Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > FOR "OFFENDERS" > Employment
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Employment Finding post-incarceration employment can be an almost monumental task. Find tips, job offers and stories from those of us that have experienced it first hand.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-04-2009, 03:55 PM
NewOffender NewOffender is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41
Thanks: 9
Thanked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default The 7 Year Limit of Criminal Disclosure Law

Did a little researching and found out that at least half of the 50 States have laws that limit the report of a criminal conviction in background checks to the past 7 years.

Has anyone had any experience with this? That is to say based on your experiences do companies comply with these State laws?

Last edited by NewOffender; 07-04-2009 at 04:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 07-04-2009, 04:01 PM
NewOffender NewOffender is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41
Thanks: 9
Thanked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Can't post the link yet but if you type 7 year fcra california state you'll find it on yahoo or google.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-06-2009, 04:58 PM
DonFromWI DonFromWI is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2009
Location: WI, USA
Posts: 142
Thanks: 122
Thanked 73 Times in 39 Posts
Exclamation Not true

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOffender View Post
Did a little researching and found out that at least half of the 50 States have laws that limit the report of a criminal conviction in background checks to the past 7 years.

Has anyone had any experience with this? That is to say based on your experiences do companies comply with these State laws?
This is a very complicated area of law. The federal government dictates the minimum standards through the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) WHEN THE CHECK IS DONE THROUGH A 3RD PARTY. The FCRA doesn't apply to employers that conduct their own background checks. It also doesn't apply to background checks for positions that pay more than $75,000/year.

The FCRA does not stipulate a time limit for criminal offenses (it used to). Therefore, most states have no limitation on criminal conviction reporting unless the state law offers protection beyond the FCRA (see below). Those that do usually have income restrictions. For example, New York has a pretty good law (7 years) except that it only applies to income up to $25,000/year. Who can live on $25K/yr. in New York??? Finally, many industries or professions require extensive checks by law and are exempt from criminal reporting limitations regardless of state or federal law.

In my opinion, the California law is the best for an ex-offender. It uses the (FCRA) credit reporting standard of 7 years for criminal offenses, and covers both 3rd party and in-house background checks. I don't think there are any income restrictions as far as the criminal background aspect goes, either. In other words, it goes well beyond the FCRA federal level of protection.

Here are some FCRA basics:

http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16a-califbck.htm#3

Part 3. Federal FCRA -- Basics of Employment Background Checks
The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) sets the national standard for employment background checks. (15 U.S.C. §§1681 et seq.) Even in states like California that have laws governing background checks, employers have to follow the FCRA. State laws may give more rights to workers, but they cannot take away from the basic rights of the FCRA.
The FCRA covers "consumer reports" issued for multiple purposes, and this is a source of confusion to many individuals. In addition to covering credit checks, the FCRA also governs employment background checks for the purposes of "hiring, promotion, retention, or reassignment." To learn more about credit reporting, read the PRC's Fact Sheet 6, "How Private Is My Credit Report," www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs6-crdt.htm.
The federal FCRA applies only when an employment background check is prepared by an outside screening company. When a third party compiles a report, the FCRA requires (1) that you are notified that an investigation may be performed, (2) that you are given the opportunity to consent, and (3) that you are notified if information in the report is used to make an "adverse" decision about you.
But under the FCRA, if the employer does not hire a third party to conduct the investigation, but compiles the report itself, the provisions of the FCRA do not apply. However, California law does require some notice and access if the employer conducts its own report. This is discussed in the Part 4 below.
When an outside company prepares the report, the FCRA requires the employer to:
  • <LI class=text14-black>Give you notice on a separate document that a report may be required. <LI class=text14-black>Obtain your permission. <LI class=text14-black>Get your specific permission if medical information is requested.
  • Give a specific notice if your neighbors, friends, or associates will be interviewed about your "character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living." This is called an "investigative consumer report" under the FCRA.
Under the FCRA, negative information usually cannot be reported after seven years. Exceptions apply for bankruptcy information (10 years) and jobs or insurance policies over a certain dollar amount. The FCRA says that criminal convictions can be reported indefinitely.
The employer must give you a "pre-adverse action notice" along with a copy of the background report before an adverse action is taken. For job applicants, an "adverse action" means the employer has decided not to hire you based on the information in the report. For existing employees, an adverse action might be termination. Or it could be a decision to not promote you, or to demote you.
You should get a second notice after an adverse action, telling you how to dispute inaccurate or incomplete information. For more on employment background checks under the FCRA, see the Federal Trade Commission publication, "Using Consumer Reports: What Employers Need to Know," http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/credit/bus08.pdf. Also read PRC Fact Sheet 16, "Employment Background Checks: Jobseeker's Guide," www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm.

