Slashdot Mirror
When Background Checks Go Wrong...
Kraken137 asks: "A friend of mine recently got a new job, and as a routine part of the hire process, a background check was done. At 5pm on the Friday before she was to start work, she was notified that the background check had turned up a felony on her record, and as a result, she could not be hired. My friend has never done anything worse than a speeding ticket, so she was suitably confused. If the incorrect results of a background check led to someone not being hired, or being fired, etc... would the person have a legal recourse against the security company?" In this, the age of information, where the numbering, collating, indexing and cross-referencing of millions of identities happens in a single second, the fact that mixups like this still occur disturbs me. What kind protections are in place when the accidental twiddling of a bit can change your entire history?
"[In the end] she ended up having to go to the county courthouse for some sort of proof of her identity, and then had to get them to re-do the background check. The matter was resolved, and she started work (a week late however). The felony actually belonged to someone in another state with the same name as my friend (but with a different date of birth and Social Security number). My friend has a very common last name, and a common first name as well. That got me to thinking. Are security companies who do background checks responsible for incorrect results?"
As someone with an HR background, I can really only stress what a legal minefield HR is today. Practictioners must constantly ride the fence between making the best hirinig decisions based on the company's goals and the legal mandates set by the federal and state governments. My question is this: did the job truly require that the prospective new hire have a "clean" background. It is illegal to discriminate based on arrests, for example, as this has what is called a "disparate impact" on minorities. In addition, there are few jobs in which a check for convictions can be truly justified. For example, someone who is interviewing for the job of Controller or CFO could legally be investigated for fraud, theft of company funds, etc. It will be interesting to see how this turns out. I hope that someone will keep us updated on this, if possible.
I boosted a few items when I was a kid, but I didn't turn into a career criminal, and I wouldn't do it again. Just because you do something stupid as a kid doesn't mean you're gonna be stealing cars and such later on. You seem to have the same mentality that leads people to try kids as adults even though the state obviously believes them to be incapable of acting as adults, which is why they don't get all the rights and privileges of adults. The same mentality that gets those stupid "zero tolerance" rules and things like California's "3-strike" rule, instituted. Makes no sense.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Slander tends to come in a more transitory form.
This seems somewhat more like slander.
In any case, if the security company isn't abject in their apologies, then it seems likely that they are vulnerable to a lawsuit in the matter, assuming we're talking about the litigation-happy United Suers of America.
It's probably a rather better idea to sue the security company than to draw the employer into the fray...
There is doubtless room for the damages to be significantly more than the one week's worth of wages, from two perspectives:
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
And then sue a few extra parties. Make sure at least one either grosses over a billion dollars a year, or at least have good VC backing.
Someone will settle out-of-court, just to be safe, and you'll get a few million out of it.
In fact, I think I'm going to go sue someone for making the traffic too congested this morning.
Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
With some exceptions (where others' security is at risk, like pilots, etc ...), it is illegal to request such tests here (France). I believe they face jail time for illegal practice of medicine if they don't do it with a registered MD, or if they did, the doctor would lose his license (and maybe go to jail as well). On top of that, with current computer privacy laws (which are actually around 20 year old), whoever is keeping this data (test results for instance) faces up to 3 years of jail time if they store it in a computer somehow (strange, but having it just on plain paper does'nt count) and they 1- don't inform you that they're storing it, 2- dont't give you access to the information or allow you to correct it and possibly delete it, 3- don't register their database with the CNIL (Commission on Computers and Freedom).
I find those test thingies quite scary. I would just plain refuse them, personally. Call me ideological -- but if everybody caves in, things like that will never change. Plus, as a sought after computer geek, it's your responsibility to do this. By doing this, you might force companies to change their whole policy -- do they really want to lose a candidate they desperately need for some useless and immoral policy? -- and make the world a better place for less lucky persons who don't have that bargaining power.
Think about it. It's a matter of honour.
My name is Charles Edward Borner. (No Jr, no II, no nothing)
My father's name is Charles Edward Borner. (No Sr, no I, no nothing).
Our SSN's are even similar (first three numbers identical).
I was born in 1973, my father in 1940.
A couple years back I went to buy a car, cash. They go looking at my credit check. The guy comes back and tells me I have many years of excellent credit.
Fighting to keep the surprise from my face, I thank him and buy the car. On the loan app, however, I made SURE that all the information supplied was mine though. I don't even want to THINK about what my father'd do to me if I fscked up his credit rating.
Probably sic my mom on me.
**SHUDDER** Talk about your archetypical fate worse than death.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
You could still breach your contract and sue. They'd have to countersue for breach of contract. My bet is that they'd end up getting the worst of it, and would prbably just try to settle it.
