Why right to work checks get rejected and how to avoid it

Even with the best intentions, Right to Work checks can fail. And when they do, it’s not always obvious why. For candidates, it can be a frustrating experience. For employers, it’s a compliance risk - and often, an avoidable one. 

Understanding the most common reasons for rejected checks is the first step in strengthening your process and improving candidate experience. Because while digital tools have brought speed and structure to the process, they haven’t eliminated the need for care and clarity. 

Where it goes wrong 

Every month, thousands of checks are processed by trusted screening partners like Giant Screening - and while the vast majority are approved without issue, a small percentage get flagged. These are some of the most common reasons: 

• Ineligible documents – Submitting something that doesn’t meet current Home Office guidance (e.g. BRPs for digital checks) still happens more often than you’d think. 

• Incomplete submissions – Documents that don’t match, are expired, or have missing sections (like the inside photo page of a passport) will almost always trigger a rejection. 

• Name mismatches – A candidate uploads proof of identity but hasn’t submitted supporting documents for a name change, such as a marriage certificate or deed poll. 

• Incorrect share code usage – Especially common with students, where term time evidence hasn’t been uploaded alongside the code. 

• Imposter attempts – Genuine documents, but clearly used by someone other than the rightful owner. These are flagged when the photo on the ID or Home Office return doesn’t match the selfie provided. 

The knock-on effects 

Rejected checks aren’t just inconvenient. They slow down onboarding, put pressure on recruitment teams, and in some cases, may mean losing a candidate altogether. For organisations operating in competitive hiring environments, that’s a cost few can afford. 

In regulated sectors, rejection rates can also draw scrutiny. Consistent issues may indicate a breakdown in internal processes or a lack of training, both of which could lead to wider compliance concerns. 

Getting ahead of rejections 

Improving accuracy isn’t just about tightening up documentation requirements. It’s about clarity at every stage: 

• Clear communication with candidates – Let them know what’s required in advance, and why it matters. Share examples of acceptable documents and how to upload them properly. 

• Consistency across teams – Ensure everyone handling onboarding follows the same process and knows when to escalate an issue. 

• Work with the right partner – A robust screening partner doesn’t just flag errors - it helps you understand them. Their analysts can spot what software alone can’t, and provide guidance that keeps you compliant. 

Prevention is protection 

Mistakes happen. But by identifying the most common trip points in advance, you can drastically reduce your rejection rate - and the stress that comes with it. 

More importantly, you can build a process that’s not only efficient, but reliable. One that gives you confidence in your compliance and helps candidates feel secure from the start. 

Because when the checks go smoothly, everything else gets to move forward faster and safer. 

At Giant Screening we can support you in creating a thorough and compliant screening process, with core elements like Right to Work and criminal record checks forming part of a wider, trusted programme. 

This blog has been powered by insights from our partner TrustID's report: '2 Years of Digital Schemes – What’s changed? The impact of technology, fraud trends and what’s to come.'