And the states with a 7-year rule:

http://securesystemsgroupltd.com/fcra.htm#5

The most recent change to the FCRA made criminal convictions reportable indefinitely. But, twelve states still follow the seven-year rule for reporting criminal convictions (for example, California Civil Code §1786). Those states are: CA, CO, KS, MD, MA, MT, NV, NH, NM, NY, TX, WA.

As far as compliance goes, I would say that it is hit-and-miss. Corporate policy usually is not very felon-friendly, however, you might be surprised. Many bigger companies do try to comply with employment law to some degree. I am familiar with a large biopharmaceutical company that typically asks for resumes, makes interview offers, and asks that you bring the completed application to the interview. They do not bring criminal history into the equation until after an interview is granted.

The main problem with compliance is this:

The application asks if you have ever been convicted of a felony. If you say "yes", you get no call. If you say "no" and are lying, they find it on the background check. Then you are denied the position for being dishonest. I like to call this corporate HR's "dirty little secret", their method of excluding ex-offenders from employment.

The irony is that in trying to exclude former law-breakers from their employment, they too are breaking the law. There is currently a movement to remove that type of question from the application because it gives a company an easy way to violate federal employment law.

If you have any more questions, I would be happy to answer them and/or steer you towards the appropriate resources to get them answered!

DonFromWI
Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to DonFromWI For This Useful Post:
Betamax (10-08-2009), ButterFliez (09-13-2011), Chynab (07-22-2009), cornered (07-08-2009), eladlrm (01-30-2011), gj07 (07-06-2009), Imisshimsomuch (07-18-2009), NewOffender (07-07-2009), noboundries (12-18-2009), OKCLobbyist (07-27-2011), pmitch10 (07-18-2009), QAngel (09-11-2011), Sheryl P. (12-12-2011)
  #4  
Old 07-06-2009, 05:35 PM
ginsiebel ginsiebel is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: oceanside, ca
Posts: 72
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

I have run into places that go back ten years in California. This has kept me from getting a job and mine was just a misdemeanor.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-07-2009, 06:45 PM
NewOffender NewOffender is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41
Thanks: 9
Thanked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ginsiebel View Post
I have run into places that go back ten years in California. This has kept me from getting a job and mine was just a misdemeanor.
So I take it there are places that there are still places that comply with the 7 year guidelines?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-08-2009, 04:46 AM
htiek123 htiek123 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 90
Thanks: 54
Thanked 53 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Brother New Offender,

There are only 7 states that have a 7 year limit on what can be included on a third party background check, and as posted above, most have salary limits of approximately 20,000 dollars. Meaning if you make more than 20,000 dollars the 7 year limit does not apply.

What this says is, you may work at McDonalds but nothing else. If a company run a background check on its own, they do not have to follow the FCRA and may use what ever they want.

California: CA Civil Code (Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act) 1785.13.6 – Conviction No consumer credit reporting agency shall make any consumer credit report containing any of the following items of information (6) Records of arrest, indictment, information, misdemeanor complaint, or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years. These items of information shall no longer be reported if at any time it is learned that in the case of a conviction a full pardon has been granted, or in the case of an arrest, indictment, information or misdemeanor complaint a conviction did not result.

Colorado: CRS 12-14-.3-105.3 (1)(e) – Reporting of information prohibited No consumer reporting agency shall make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (e) Records of arrest, indictment or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, predate the report by more than seven years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $75,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.

Kansas: KS Chapter 50 Article 7 – Fair Credit Reporting - Obsolete Information:
Except as authorized under subsection (b) of this section, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (5) records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime which, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven (7) years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $20,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.

Maryland: Code of Maryland §14-1203 (a) (5) - Reporting of obsolete information prohibited:
(a)Prohibited items of information – Except as authorized under subsection (b) of this section, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (5) Records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime which, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $20,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.

Massachusetts: M.G.L. Chapter 93, Section 52 – Information not to be contained in report; exceptions:
Except as authorized under subsection (b) no consumer reporting agency shall make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (5) Records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime which, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $20,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.
M.G.L. Chapter 151B, Section 4 (9) – Unlawful practices
It shall be unlawful practice: (9) For an employer, himself or through his agent, in connection with an application for employment, or the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, or the transfer, promotion, bonding, or discharge of any person, or in any other matter relating to the employment of any person, to request any information, to make or keep a record of such information, to use any form of application or application blank which requests such information, or to exclude, limit or otherwise discriminate against any person by reason of his or her failure to furnish such information through a written application or oral inquiry or otherwise regarding: (i) an arrest, detention, or disposition regarding any violation of law in which no conviction resulted, or (ii) and arrest, first conviction for any of the following misdemeanors: drunkenness, simple assault, speeding, minor traffic violation, affray, or disturbance of the peace, or (iii) any conviction of a misdemeanor where the date of such conviction or the completion of any period of incarceration resulting there from, whichever date is later, occurred five of more years prior to the date of such application for employment or such request for information, unless such person has been convicted of any offense within five years immediately preceding the date of such application for employment or such request for information.

