InfoTrack Information Services & Instant Checkmate disciplined for inaccurate background checks
It's tough enough landing a job these days.
So imagine if that background check provided to your potential employer wrongly identified you as a possible sex offender. That's what the Federal Trade Commission says happened in a case it's settling with InfoTrack Information Services of Deerfield, Ill. The company provides employment background screening services. The FTS said InfoTrack gave inaccurate information suggesting that job applicants potentially were registered sex offenders. According to the FTC’s complaints, both companies operated as consumer reporting agencies under the law but failed to abide by the FCRA. The FTC charged, among other things, that in many instances InfoTrack provided inaccurate information suggesting that job applicants potentially were registered sex offenders, possibly causing employers to reject their job application. According to the complaint against Instant Checkmate, that company failed to require that users of its reports identify themselves or certify the purpose for which they were seeking consumers’ information. “Consumers shouldn’t have to worry that they’ll be turned down for a job or an apartment because of false information in a consumer report,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Data brokers that operate as consumer reporting agencies have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy of the information they sell for decisions about whether to hire someone, extend them credit, rent them an apartment, or insure them.” In many instances, the FTC said, InfoTrack would search the National Sex Offender Registry with a first and last name, say for example "John Smith." But often, there wasn't a birth date — so in its report to the employer, InfoTrack would turn over all John Smiths in the database as "possible matches." According to the FTC’s complaint, InfoTrack and its owner, Steve Kaplan, violated the FCRA by failing to use reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of consumer report information obtained from sex offender registry records; failing to provide FCRA-required notices; and failing to provide written notices to consumers of the fact that InfoTrack reported public record information to prospective employers, when that information was likely to adversely affect consumers’ ability to obtain employment.
The court order against InfoTrack and Kaplan requires the defendants to comply with the FCRA by:
maintaining reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of consumer report information;
providing required FCRA notices; and
notifying consumers when InfoTrack has provided public record information about them that is likely to have an adverse effect upon their ability to obtain employment.
The civil penalty against InfoTrack and its owner, Steve Kaplan, calls for a $1 million payment. But everything except $60,000 is suspended for inability to pay.
The FTC also announced that Instant Checkmate of San Diego has agreed to settle charges it failed to verify the identity of people purchasing background reports that were marketed to landlords and employers.
Instant Checkmate runs a website that lets users search public records on people, including addresses and arrest records, along with birth, marriage and divorce records. Because Instant Checkmate billed itself as providing background reports to landlords and employers, the FTC said the company qualified as a consumer reporting agency. That means it is required to take reasonable steps to ensure that those using the reports have a legitimate business need, the commission said.
The court order against Instant Checkmate prohibits the company from violating the FCRA by:
furnishing consumer reports to anyone who does not have an FCRA-defined permissible purpose;
failing to maintain reasonable procedures to limit the furnishing of reports to people with permissible purposes;
failing to maintain reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the reports; and
failing to provide User Notices.
The company has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $525,000.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/data-brokers-disciplined-consumer-protections-23261292
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/04/two-data-brokers-settle-ftc-charges-they-sold-consumer-data
Image source: http://www.bigdata-startups.com/BigData-startup/keeping-track-people-keeping-track-infographic/