Complaints and Appeals
A candidate who believes a competition was not run under the recruitment principles, and an official who believes the Civil Service Code has been breached, may complain to the Civil Service Commission of the Velocity Interoperability Network. The procedure opened on 6 September 2026 and applies to every department and service of the Velocity Interoperability Network.
The Commission is independent of the departments it regulates, and complaints are decided by a panel of three Commissioners. No Commissioner sits on a case concerning a department in which the Commissioner has previously served, and no Commissioner who took part in an appointment sits on a complaint about it. Complaining costs nothing, and a complainant does not need a representative.
Raise the matter with the department first
What the Commission may consider. A complaint must concern one of the matters below.
- A competition not run under the principles
- That a vacancy was not advertised as required, that candidates were assessed against requirements other than those published, that different evidence was sought from different candidates, or that the panel did not record its reasons.
- An exception used without authority
- That a post was filled without open competition where no permitted exception applied, that an exception was used beyond its maximum length, or that an exception requiring the Commission's approval was used without it.
- A breach of the Civil Service Code
- That an official failed to declare an interest, accepted a gift or hospitality that placed them under obligation, took part in a decision in which they had an interest, or gave advice that was not objective.
- A post filled at the wrong grade
- That a post was advertised at a grade that does not correspond to its duties, or that a post regraded upwards was filled without the competition the grade requires.
- Detriment for raising a concern
- That an official has been disadvantaged for raising a concern under the Code in good faith, whether in the allocation of work, in assessment during probation or in a competition.
What the Commission may not consider. The Commission cannot substitute its own judgement for a panel's assessment of a candidate's merit: that a candidate disagrees with the marks awarded is not, by itself, a ground of complaint. It does not decide disputes about pay, hours or terms of service, or about the performance of a department's functions, which are matters for the department. It does not act as an employer or reinstate an official, and it does not consider a complaint made more than twelve months after the outcome or conduct complained of, unless the complainant could not reasonably have known of it earlier.
Making a complaint. The steps below apply to complaints about competitions and about conduct alike.
Step 1: Raise the matter with the department first
Write to the department that ran the competition or employs the official concerned, setting out what happened and why you believe the principles or the Code were not observed. Do so within three months of the outcome or of the conduct complained of. The department must reply within fifteen working days.
Step 2: Write to the Commission within twenty-eight days
If the department's reply does not resolve the matter, write to the Commission within twenty-eight days of receiving it. Give your name, the department concerned, the competition or conduct in question, what you say went wrong and what the department said in reply. A complaint may be made in any form; there is no application to complete.
Step 3: Receive an acknowledgement and an assessment of remit
The Commission acknowledges every complaint within five working days and decides within ten working days whether the matter is within its remit. A complaint outside the remit is returned with an explanation and, where possible, an indication of who may consider it.
Step 4: The investigation
The Commission asks the department for the panel record, the advertisement, the marks and any other document bearing on the complaint, which the department must produce within ten working days. The Commission may put questions to the panel and to the complainant, and completes the investigation within forty working days.
Step 5: The decision
A panel of three Commissioners decides the complaint within fifteen working days of the investigation being completed. The decision states whether the principles or the Code were observed, the reasons for that finding and what the department is required to do.
Step 6: Publication and review
The decision is sent to the complainant and the department, and published in anonymised form within twenty working days. A party may ask for the decision to be reviewed within twenty-eight days, but only where evidence is produced that was not available at the time; a review is decided by three Commissioners who did not take the original decision.
Time limits. The periods below bind the Commission as well as the parties. Where the Commission cannot meet a period, it writes to the parties with the reason and a revised date.
| Stage | Period | Responsible |
|---|---|---|
| Complaint raised with the department | Within three months of the outcome or conduct | The department |
| Department's reply | Fifteen working days | The department |
| Complaint made to the Commission | Within twenty-eight days of the reply | The complainant |
| Acknowledgement | Five working days | The Commission |
| Decision on remit | Ten working days | The Commission |
| Documents produced by the department | Ten working days from request | The department |
| Investigation completed | Forty working days | The Commission |
| Decision taken | Fifteen working days after the investigation | A panel of three Commissioners |
| Decision published in anonymised form | Twenty working days after the decision | The Commission |
| Request for review on new evidence | Within twenty-eight days of the decision | The complainant or the department |
Outcomes. A complaint is decided in one of the ways below. The Commission decides whether the standard was met; where a breach of the Code is found, what follows from it is a matter for the official's department.
| Outcome | When it applies | What follows |
|---|---|---|
| Complaint not upheld | The competition or the conduct is found to have met the standard | The decision is published; no action is required of the department |
| Upheld, with a recommendation | A departure from the principles or the Code that did not affect the outcome | The department reports within twenty working days what it has changed |
| Upheld, competition to be run again | A departure that may have affected who was appointed | The competition is run again; an appointment already made is not disturbed where the Commission is satisfied it was made on merit |
| Upheld, breach of the Code found | An official acted contrary to the Code | The finding is sent to the department, which decides what action to take under its own procedures |
| Delegated authority withdrawn | A serious or repeated departure by a department | Appointments at every grade are made by panels convened by the Commission until the arrangements are corrected |
Confidentiality. Decisions are published in anonymised form: candidates and officials are not named, and departments are named only where the finding concerns a departure from the principles by the department itself. The Commission does not disclose the identity of an official who raises a concern under the Code, except where disclosure is necessary to investigate and the official agrees. The number of complaints received and their outcomes are reported in the Commission's quarterly statistical release.
Complaints and requests for review are sent to contact@civil-service.gov.vin. For the standards against which complaints are decided, see Recruitment Standards and Conduct and Codes; for casework figures, see Statistics; for answers to common questions, see the frequently asked questions.