Pre-employment and post-joining checks on employment history, education, address, identity, criminal record and references, run with the candidate's consent, and reported with what could not be confirmed stated plainly.
Overview
Background verification is the confirmation, before or shortly after joining, that what a candidate told you about themselves is true: where they actually worked and how they left, what they studied, where they live, who they are, and whether there is a court record. Use it on every hire who will handle money, data, customers or people, and on any hire whose CV carries a gap you could not close in the interview.
The value of a BGV report is entirely in its honesty about limits. Employers shut down, HR desks stop replying, universities take as long as they take, and a name-based court search in India is not the same thing as a clean record. A report that quietly rounds those up to 'clear' is worse than no report at all, because you then make a decision believing something was checked when it was not.
So we run the checks in parallel rather than in sequence, chase the ones that stall, and report each component separately with its own status: verified, discrepant, or insufficient with what was attempted. You get a decision to make, not a verdict handed to you.
Briefing to closure, depending on role, seniority and location.
From first conversation through to the joining date.
For clients in Mumbai, Thane, Navi Mumbai and other Indian cities.
The right fit
When it isn't
Verification is not a substitute for interviewing properly, and it is the wrong tool for judging whether someone can do the job. A clean report tells you a candidate is who they claim to be; it says nothing about competence, and treating it as a proxy for assessment is how a verified but unsuitable hire gets made. It is also not a screening filter to apply before you have decided you want someone. Run the assessment first, at whichever service fits the role, and verify the person you have chosen.
Look at Leadership Hiring insteadHow it runs
Day 1
You decide which components apply to the role, employment, education, address, identity, criminal record, reference, and the candidate gives written, informed consent to each before anything begins. No check is run without it. Consent is not a formality here; it is what makes the verification lawful and the report usable.
Relieving letters, payslips, appointment letters, mark sheets and degree certificates, ID and address proof are collected and checked for internal consistency before any third party is approached. A large share of discrepancies are visible at this stage, dates that do not line up, a designation on a payslip that does not match the CV, and cost nothing to find.
Employment, education, address, identity and court-record checks are initiated together, because each has a different and unpredictable response time. Run one after another and the report is held hostage by the slowest respondent; run them together and only the genuinely slow component is still open at the end.
Ex-employer HR desks go quiet, small companies close, and institutions have their own verification queues. Each is followed up on a fixed schedule and every attempt is logged with date and channel, so an insufficient result at the end is backed by a record of what was tried rather than by a shrug.
Each check is reported separately as verified, discrepant or insufficient, with the source and the date. Discrepancies carry the two versions side by side, what the candidate stated, what the source confirmed, so you can judge severity yourself. Nothing unverified is reported as clear.
Where a check comes back discrepant, the candidate is given the chance to explain and to produce evidence, and their response goes into the report. Some discrepancies are genuine record-keeping errors at the ex-employer's end. The decision to proceed or withdraw stays with you, informed by both sides rather than by the first version.
What goes wrong
The most important check is the one you have least control over. A closed company, an outsourced HR helpdesk or a manager who has since left can leave an employment record unconfirmable however many times it is chased. When that happens we say so, list what was attempted, and suggest the secondary evidence (payslips, bank credits, Form 16, PF passbook) that can corroborate it instead.
Court-record checks in India run against names and jurisdictions, and the same name can produce false matches or miss a case filed where the person no longer lives. The honest form of this check states which jurisdictions were searched and on what identifiers, so the result is read as what it is rather than as a blanket clearance.
Checks that begin only after joining leave you with a person already on the rolls when a discrepancy surfaces. Started at offer stage instead, most components close before the joining date. The trade-off is that an early check can alert a current employer, so employment verification for a candidate still serving notice is sequenced deliberately, with the candidate's agreement.
A mismatch in an exit date by a fortnight, a designation recorded differently in HR records, or a break the candidate described loosely are common and often innocent. Treating every mismatch as fraud costs good hires; treating none of them as material costs more. Each is reported with both versions and a note on severity, and the judgement stays with you.
In a batch of forty, an insufficient employment check is easy to lose in a summary that reads mostly green. Reports for volume mandates are therefore given per candidate with a status per component, and the batch view lists open and discrepant cases first rather than as a footnote to a pass rate.
Your side
A search stalls on the client side at least as often as on ours. These are the things that keep it moving.
The check package per role, decided before the candidate is approached for consent, which components apply, and which are mandatory versus nice to have.
A named person on your side who receives reports and makes the proceed-or-withdraw decision. Verification stalls when the report has no owner.
Your policy on discrepancies, agreed in advance: what is a stop, what is a conversation, and who signs off an exception.
Candidate contact and documents routed promptly. Most delay in the first week is documents that have not been collected, not checks that are slow.
Clarity on timing, whether checks start at offer stage or after joining, since that decides whether a discrepancy is found before or after the person is on your rolls.
By sector
The method is the same; what changes is who you are hiring and where they drop out. Each sector page covers the roles, the qualification floors and the locations that matter for it.
Other services
Typically employment history and exit status with previous employers, education and qualifications with the institution, current and permanent address, identity against government ID, criminal and court records in the relevant jurisdictions, and professional reference checks. Which of these apply is decided per role before the candidate is asked for consent.
It depends almost entirely on how quickly third parties respond, so no single figure is honest. Identity and address checks usually close quickly; employment verification with a company that has shut down, or education with an institution running its own queue, can stay open far longer. Checks are run in parallel and chased on a schedule, and anything still open at the end is reported as open rather than as clear.
Yes. Verification of a current employer is sequenced deliberately, with the candidate's agreement, and is usually held until after they have resigned or joined. Every other component, education, address, identity, court record, previous employers, can be completed in the meantime, so the report is nearly finished by the time the last piece can safely be run.
The report shows both versions side by side: what the candidate stated and what the source confirmed. The candidate is given the opportunity to explain and to produce evidence, and their response is recorded. Some discrepancies are genuine record-keeping errors at the employer's end. The decision to proceed or withdraw remains yours.
Yes, in writing and before any check begins. Consent is component-specific, a candidate agrees to employment, education, address, identity, court-record and reference checks individually rather than in a blanket clause. Without it the verification is neither lawful nor usable, so no check is initiated on a verbal go-ahead.
Before, wherever the timeline allows. Checks started at offer stage usually close before the joining date, which means a discrepancy surfaces while the decision is still reversible. Post-joining verification is workable and sometimes unavoidable, but it leaves you with a person already on the rolls if something material comes back.
Yes. Verification is offered on candidates sourced by your own team or another agency, on the same basis as candidates we place, consent first, checks run in parallel, each component reported separately with insufficiencies named. It is also used on existing employees where a role changes to one that handles money, data or access.
Get started
Tell us the role, the numbers and the deadline. We'll come back within one business day with questions and an honest view of what it will take.
Start hiring