It can be worse than that.
We once had a very good employee who had inadvertently closed a checking account while two long-uncashed checks were still extant in his previous state of residence.
When the checks were cashed they both bounced (of course) and since it was two checks equalling a total of more than $50, he was charged with a felony.
Since he could not be located, it was adjudicated in absentia, and he was convicted of a felony he never knew he'd committed.
He had been working for us for weeks when his background check uncovered this, and corporate policy required that he be fired.
He was a damn good employee, who had made a common mistake, and then suffered because of the incompetence of some sherrif's deputy thousands of miles away who couldn't be bothered to do a proper check.
--
What, and get a reputation for being such a stickler for paperwork?
I think what we need are accuracy statistics for reporting agencies. [Pulling made-up numbers out of my ass...] If TRW's report is accurate 91.7% of the time, and Equifax's is accurate 93.1% of the time, and their customers know this, then they might have incentive to find errors on their own.
If they can make "false positive" reports on bad credit history, then they can make "false negatives" too. It's the bank's money that's on the line, not TRW's.
Think in those terms, and you can change "Mistakes are fined" to "Mistakes are fired."
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Her connection with the felon in question ended up being the following:
Other than that, they had different DOB's, SSN's, Drivers License Numbers...
I bought a motorcycle and went to get a learner's permit. They said I had a speeding ticket that needed to be paid, from a city I have never driven in 1000 km and a ferry ride away.
After some digging and waiting it turned out the ticket was for someone with the same last name and a drivers license number similar to mine.
When I wrote a formal complaint that it wasn't me they sent the form back saying I needed to "nominate" the person who was actually doing the driving. How do I know, I wasn't there?! And they could see from the ticket the guy signed that it obviously wasn't me!
So I sent another letter politely explaining that the person processing the form must have been slightly drunk, and the ticket was promptly removed from my file.
My wife and I are adopting soon, and a criminal record check is required. I've never done anything that would cause me to have a record, but for some reason this story makes me nervous.
i think in arkansas it's a felony if you're going over twice the posted limit, not too easy on a highway, but supposedly they get you coming through in school zones...i know this because i dated a girl who had a felony and this was it. i was a little disappointed...
"Leave the gun, take the canoli."
this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
If it kept me from permanently recieving the job (ie. even after the whole mess was cleared up, someone had been hired in my place), I would sue the company performing the background check for punitive damages.
If not, I'm sure you can take it to court and get yourself reinstated.
I once applied for a job, and had to take a drug test. There was an error, and when I explained to them that I was very seriously not on drugs, they held the position till there was a retest. If they are professional, and know that mistakes can be made they will hold the position for you.
Ahha yes, the DoD background check, I remember them well. This was when I was finalizing my employment with Lockheed. I was having my SECOND interview with Mr. DoD and he starts down a line of questioning that makes no sense to me. About the fourth question he ask did I know that my Father was a draft dodger back in the 60's. After I stopped laughing I ask what gave him this impression, My Father was a DI in the U.S. Army back in the 60's, actually he had been in the Army since he turned 17 and had served in three wars by then. Mr. DoD then looked at me and said "No, I meant your BIRTH father" After another burst of laughter I informed him that I have tried twice to see my adoption records and that the state has refuses to let me see them on both occasions. After that the interview was finished and I went to work the next week. I just think it is rather funny that the DoD can look at (and not disclose) the very records I have been trying to get my hands on for 20 years.
__ Fast - Cheap - Good Pick any two
right now, somebody is probably turning your background information into a comodity and trading it with other fans, just to make some silicon valley fat cat rich. that really chaps my hide!
now, i'm going back to the drums...
Can your IM do this?
Of course, wearing a Tommy Hilfiger shirt is itself a felony, so no harm is done in this case.
Couldn't this been seen as libel in a way? I mean, the company misrepresented her. Surely then, she can claim a week's worth of wages, plus damages... Ideas?
Score:-1, Funny
I ran into a problem along the same vein with Maryland's Dept of Motor Vehicles. My 1969 Camaro was registered in DE. After having the tag around 6 months I received notification from a collection agency in CA that parking fines were overdue for that tag. Considering the violation was over two years old and for a jeep (exactly - what the heck?) I sent them a letter that I had been issued my tag only 6 months before and owned an entirely different vehicle, providing a nice suggestion they find out who was issued the tag at the time it was ticketed.
So what do I get in response? A threatening form letter along with instructions to prove I was not the guilty party. My second letter had a copy of all the correspondence up to this point attached and was a single sheet of white paper with the following words: "You are morons."
