What if I think someone else sat for me?
What to do if someone else sat a certifying Assessment in your name, and what AIRS-J/1 says happens next.
Judgment is how well a person decides once AI has given the answer. AIR APAC certifies people against its Standard for judgment in AI-enabled work, AIRS-J/1. A certification describes the person who sat the Assessment. The Standard treats identity as essential. It says: "A simulation-based credential fails at the point where scenarios leak or identity is unverified." (Section 9)
This page answers the person whose name is on the sitting first. It then gives an employer the two answers it needs.
What does "someone else sat for me" mean here?
It means another person took a certifying sitting in your name. A result or a credential then carries your name for work you did not do. The Standard's word for this is impersonation (Section 18.4). A technical problem during your own sitting is not impersonation.
How does AIR APAC check who is sitting?
Section 9.1 requires identity to be verified at the start of each certifying session, by a method recorded in the assessment log. A remote session requires a live check. A hiring Assessment is sat in person under supervision, unless the approved instrument records screen and camera for the whole session. AIR APAC announces such instruments on its published list. A recording is evidence for the integrity process in Section 18.4 and is never used in scoring. Every employment-grade result (an Assessment result at Moderate or High confidence, Section 12.8) states its sitting mode, in person or remote.
What should I do first?
Tell AIR APAC in writing through the contact page, choosing the topic "Appeal, complaint or access support". The complaints procedure says you do not need to have sat an assessment. Give the credential code if you have it, and say what you know and how you learned it. Under Section 18.7, a complaint may concern conduct, an approved instrument or a certified person.
Can I see what was done in my name?
Section 14.5 gives a candidate the right to obtain their own transcript and result, and to request correction of factual errors in it. The Standard does not say whether a person whose name was used by someone else counts as the candidate. Ask for both when you write to AIR APAC. The Standard calls the transcript and scoring record "AIR APAC's record of the assessment" (Section 14.4).
What happens to a credential from that sitting?
Impersonation is one of the grounds for suspension and revocation that Section 18.4 lists. The same section says the credential "remains valid during the process unless the allegation is impersonation". For the other grounds, the credential stays valid while the process runs. Impersonation is the exception, in the Standard's own words.
What is the process?
Section 18.4 sets out the process. Written notice is given, with the specific allegation and the evidence. There are 21 days to respond. A panel of three drawn from the review board decides and gives written reasons. The decision can be appealed under Section 18.5.
Can I appeal?
Under Section 18.5, a candidate may appeal a certification-status decision, an employment-grade result released to an employer, or a suspension, within 30 days. The grounds in Section 18.6 include "a procedural failure under Sections 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 15" and "the sitting mode required by Section 9.1 not met". An appeal on a result released for hiring is decided within ten working days. Appeal is free for the first instance. The appeals page sets out how to appeal.
What does the public register record?
The register records the credential's status, with its code, track, dates and a plain-language scope (Section 14.1). It does not record the employer, the dimension scores or any transcript content. The Standard does not say what the register shows while the process runs. Anyone who holds the credential code can verify the entry free of charge, with no account (Sections 14.2 and 14.3).
I am an employer and a result in front of me looks wrong. What do I do?
Use the complaints procedure: under Section 18.7, a complaint may concern a certified person. If the result is employment-grade, it states its sitting mode (Section 9.1). Check it against the mode you expected. The Standard states that a complaint "does not change certification status except through the due process in Sections 18.4 to 18.6". The employment decision is the employer's. AIR APAC "does not make, and does not accept responsibility for, the employer's decision about the person" (Section 12.6).
If a result changes, who is told?
In an appeal, the parties who received the result are sent the decision. Where the result changed, they are also sent the corrected result, which replaces the first for every recipient (Section 18.5).
What this does not claim
This page does not say how often impersonation happens. It sets no response time beyond those in the Standard. It does not say what happens to the person who raised the concern, beyond the process in Section 18.4. It does not tell an employer whether to act on a concern before that process ends. It is not legal advice.
AIR APAC publishes the standard for judgment in AI-enabled work, certifies people against it through its official instrument, and stands behind every result.