Incorrect Background Information Reported for New Job

[MS3Driver]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I'm in the middle of a job application for a new company. I was recently caught up in an unfortunate circumstance where I ended up being charged with a "HS Possession of a Designated Substance" CA law code 11375(b)(2).

I have not been convicted of anything yet, and I was completely open about the pending charges when I talked to my potential employer. The charge refers to a couple pills of Xanex, and it can be filed as an infraction or a misdemeanor. My potential employer assured me that such a minor charge would not be cause for them to rescind my job offer.

Based on these assurances, I submitted my letter of resignation to my current job a little while ago. Fast forward to today:

I get a phone call this afternoon from the VP of HR at the new company. He calls to tell me my job offer has been rescinded based on results from my background check saying I was being charged with "An Intent to sell Designated Substance (Xanex)" which is a felony charge mandating a minimum of 1 year in prison. This background check was run by A-Check, an outside company specializing in running background checks and doing drug tests on new potential employees.

I immediately told him there must be some mistake, and I offered to fax him a copy of the letter I got from the DA stating the real charges. I also offered to give him the phone number of my lawyer, so he could talk to him to straighten things out. The VP of HR essentially ignored all these requests and treated me like some heinous criminal.

I immediately went home to double check the charges on the letter from the DA. What I discovered is that code 11375(b)(1) is the charge for "Possession with intent to sell" the felony. I was charged with sub-section (2) which is the simple possession charge that's only a minor misdemeanor. At this point my reputation has been thoroughly destroyed at the potential new company, because the VP of HR talked with all of my potential new bosses before he rescinded the offer, and on top of everything I have already quit my current job.


So... is this grounds for a defamation suit against A-Check? The results of my background check are being sent to me, as is my right. They basically completely messed up and didn't bother to double check the results before submitting them. This is the entire point of operation for this company. Shouldn't they be required to double check their information for accuracy before ruining someone's life?

Thanks for any responses. Sorry for the slightly long-winded post.

 

[justalayman]

where did you get your information?

(b) (1) Every person who possesses for sale, or who sells, any
substance specified in subdivision (c) shall be punished by
imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one
year or state prison.

You're going to have to clue me where I can find it is listed as a felony.

So... is this grounds for a defamation suit against A-Check

? Do you have any idea where they got their information? Do you have actual proof the A-Check did in fact tell the prospective employer (1) instead of (2)? Is it possible that A-Check simply included the entire statute and the prospective employer made the inference?

You really do not know how it came to be that the prospective employer believed you were charged with (1) instead of (2). You need to find out that before you point too many fingers.

 

[MS3Driver]

It's true I haven't actually seen the report yet. I'm waiting for it to come in the mail. The employer simply said that the report they received said I was being charged with a felony. I don't know if they made that inference or if it was "summarized" as such.

They seemed thoroughly convinced that it was filed as a felony though. Despite my numerous attempts to tell them there was a mistake, they wouldn't listen to me. One would think if the entire clause (parts 1 and 2) were included, that when I started so vehemently pointing out that there was a mistake they would have taken a closer look and said "Oh hey, he's right he was charged with the second clause not the first."

This and just the general tone of the conversation leads me to believe that there was in fact some distinct "summarization" to the extent of Felony charges for Intent to Sell. That was the term the VP kept repeating again and again.

So just for the sake of my curiosity... if this is the case would there potentially be grounds for a lawsuit or no?

 

[justalayman]

maybe but you are a long way from that. On top of that, if you find out there was something reported incorrectly, you will have to figure out who made the mistake.

wait for the report and see what it says before you get all prepped to sue anybody.

 

[cbg]

The background check company is NOT responsible for fact-checking the information they find. They report what is there.

Any lawsuit you would have would be against the person or entity who initially made the error.

 

[MS3Driver]

The background check company is NOT responsible for fact-checking the information they find. They report what is there.

Any lawsuit you would have would be against the person or entity who initially made the error.

I believe they found the correct information, but completely mis-interpreted or mis-reported the results. I have to admit it would be a relatively easy clerical mistake to simply look up the number, section b and take the first result without realizing there was yet another sub-section distinction. I honestly almost thought I was wrong when I first looked up the exact law wording, and had to re-read everything rather closely to realize I was only being charged with the lesser misdemeanor.

 

[justalayman]

wait for the report. read it, understand it. If the report is incorrect, then you have to find out who made the error. It might have been A-check or it might have been whomever they got the info from.

Maybe it's right and the prospective employer simply jumped to conclusions and then had a closed mind and didn't want to listen to you.

wait...patiently wait.

 

[MS3Driver]

Haha, alright I will. Check back beginning of next week, and I'll quote the relevant sections. Thanks for the initial feedback.