Montana: Montana Code Annotated 2005 31-3-112 – Obsolete information:
No consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (5) records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime which, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than 7 years; (6) any other adverse item of information which antedates the report by more than 7 years.

Nevada: Nevada Revised Statutes 2005 598C.150 (2) – Purging of information from files of reporting agency; disclosure of purged information. A reporting agency shall periodically purge from its files and after purging shall not disclose: (2) Except as otherwise provided by a specific statute, any other civil judgment, a report of criminal proceedings, or other adverse information which precedes the repot by more than 7 years.

New Hampshire: HRS 359-B:5 - Obsolete Information
I. Except as authorized under paragraph II, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (e) Records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime which from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than 7 years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $20,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.

New Mexico: New Mexico Statute Chapter 56-3-6 – Report information; limitations:
A credit bureau may report the following matters for no longer than the specified periods: (5) arrests and indictments pending trial, or convictions of crimes for not longer than seven years from date of release or parole. Such items shall no longer be reported if at any time it learned that after a conviction a full pardon has been granted, or after an arrest or indictment a conviction did not result; and (6) any other data not otherwise specified in this section, for not longer than seven years.

New York: New York State Consolidated Laws Article 25 Section 380-j – Prohibited Information:
Prohibited information. (a) No consumer reporting agency shall report or maintain in the file on a consumer, information: (1) relative to an arrest or a criminal charge unless there has been a criminal conviction for such offense, or unless such charges are still pending. (f) (1) Except as authorized under paragraph two of this subdivision, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information. (V) records of conviction of crime which, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years.

Texas: Business & Commerce Code – Chapter 20 § 20.05 – Reporting of information Prohibited. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a consumer reporting agency may not furnish a consumer report containing information related to: (4) a record of arrest, indictment, or conviction of a crime in which the date of disposition, release, or parole predates the consumer report by more than seven years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $75,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.

Washington: RCW 19.182.040 – Consumer report – Prohibited information – Exceptions:
Except as authorized under subsection (2) of this section, no consumer reporting agency may make a consumer report containing any of the following items of information: (e) Records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of crime that, from date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years. Exception: If the salary of an individual equals or is reasonable expected to equal $20,000 or more, the 7-year restriction does not apply.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to htiek123 For This Useful Post:
Chynab (07-22-2009), noboundries (12-18-2009), OKCLobbyist (07-27-2011), persh (10-30-2009)
  #7  
Old 07-08-2009, 08:48 PM
kamiller kamiller is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2009
Location: california
Posts: 47
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

So do the states with the 7 year limit ask if you have ever been conviced of a felony or have you ever been convicted in the last 7 years?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-09-2009, 05:07 PM
htiek123 htiek123 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 90
Thanks: 54
Thanked 53 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Most of them ask if you have ever been convicted of a crime, however they can only report the last 7 years. Everything I read says to be upfront and honest, however if I lived in one of these states, I would certainly lie.

Most of these states have exceptions like, health care and working for the police, but for most corporate jobs, I'm sorry, but I would lie.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to htiek123 For This Useful Post:
Davisb (10-02-2012)
  #9  
Old 07-16-2009, 06:19 PM
Been-There Been-There is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Massachusetts US
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

According to LAC dot org in Hawaii employers cannot consider convictions more than 10 years old.

They list the most friendly states for employment as

New York, Hawaii and Connecticut tied for number 1
California at number 4
New Jersey, Illinois and Wisconsin tied at 5

I always wonder whether references to 'convictions' despite its plain meaning refer to release from prison or even the end date for probation which is considered a form of custody. That can change the clock considerably for some. I haven't been convicted of anything for more than 7 years but I'm within that for release from prison and my end date for supervision wasn't all that long ago.

Even in the best case unless they don't check decisions are based on the job and whether the crime is related in any way to the job duties.

Companies in most cases simply do not use a company for background checks that is bound by the 'credit reporting agency' restrictions.

