This is a complete Verify report, reproduced in full, so you can see exactly what a commissioning organisation receives.
One of three sample reports. This one reaches CONCERN.
This sample is provided solely to demonstrate the structure and assessment treatment of a Verify report. It does not concern a real commission and must not be presented as evidence of an assessment carried out for an actual person or organisation.
| Report reference | INTEGRI-VFY-2026-0001 |
| Report version | 1.0 |
| Assessment date | 14 May 2026 |
| Assessment period | 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026 |
| Commissioning organisation | Heartfield group selection panel |
| Subject | Sarah Mellor |
| Role or appointment | Prospective councillor, Westbridge Ward, Heartfield Metropolitan Borough Council |
| Agreed scope | Publicly accessible material relevant to candidacy for election as a councillor |
| Report reliance period | 12 August 2026, being 90 days after issue, in accordance with Terms section 3 |
| Overall conclusion | CONCERN |
This report assesses publicly accessible material relating to Sarah Mellor within the agreed scope and the assessment period of 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026. Four findings are recorded.
Two findings are classified HIGH. The first concerns a post published in March 2024 expressing a settled position on a planning application then pending before the council's planning committee. The second concerns a post published in February 2022 containing language capable of being construed as attributing negative characteristics to members of a religious community, which remained publicly visible at the assessment date. A third finding, classified MEDIUM, concerns a pattern of demeaning language directed at named individuals. A fourth, classified LOW, is recorded for context.
The overall conclusion is CONCERN.
| Ref | Finding | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| F01 | Public position taken on a planning application then pending before the council | HIGH |
| F02 | Publicly visible post referring to an opponent by reference to their religious community | HIGH |
| F03 | Pattern of demeaning language directed at named community activists | MEDIUM |
| F04 | Sarcastic post about the council's revised recycling collection schedule | LOW |
Commission scope. The commission was to assess publicly accessible material bearing on the subject's exposure to scrutiny as a prospective councillor for Westbridge Ward, Heartfield Metropolitan Borough Council. The assessment addresses material relevance to that role. It does not address the merits of the subject's candidacy.
Assessment period. The standard assessment period applies: the five years ending on the assessment date, being 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026. No extension was agreed and none was required. Material outside that period was not routinely searched for or assessed merely because it may be discoverable.
Source boundary. The assessment considered publicly accessible material within the agreed scope and assessment period, including relevant social media, press and news sources, public records and publicly available official material. Private, restricted or credential protected sources were not accessed.
Third party approaches. Verify does not involve contacting third parties to obtain information about the person assessed.
Assessment basis. Each reportable finding is assessed for material relevance to the agreed role and scope. Where a relevant external governance or legal framework genuinely applies, it is identified. The absence of an external framework reference does not by itself exclude a finding where the report states a clear role specific assessment basis.
| Significance | HIGH |
|---|---|
| Source | Subject's public account on X, together with the council's public planning register |
| Date of material | 14 March 2024 |
Finding. On 14 March 2024 the subject published a post on X stating: 'The Riverside development is an absolute disaster for this community. I will do everything in my power to block it if I get elected. This council has sold out our neighbourhood.' At the date of publication the Heartfield Riverside development application, reference HFB/2024/0312, was pending before the council's planning committee.
Assessment. The post states a settled intention in respect of a specific, identified application that was live before the committee at the time. A member who has publicly committed to blocking a named application carries a material risk of challenge on grounds of pre-determination if elected and subsequently involved in any part of the planning process for that application. The material is directly relevant to the role sought because planning decisions fall within the functions of the authority concerned.
Assessment basis. LGA Model Code of Conduct, objectivity. The Seven Principles of Public Life, objectivity. Planning pre-determination.
| Significance | HIGH |
|---|---|
| Source | Subject's personal Facebook profile |
| Date of material | 7 February 2022 |
Finding. On 7 February 2022 the subject published a post on Facebook stating that a named opponent's views were 'typical of people from that background', and referring to that opponent's religious community in terms capable of being construed as attributing negative characteristics to members of that community. The post remained publicly visible at the assessment date.
