This task removes personal data from a recorded referral. UK GDPR Art. 14 requires telling a candidate that a reference was obtained from someone else, and Art. 6(1)(f) legitimate interests is the usual lawful basis for holding a referee's own contact details. The common law adds its own discipline. Since Spring v Guardian Assurance [1995] 2 AC 296, a referee owes the subject a duty of care. That duty means not giving a careless or misleading account. anonym.plus marks referee and subject identifiers on your device, so the assessment stays while contacts are shielded.
When this applies
Each referee shares a name, a telephone line, and a candid view on the person. That becomes data the candidate has a right to know about, under Art. 14. You trim the referee's own identifiers before the write-up enters a recruitment file. The substance of what they said stays intact.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Open the write-up in anonym.plus on your device.
- Built-in OCR reads a scanned testimonial letter.
- The app marks source and subject identifiers.
- Confirm each marking and keep the substance of feedback.
- Swap or black out the confirmed contacts.
- Save the cleaned copy locally.
What you need to provide
- The referral write-up (PDF, DOCX, or scan).
- An operator (Replace keeps the feedback readable).
- Optional alias map for repeat referees.
PII entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | referee Donovan → [REFEREE] |
| Names | PERSON | subject named → [CANDIDATE] |
| Contact | PHONE_NUMBER | +44 117 496 9081 → [PHONE] |
| Contact | EMAIL_ADDRESS | referee@example.co.uk → [EMAIL] |
| Org | ORGANIZATION | former employer → [EMPLOYER] |
| Location | LOCATION | office address → [ADDRESS] |
Compliance achieved
- Supports the third-party information duty in UK GDPR Art. 14.
- Referee contact data is processed on the legitimate-interests basis in Art. 6(1)(f).
- Keeps the substance a court could examine under the Spring v Guardian Assurance [1995] 2 AC 296 duty of care, while shielding the referee's own contacts.
- Offline work keeps the write-up off any server.
Anonymise reference checks offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
A candid account can identify a referee by role even without a name, and the Spring duty of care means the underlying assessment should stay accurate, not just anonymous. The app marks named items; review the feedback for unique clues before it is shared, and weigh any subject-access request with the ICO's guidance.
Frequently asked questions
Does the candidate have a right to know a reference was taken?
UK GDPR Art. 14 generally requires telling the candidate that data was obtained from a third party such as a referee. The usual exemptions can still apply. anonym.plus does not change that duty; it only shields the referee's own identifiers once the write-up is on file.
What does Spring v Guardian Assurance mean for a written reference?
That 1995 House of Lords case held a referee owes the subject a duty of care. The referee must not be careless or misleading. It is a reason to keep the substance of feedback accurate, even as you remove the referee's personal identifiers.
Can I keep the assessment readable after redaction?
Yes. Replace swaps each referee's contact details for a label. The feedback still reads in full without naming a real person.