TODAY | November 09, 2012
>>> back now at 7:41 with "rossen reports." finding a new job is hard enough but now experts say there may be a hidden flaw that can ruin your chance of getting hired. today national investigative correspondent jeff rossen is here with the details.
>> good morning. we all know when you apply for a job most employers will do a criminal background check . we do them here. nothing to worry about, right? because you're not a criminal. well, think again. experts say the background check companies are causing innocent people to lose jobs, mistaking them for drug felons, armed robbers, even sex offenders . it happened to catherine taylor . a stay at home mom looking to get back to work. the red cross wanted to hire her. as an accountant.
>> i was supposed to start work the following week.
>> reporter: but then suddenly catherine 's job offer was yanked. a criminal background check had come back with a long rap sheet of drug felonies. the problem is, it wasn't her.
>> i was devastated. it was like my whole world was just torn apart.
>> reporter: the company hired to run the background check in 2006 , choicepoint, one of the biggest, mixed her up with this catherine taylor , a repeat drug offender with the same date of birth but nothing else in common. they didn't even live in the same state.
>> i have never been convicted of anything, nonetheless have a traffic ticket.
>> reporter: consumer advocates say these mistakes are happening far too often. take leonard smith . when he applied for a job the background check company, sterling info systems, confused him with this sex offender , who was in prison at the time. it also happened to james hines , an innocent dad. the background check company adp mixed him up with michael james hines , a convicted sex offender in a different state. they don't even have the same first name. the companies say accuracy is important, but errors do happen.
>> consumers are losing jobs by the thousands every year because of bad background checks that are run on them.
>> reporter: jim francis is an attorney specializing in these cases. he says too often background check companies rely solely on computers to match the data with no one checking to make sure the results are correct. a billion dollar industry, he says, that is well aware of the problem. if the companies know this problem exists, why not just fix it?
>> they would have to spend money on personnel and instituting procedures which would carve into their profits.
>> reporter: under federal law , the companies are required to use reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy.
>> the error rate is less than 10%.
>> we went straight to the industry group representing those companies.
>> accuracy is paramount.
>> reporter: how do you explain background companies coming back with a different date of birth, different state, just matching a first and last name in some cases. does that seem accurate to you?
>> it -- what i will say to that is that the most important thing is to let viewers know how background checks are conducted. you're speaking of hypotheticals.
>> reporter: we asked her about a real life example. i want to show you a picture. this woman's name is catherine taylor . she lives in arkansas and applied for a job with the local red cross . the background check comes back and says she has a long rap sheet of drug felonies. turns out they mistook her with this woman who lives in a different state. how does this happen?
>> you know, if there are errors in a report individuals do have an opportunity to contest it so i'm sorry. i just don't know all the facts of that particular case.
>> reporter: catherine did contest it but by the time choicepoint cleared it up, that job was long gone.
>> they need to have tighter, stricter controls. you're talking about human lives. this has got to stop.
>> the company that ran catherine taylor 's background check was bought by lexus nexus . they say their systems have since improved and now they have a 99.8% accuracy rate. experts say if this happens to you, you don't have many options, unfortunately. you can contact the background check company as catherine did and dispute it. the problem is, they have 30 days to investigate. by then the job could be long gone as it was with catherine . the only other option unfortunately, savannah, is to sue the company but once again the job isn't there when you want it. they just go down the list.
>> doesn't remedy it if you don't get the job. thanks for bringing the story. appreciate