Assessment. The wording attributes a characteristic to an individual by reference to their religious community rather than to anything they have said or done. Because the post remained publicly visible at the assessment date, the material is current rather than historic, and is discoverable by any member of the public. The role sought carries an expectation of equal treatment of constituents, which makes the material relevant to the appointment rather than merely to the subject's past conduct.
Assessment basis. Equality Act 2010, religion or belief. LGA Model Code of Conduct, equality and respect. The Seven Principles of Public Life, leadership.
| Significance | MEDIUM |
|---|---|
| Source | Subject's public account on X |
| Date of material | January 2023 to November 2024 |
Finding. Across eleven posts published between January 2023 and November 2024, the subject used language about named individuals involved in local community activism that is dismissive and contemptuous, and in three instances personally demeaning.
Assessment. No single post in the series would warrant a higher classification. The finding rests on the pattern rather than on any one item, and the individuals are named and identifiable. The relevance to the role is the standard of conduct expected in public dealings with constituents and local groups.
Assessment basis. The Seven Principles of Public Life, leadership. Role specific relevance: sustained conduct below the standard expected in public office.
| Significance | LOW |
|---|---|
| Source | Subject's personal Facebook profile |
| Date of material | 23 October 2023 |
Finding. On 23 October 2023 the subject published a post mocking the council's revised recycling collection schedule.
Assessment. The tone falls below the register expected of a prospective elected representative. The material is recorded for context. It does not by itself indicate substantial governance or reputational risk and no action follows from it.
Assessment basis. Role specific relevance only. No external framework applies.
One or more well supported findings present a serious material governance or reputational concern within the agreed scope. Two findings are classified HIGH, and in the case of F02 the material remained publicly visible at the assessment date.
This does not constitute a recommendation against selection. That decision rests with the selection panel.
The following are proportionate steps available to the commissioning organisation. Each is tied to an identified finding. They are matters for the organisation to consider before it proceeds with its own decision.
| Finding | Consideration | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| F01 and F02 | Invite the subject to respond to the panel on the identified findings, with a formal discussion with the panel chair. | Selection panel and subject |
| F01 | Provide the subject with written guidance on planning pre-determination obligations. | Selection panel |
| F02 | Document the organisation's own reasoning on how the finding has been taken into account. | Selection panel |
| Ref | Source | Public date | Accessed | Used for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S01 | Subject's public account on X | 14 March 2024 | 14 May 2026 | F01 |
| S02 | Heartfield Metropolitan Borough Council public planning register, application HFB/2024/0312 | Public record | 14 May 2026 | F01 |
| S03 | Subject's personal Facebook profile | 7 February 2022 | 14 May 2026 | F02 |
| S04 | Subject's public account on X | January 2023 to November 2024 | 14 May 2026 | F03 |
| S05 | Subject's personal Facebook profile | 23 October 2023 | 14 May 2026 | F04 |
This report is an advisory reputational due diligence assessment of publicly accessible material within the agreed scope and assessment period. It does not constitute legal advice, a judicial or regulatory finding of fact, a compliance certification, a determination of suitability or fitness, or a recommendation for or against selection, appointment, disciplinary action or removal. The commissioning organisation retains responsibility for its own due diligence, human judgement and final decision, and must not rely on this report as the sole basis for that decision.
This report is issued subject to the Integri Terms of Service, including the liability provisions at clause 8. Nothing in this report excludes or limits any liability that cannot lawfully be excluded or limited.
| Issued | 14 May 2026 |
| Report reference | INTEGRI-VFY-2026-0001 |
| Report version | 1.0 |
| Authorised by | Integri Limited |
| Status | Issued Verify report |
This report has been prepared by Integri Limited on a politically neutral basis.
Integri Limited | 124 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX | ICO Registered ZC029967 | Illustrative sample, fictional subject