It would be nice if the Government could reinforce the FCRA again to make it stick for background checks. Obama is our best chance for that in a long time. Here's hoping.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-17-2009, 06:22 AM
htiek123 htiek123 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 90
Thanks: 54
Thanked 53 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Brother Been-There

Wow, NJ, I live in NJ, I would love to know what is so friendly or great about this state when it comes to background checks. They only follow FCRA and have no state laws that offer further protection.

I would say California is the best, just my opinion. They can’t use Marijuana convictions over two years old and they have the 7 year rule with no salary restrictions. While NY has the 7 year rule, if the job pays more than 25,000, the rule does not apply. I believe that Washington State also has a 10 year limit.

Companies in most cases simply do not use a company for background checks that is bound by the 'credit reporting agency' restrictions.”

I’m sorry, but this statement is completely incorrect.

Could you give an example of a company that does background checks and is not under FCRA?

Most companies do use third party vendors, due to the cost and ease. These background companies buy data bases of convictions from all states. They have all this information in one place, and if your name comes up, they already have your convictions.

All companies that issue consumer reports are bound by FCRA.

The only way around FCRA is if the companies run their own background checks in-house. This entails having a company employee go to the court houses and look up this public information. These in house checks are not regulated by FCRA. Also they can hire a private courthouse runner or a private detective or something similar.

You see it would cost a company a great deal of time and money if they have to do this for every employee.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to htiek123 For This Useful Post:
noboundries (12-18-2009)
  #11  
Old 07-17-2009, 05:10 PM
Been-There Been-There is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Massachusetts US
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

So you apply for a job where you have a record older than 7 years and you never hear back from them despite being utterly qualified and having a good interview.

Now you prove that they didn't disqualify you based on your criminal record beyond 7 years ago? Tell me that doesn't happen regularly.

Employment discrimination is among the most difficult things to prove.

Washington state has a 7 year rule with a $20,000 disqualifier from what I have read.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-18-2009, 02:15 PM
pmitch10's Avatar
pmitch10 pmitch10 is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NH, USA
Posts: 2,448
Thanks: 763
Thanked 640 Times in 438 Posts
Default

I would think that with the cost of inflation.....not sure when these laws were first made up, but.....that they would review this 20,000 limit and increase it considerably. Raising the standard, so to speak.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-18-2009, 05:56 PM
htiek123 htiek123 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 90
Thanks: 54
Thanked 53 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Brother Been-There,


“So you apply for a job where you have a record older than 7 years and you never hear back from them despite being utterly qualified and having a good interview.”

This happens everyday to everybody, weather you have a record or not. In Mass, if the job pays more than 20,000 a year, then the 7 year limit is out

”Now you prove that they didn't disqualify you based on your criminal record beyond 7 years ago? Tell me that doesn't happen regularly.”

Sorry, I’m not understanding what you trying to say here

Do you mean that they did disqualify you based on your record?

“Employment discrimination is among the most difficult things to prove.”

You are 100% correct here, its ironic, they break the law to keep you out because you broke the law.

"Washington state has a 7 year rule with a $20,000 disqualifier from what I have read."

I’m sorry I meant to say Washington DC
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-19-2009, 12:12 AM
Mark2008 Mark2008 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 2,842
Thanks: 380
Thanked 1,688 Times in 845 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by htiek123 View Post
Most of them ask if you have ever been convicted of a crime, however they can only report the last 7 years. Everything I read says to be upfront and honest, however if I lived in one of these states, I would certainly lie.

Most of these states have exceptions like, health care and working for the police, but for most corporate jobs, I'm sorry, but I would lie.
Same here. The worst they can do is fire you afterward. in which case you might have a legal case against them. I have yet to personally meet an employer who had the balls to bring up a 14-year-old conviction against me. I certainly would keep my mouth shut if I were in his/her shoes.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-19-2009, 03:34 PM
Been-There Been-There is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Massachusetts US
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

My point is if you can't prove they used your record against you whats the point? The law is toothless.

What is not absolutely clear to me either is whether those statutes apply only to crimes committed in those states either. In other words I apply in California for a job but I have federal and state convictions elsewhere does that then mean they can't use those felonies? My fed probation officer even told me not to do that after my time was up.

We are on the same page about not checking off 'have you ever been convicted of a felony' though. Absolutely not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by htiek123 View Post
Brother Been-There,


“So you apply for a job where you have a record older than 7 years and you never hear back from them despite being utterly qualified and having a good interview.”

This happens everyday to everybody, weather you have a record or not. In Mass, if the job pays more than 20,000 a year, then the 7 year limit is out

”Now you prove that they didn't disqualify you based on your criminal record beyond 7 years ago? Tell me that doesn't happen regularly.”

Sorry, I’m not understanding what you trying to say here

Do you mean that they did disqualify you based on your record?

