proof that permission has ended, or ignoring a Negative Verification Notice can all undermine your protection and draw attention to wider process weaknesses. The organisations that stay on the right side of enforcement treat PVNs as part of a structured compliance framework, with clear triggers for using the Employer Checking Service, accurate records and firm rules on who can authorise exceptions.
Section I: Need Assistance?
We have substantial experience advising employers on right to work compliance and on steps to avoid and appeal civil penalties. If you have concerns about a worker’s status or you have received a notice from the Home Office, our team can provide guidance on the correct right to work check, how to deal with urgent Employer Checking Service queries and how to manage any associated employment law risks.
Section J: Positive Verification Notice FAQs
What is a Positive Verification Notice?
A Positive Verification Notice is a document issued by UK Visas and Immigration following an Employer Checking Service request. It confirms that the Home Office has verified that a worker has a current right to work in the UK in the role in question and gives the employer a statutory excuse for six months from the date on the notice, provided the employer did not know or have reason to believe that the person was working illegally.
When should an employer request a Positive Verification Notice?
Employers should request a Positive Verification Notice only in situations set out in the Home Office guidance where normal checks are not possible. Typical examples include an in-time application, appeal or administrative review that is still pending, a Certificate of Application that directs the employer to contact the Home Office, an Application Registration Card that indicates work may be allowed, certain long-term residents who cannot produce other documents, or technical problems with an eVisa or the online service that prevent an online right to work check from being completed.
How can an employer obtain a Positive Verification Notice?
An employer needs to submit a request to the Employer Checking Service with details of the worker and the reason a normal right to work check cannot be completed. The request is made online and, if the Home Office can confirm that the person has permission to work in the role in question, it will issue a Positive Verification Notice that the employer can retain as evidence.
How long does it take to receive a Positive Verification Notice?
The Employer Checking Service usually responds within five working days. The response will be either a Positive Verification Notice, which confirms a current right to work, or a Negative Verification Notice, which confirms that the Home Office cannot verify permission to work on the information available.
How long is a Positive Verification Notice valid for?
A Positive Verification Notice is valid for six months from the date shown on the notice. During that period the employer has a statutory excuse for employing the worker in the role covered by the notice. Before the six months end, the employer needs to complete a follow-up right to work check, which may be another online check, a further Positive Verification Notice or a new document check, depending on how the person’s status is held at that time.
Can a worker start employment before a Positive Verification Notice is received?
If there is no other prescribed check in place, allowing a worker to start before a Positive Verification Notice or online result is received leaves the employer without a statutory excuse if the person turns out to be working illegally. From a compliance perspective, employers should delay the start date until a valid right to work check has been completed and evidence retained.
What happens if UK Visas and Immigration cannot verify a worker’s status?
If the Employer Checking Service cannot confirm that a person has permission to work, it will usually issue a Negative Verification Notice. In most cases this means there is no current right to work that can be traced and the employer has no statutory excuse if they proceed. There is a narrow exception for workers with continuous employment that started before 29 February 2008, who sit outside the civil penalty scheme, but employers should take advice before relying on that exception.
Does a Positive Verification Notice protect an employer from penalties?
A Positive Verification Notice gives the employer a statutory excuse against a civil penalty for the six-month period stated on the notice, as long as the employer has kept the evidence correctly and did not know or have reasonable cause to believe that the worker was disqualified from working. It does not protect the employer where there is actual knowledge or clear warning signs that the individual does not have the right to work.
Can a worker provide a share code instead of obtaining a Positive Verification Notice?
If a worker has digital status held as an eVisa or under the EU Settlement Scheme, the correct route is usually to provide a share code so the employer can complete an online right to work check. Where a share code check is available and works, the employer should not use the Employer Checking Service. PVNs are reserved for situations where neither an acceptable document nor an online result can be obtained in line with the guidance.
Where can employers access the Employer Checking Service?
Employers can access the Employer Checking Service through the GOV.UK website and submit a request online. It is good practice to record the date of the request and keep a copy of the ECS response alongside other right to work evidence in case the Home Office later reviews the file.
