Victimisation complaint redaction is the removal of personal data from a claim raised under Equality Act 2010 s.27. That section makes it unlawful to subject someone to a detriment because they brought proceedings, gave evidence, or alleged a contravention — the protected conduct s.27(2) lists. anonym.plus marks names, contacts, and dates on your device, so the record stays clear while the people are shielded.
When this applies
The complaint names the worker, the alleged actor, and the earlier protected act. You strip those identifiers before the record circulates.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Open the document in anonym.plus on your device.
- The app marks worker and alleged-actor names.
- Built-in OCR reads scanned prior-complaint pages.
- Keep the protected-act timeline in place.
- Swap or black out the confirmed identifiers.
- Save the clean copy locally.
What you need to provide
- The complaint (PDF, DOCX, or scan).
- An operator (Replace keeps the timeline readable).
- Optional alias map for a repeat worker.
PII entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | the worker → [COMPLAINANT] |
| Names | PERSON | alleged actor → [RESPONDENT] |
| Contact | EMAIL_ADDRESS | w@example.co.uk → [EMAIL] |
| Dates | DATE_TIME | demoted 8 July → [DATE] |
| Location | LOCATION | Cardiff office → [LOCATION] |
| Identifiers | UK_NINO | QQ 12 34 56 C → [NINO] |
Compliance achieved
- Keeps the protected conduct legible under Equality Act 2010 s.27(2) — bringing proceedings, giving evidence or information, or making an allegation.
- Preserves the detriment and its timing, which is the causal link s.27(1) turns on.
- Reaches a former worker, since s.108 covers relationships that have ended.
- Leaves the employer-liability question under s.109 answerable, including the reasonable-steps defence in s.109(4).
- Holds to the accuracy duty in UK GDPR Art. 5(1)(d), offline throughout.
Anonymise victimisation complaints offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
Shielding the person who came forward is hard. A unique event, such as a specific demotion, can identify them once names go. The tool cannot judge whether the earlier step was protected conduct, or whether the treatment followed from it — both are for the decision-maker. Confidentiality supports the very s.27 duty at issue.
Frequently asked questions
Can the tool hide who raised the matter?
It removes names and contacts. A unique event can still point back to them, so review the text. Keeping their identity quiet supports the s.27 duty.
What counts as protected conduct?
Section 27(2) lists it: bringing proceedings, giving evidence or information in connection with proceedings, doing any other thing for the purposes of the legislation, or alleging a contravention. Keep that timeline intact.
Is the claim uploaded?
No. The app runs locally, so the claim and its pages stay on your device.