It’s one of those situations you’d expect to see in an episode of Person of Interest or every other crime show, but this has been an ongoing nightmare for one job seeker.
According to Essence, a recent lawsuit has been filed by a Connecticut resident against HR software provider ADP’s background-check screening arm “APD Crim Radar,” alleging the firm violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act when it falsely flagged that he was a convicted drug distributor, costing him a newly offered job.
The plaintiff applied for a position as a part-time patient coordinator at a Connecticut dental practice sometime around August 2022. He was offered the job, contingent on a successful background check.
In the May 10 complaint, Ramos, III, v. ADP Screening and Selection Services, Inc., the complainant claims the dental practice used ADP Screening and Selection Services to conduct the background check.
The background check screening firm then used two methods “its own proprietary software, “ADP Crim Radar” and a third-party vendor, which checked the criminal records at a local courthouse.
While its own software found no criminal records, the third-party vendor reportedly “found” four criminal convictions, including a felony conviction for possession with intent to sell/dispense, on his record.
The vendor also falsely claimed the plaintiff’s birth date matched that of the individual in the courthouse records. Instead, the plaintiff claims that it had returned records of a different individual with the same name.
After receiving the background check results, the dental practice rescinded the offer. And while the plaintiff was permitted to dispute the information, ADP only allows this after sending the report to the employer, the complaint states.
The plaintiff alleged that ADP violated the FCRA by failing to “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy,” a compliance procedure required by law.
The plaintiff and putative class are seeking statutory damages “of not less than $100 and not more than $1000” in addition to punitive damages, attorney fees, and costs, per the complaint.
In a statement to HR Dive, ADP said they are refuting the claims:
At ADP, integrity and compliance is of utmost importance to us.We have strong and proven procedures in place that comply with FCRA rules. This includes engaging public record researchers to obtain accessible records from the actual courts, to ensure that ADP Screening and Selection Services provides accurate and reliable background screening results to our clients.
These vendors are required to follow specific procedures in the review of these records. We are disputing the allegations put forth in this complaint, however, as this is ongoing litigation, we cannot share additional details at this time.