Haven't heard from them in 4 years.
Andrew Borntreger
Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters
If we could easily see into records pertaining to ourselves, this problem would never occur.
Read The Transparent Society Will Technology Force Us to Choose Between Privacy and Freedom? by David Brin for a well thought out map of the root problem, and a solution to it.
Here are some of the questions it poses:
Thousands of people commit felony theft in the United States all the time, but these people are only prosecuted when the government officials want a conviction on something. Anyone who owes money to a bank on their vehicle is guilty of theft if they drive that vehicle across a state line without first notifying the lending institution. And yes, people _have_ done jail time on this charge. It is one of the many ways police can get a conviction on a person through selective enforcement of the law. In my opinion, selective enforcement of the law is one of the larger threats to individual freedoms and liberties.
Why do people trust these background checks and pre-employment tests so much? Whatever happened to a good old intesive face to face interview?
As an example I took a test to be hired by a armored car company several years ago. It was to be one in a series of tests and background checks (including a polygraph) that a person had to go through to get employement with this company. To make a long story short I was told that the test said that I was, in this order, too smart and possibly dishonest. A short time later one of their own employees, presumably having passed all these tests, stole over $7mil from one of their trucks in broad daylight at a major interstate rest stop and got away with it (caught by his own stupidity several months later).
Just because someone passes these tests and checks doesn't mean that they won't rip you off or comprise your business. It does give a basis but relying on it too heavily is a sure way to get screwed.
In other words, human beings don't have unique identifiers, and many of the things you might expect to be a unique identifier can change, be misentered, forgotten, lost or stolen.
And if you try to force someone to have a unique identifier assigned by you, you are overstepping your bounds in a way people accustimed to at least the illusion of personal freedom and privacy (e.g. Americans) will react badly to. You are also setting up an abusable system.
So it's a mess because the real world is a mess. It's very easy to forget that people are human beings, not tuples in a database.
There are gonna be search errors. A woman in North Carolina recently got thrown in jail for three days because her driver's license number matched the SSN of a fugitive in New Jersey. The fact that she's white, female and in her fifties did nothing to deter the arresting officers from mistaking her with a 22 year old Latino male, so she's suing for wrongful imprisonment. Gonna win, too, I hope.
--
This is not my sandwich.
I don't see a prolem with information storage. After working at a bank for some time, I see the good in knowing that the person you're handing a $5000 check to is actually going to pay you back based on their credit history.
The problem is, there isn't any real accountability. Oh, sure, you can "challenge" items in your credit report and the like, and the companies like TRW and Equifax have a time frame to fix things, but there's no incentive for them to verify on their own what's true or not. And even more insidious is the crime of identidy theft, where someone uses your information as their own to purchase things, defraud others, or even commit crimes in your name.
So here's my wish-list for how to prevent problems. I haven't narrowed down any ideas, but some general thoughts.
I want to see whatever information a company has on me, whenever I want to.
If some company, government organization, or otherwise has information on or about me, it should be my right to see it whenever I wish. Nobody has the right to me except me.
Mistakes are fined.
If there is a mistake in the information, the information holder has to prove that they are right (example: if it says I had a Nordstrom card in 1988 and I never did, they have to prove that I did). If they are wrong, then they are fined some reasonable amount. How long would it take for credit reporting agencies to start being more precise in their information gathering and reporting techniques when they learn it will cost them money?
There's probably more I could add, but that's the short list. The main theme here is accountability and respect; my information is mine, and if you want to hold it, then you'd damn well better get it right, or else.
As always, I could be wrong.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
At some time around 1994 (not long after my mother died), the credit bureaus collectively decided that I am now "Johnny P. Narkinsky", with my Social Security Number, my Birthdate, and my mother's credit record!
I have disputed items in my credit file. I have fought. I have written letters. Nothing I do can convince them that my mother is dead and I am not she. In fact, one (which will remain nameless due to outstanding litigation) now claims that I am dead.
But wait, it gets worse. A couple of years ago, I was involved in a lawsuit. I won the lawsuit (filed by an apartment complex) and won a countersuit claiming fraud and a couple of other things. Since then, all three credit bureaus are claiming that I lost this lawsuit -- and listing this information as a matter of the public record.
I have been unable to get any of them to remove this entry -- instead, they simply list it as "disputed". I have sent them copies of the written judgement, I have pointed out their error, and they are still non-responsive.
Because of the laws congress passed protecting credit bureaus (while claiming to be for a consumer's protection) from defamation suits, I am unable to find a lawyer who really wants to file suit against these jerks. They have ignored threatening letters from my lawyer -- which are about all I can do.