Section K: Glossary
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Positive Verification Notice (PVN) | A notice issued by the Home Office following an Employer Checking Service request confirming that an individual has a current right to work in the UK and can carry out the role in question. It gives the employer a statutory excuse for six months from the date shown on the notice. |
| Negative Verification Notice (NVN) | A notice issued by the Home Office when the Employer Checking Service cannot confirm that an individual has permission to work in the UK. In most cases it indicates that no current right to work can be traced, although some long standing employees who started before 29 February 2008 sit outside the civil penalty scheme. |
| Employer Checking Service (ECS) | A free online Home Office service that employers use to confirm a worker’s right to work where standard right to work checks are not possible, for example because an in-time application or review is pending or the person holds certain documents that direct the employer to seek Home Office verification. |
| Right to Work Check | A prescribed check that a UK employer carries out before employment starts and, where relevant, during employment to confirm that a worker has permission to work in the UK in the role on offer. If done correctly it provides a statutory excuse against a civil penalty. |
| Statutory Excuse | The legal protection an employer gains against a civil penalty for illegal working where it has carried out the correct type of right to work check, recorded the required evidence and repeated checks on time where the worker’s permission is time limited. |
| UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) | The Home Office directorate responsible for managing immigration and nationality applications, including the systems that support right to work checks and the Employer Checking Service. |
| Share Code | A unique code generated by an individual through the Home Office online service that allows an employer to view their digital immigration status and complete an online right to work check. |
| Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) | A physical card that was issued to some non UK nationals to confirm their immigration status. BRPs have been decommissioned and many have expiry dates that do not match the holder’s actual permission. An expired BRP cannot be used for a manual check but can still be used to access the online right to work service. |
| Digital Immigration Status (eVisa) | An online record of a person’s immigration status held on Home Office systems. Workers with an eVisa use a share code to let employers view their status and complete an online right to work check without relying on physical documents. |
| Certificate of Application (CoA) | A document issued to some applicants under the EU Settlement Scheme and certain other routes. Some certificates state that the employer needs to contact the Employer Checking Service to confirm the person’s right to work while the application is pending. |
| EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) | The scheme that allows eligible EU, EEA and Swiss nationals and their family members to obtain pre settled or settled status in the UK, which can in turn provide a right to work. |
| Settled Status | A form of indefinite permission granted under the EU Settlement Scheme that allows the holder to live and work in the UK without time limit, subject to absence rules and general suitability requirements. |
| Pre settled Status | A limited form of permission under the EU Settlement Scheme that allows the holder to live and work in the UK for a time limited period before they qualify for settled status, subject to eligibility and residence requirements. |
| Civil Penalty | A financial penalty imposed on employers who employ people who do not have the right to work where no statutory excuse is in place. Current levels are up to £45,000 per illegal worker for a first breach and up to £60,000 per worker for repeat breaches within three years. |
| Sponsor Licence | Permission granted by UKVI to a UK organisation that allows it to sponsor non UK nationals for certain work routes, such as the Skilled Worker route, and to assign Certificates of Sponsorship to eligible roles. |
| Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS) | An electronic record with a unique reference number assigned by a licensed sponsor to a worker who needs to apply for a sponsored work visa. It sets out key details of the role and the sponsor. |
| Follow up Check | A further right to work check carried out before an earlier statutory excuse expires, for example when a Positive Verification Notice or time limited status is due to end. It is needed to extend the employer’s protection against a civil penalty. |
| Illegal Working Penalty | A civil or criminal sanction that can be imposed where a person is found to be working without the required permission and the employer has not secured a statutory excuse through the prescribed right to work check process. |
Section L: Additional Resources & Links
| Resource | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|
| GOV.UK: Employer Checking Service | Official Home Office online service for employers to request right to work confirmation when standard checks are not possible. | https://www.gov.uk/employee-immigration-employment-status |
| GOV.UK: Right to work checks – an employer’s guide | Primary Home Office guidance on how to conduct right to work checks and the circumstances for using ECS. | https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/right-to-work-checks-employers-guide |
| GOV.UK: Code of practice on preventing illegal working | Code setting out civil penalty levels and how the Home Office will calculate penalties for illegal working. | https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-penalty-maximum-penalty-amounts |
| GOV.UK: EU Settlement Scheme – information for employers | Guidance for employers on how EUSS status interacts with right to work checks and use of share codes. | https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/eu-settlement-scheme-employer-toolkit |