My solution? I have named my son John Paul Narkinsky. Not John Paul Narkinsky Jr. John Paul Narkinsky. I plan to name my twins sons to be born in Nov. James Patrick Narkinsky and Jeremy Peter Narkinsky. If I am so fortunate as to have a fourth, I will name him Jonah Petronius or something equally difficult.
Girls will all be Jane Paula, Jennifer Patricia, or something equally appropriate. If I am truly blessed, one will be born on my birthday. This one, regardless of gender, will be Johnny P. Narkinsky.
I plan to teach ALL of my kids to give only their initials, and to make up a social security number whenever they are asked.
As Heinlein pointed out in Friday, it is the duty of all citizens in this day and age to confuse computers. If you can't avoid a tax, pay too much. Transpose digits. Anything to make information mining difficult.
Are you doing YOUR part?
--
-- Slashdot sucks.
She needs to go to Central Services and fill out a 27B/6.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
Is that speeding in excess of a certain number of Miles Per Hour is in some juristictions a felony. Typically it's between 15-20 over. And many also fail to realize that when you just pay the ticket you're basically "pleading guilty". So if you have a speeding ticket for doing 70mph in a 50mph zone, and you simply pay the ticket ( note that just paying the ticket is really just waiving your rights to a jury trial ) then you've for all intents and purposes been convicted of a felony crime.
:) Note: i may be wrong with the 15-20, in some places it could be lower or much higher. it varies.
Of course, if i'm wrong, i will be corrected
This sort of thing has been discussed repeatedly and at length in the Risks Digest. You guys do read the Risks Digest, don't you?
The Risks Digest is more verbosely known as the Forum On Risks To The Public In Computers And Related Systems, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, Peter G. Neumann, moderator. It's a great and fascinating thing to read; it covers almost any topic even tangentially related to the risks of using computers and digital systems, including privacy issues, Y2K issues, software in critical systems, encryption policy, etc., etc. It is known on usenet as comp.risks, and is also available via e-mail. It's an old forum; in the online archives you can read discussions following such famous events as the loss of the Shuttle Challenger and the Robert Morris Internet Worm. Highly recommended reading for anyone making software.
Also recommended are the Privacy Forum and the Computer Privacy Digest.
--Jim
A colleague of mine went to an interview in conjunction with obtaining a top secret security clearance. Once there, he was confronted with and asked to explain a ten-year-old photo of himself, age 12, walking into the Polish embassy. He had apparently arranged to meet someone there while gathering data for a middle school geography report.
Someone in our intelligence apparatus was lurking outside the embassy, taking pictures of random kids, identifying them, and holding on to the photos so that they could surface a decade later during an NCIS investigation.
Creepy.
Chris
I called my uncle who is a lawyer in my area to ask him about this one once. My question was concerning a failed drug test tht my friend had. He failed it due to incomplete results. Basically..what he found out later is that the company lost his sample and could not finish testing. He started his job one month late because of this. (While he had to wait for the next training courses) My uncle said for me to tell my friend just to have a lawyer call them and they will settle. They paid 3/4 of one month salary + lawyer fees for him in the settlement.
I'd tell your friend just to threaten a lawsuit for loss of wages and grief caused by misinformation. They will never win it and probably will just settle.
I gave my 2 weeks notice and on the day before I planned to drive from Chicago to New York, I got a phone call that there was a warrant for my arrest in Chicago for failing to appear in court to answer a drug pusession charge. I was told not to report for work on the following Monday. After making a few calls in Chicago, I was reassured that the whole thing was bogus -- no one had a warrant for my arrest. I drove to New York and the background check people sent someone to the courthouse to get a copy of the warrant which was for someone with the same name but a different birthdate. The company did the right thing: I started on Wednesday instead of Monday and got paid for the two days of work I missed while they were clearing up the problem. I just had my 5th anniversary with them last month.
The background check folks screw up sometimes. You need to get the report in writing from them -- you are entitled to a copy under Federal law. You have a recourse if they refuse to correct gross errors and their failure to correct causes you financial damage.
Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected
Anomalous: deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected
Canard: a false or unfounded repor
When the background check came back, they denied him clearance on the grounds that he lied on his air force enlistment papers. The lie? He said that his mother was born in Germany when in actual fact, she was born in Austria.
The funny thing is, he didn't know she was born in Austria, and she didn't know she was born in Austria. The background check revealed that she was adopted by a german family, another fact that she didn't know her whole life up until that point.
Bingo Foo
----
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!