“Employment discrimination is among the most difficult things to prove.”

You are 100% correct here, its ironic, they break the law to keep you out because you broke the law.

"Washington state has a 7 year rule with a $20,000 disqualifier from what I have read."

I’m sorry I meant to say Washington DC
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-20-2009, 07:31 AM
htiek123 htiek123 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 90
Thanks: 54
Thanked 53 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Been-There View Post
My point is if you can't prove they used your record against you whats the point? The law is toothless.

What is not absolutely clear to me either is whether those statutes apply only to crimes committed in those states either. In other words I apply in California for a job but I have federal and state convictions elsewhere does that then mean they can't use those felonies? My fed probation officer even told me not to do that after my time was up.

We are on the same page about not checking off 'have you ever been convicted of a felony' though. Absolutely not.
Brother Been-There

You are 100% correct in that it’s hard to prove that they used your record against you. They can always say that they have a more qualified candidate. It’s catch 22. If you put down the conviction, your application goes in the trash; if you don’t declare it they will not hire you due to the fact that you lied. There is no way around this.

With regards to crimes committed in other states, your example of California is a good one. I have a felony in NJ, 17 years ago. If I apply for a Job in NJ then it is reportable, because NJ is for life time, how ever if I applied for a job in California, they can only go back 7 years regardless of where the crime was committed. Now if you committed your crime in California 10, years ago it’s not reportable in California, however if you apply for a job in NJ, then your convictions will be reportable.

You go by the laws in that state that you apply in, no matter where the crime was committed.

I’ve lived in NJ my whole life, all my family and friends are here, however I’ve thought about moving to California.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-20-2009, 02:28 PM
plainsight plainsight is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: los angeles
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default CA law protects...sort of

I just moved to LA from Boston, and have 4 federal felonies (from the same incident), which was completely wrapped up 12 years ago. I worked in Boston as a licensed real estate broker (disclosed to MA, not a big issue). I applied for a license here, and also disclosed. Still not a problem. I left my company of 6 years for a new job. My new employer hired me, then did a background check. He decided that he didn't like the convictions, so out I went. Because I was a 1099 contractor, as many real estate people are, there really isn't much I can do about it. The law in CA is nice with the 7 year limit, but in practice it didn't do much to protect me. Just FYI.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to plainsight For This Useful Post:
DonFromWI (07-22-2009)
  #18  
Old 07-22-2009, 12:06 AM
Been-There Been-There is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Massachusetts US
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

The best way around this is to work for yourself completely where you have direct customers in some business that allows licensing or doesn't require licensing. Thats also a good way to protect yourself against garnishment for federal restitution. Many states do have laws stating that in order for you to be denied licensing for an occupation that the crime and the occupation must be closely related.

Just an FYI also people have been hiring 'prison coaches' to prepare for prison. These people have ripped off financial companies etc, have lots of money and no sense of what to expect. These people are actually looking for 'us'. Mostly concerning federal prison but I'm sure thats not always the case. As a part time thing this would be very profitable.

Last edited by Been-There; 07-22-2009 at 12:14 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Been-There For This Useful Post:
noboundries (12-18-2009)
  #19  
Old 07-22-2009, 03:41 PM
DonFromWI DonFromWI is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2009
Location: WI, USA
Posts: 142
Thanks: 122
Thanked 73 Times in 39 Posts
Default It all depends

Quote:
Originally Posted by ginsiebel View Post
I have run into places that go back ten years in California. This has kept me from getting a job and mine was just a misdemeanor.
Some vocations such as healthcare, childcare, or law enforcement can still go back indefinitely. But generally in CA it is 7 years. The only hitch is that many employers will break the law to discriminate against former law breakers. If that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-04-2009, 10:11 PM
NewOffender NewOffender is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41
Thanks: 9
Thanked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plainsight View Post
I just moved to LA from Boston, and have 4 federal felonies (from the same incident), which was completely wrapped up 12 years ago. I worked in Boston as a licensed real estate broker (disclosed to MA, not a big issue). I applied for a license here, and also disclosed. Still not a problem. I left my company of 6 years for a new job. My new employer hired me, then did a background check. He decided that he didn't like the convictions, so out I went. Because I was a 1099 contractor, as many real estate people are, there really isn't much I can do about it. The law in CA is nice with the 7 year limit, but in practice it didn't do much to protect me. Just FYI.
I'm thinking about becoming a real estate agent. How hard is it to make a good living as a real estate agent?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-04-2009, 10:12 PM
NewOffender NewOffender is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41
Thanks: 9
Thanked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonFromWI View Post
Some vocations such as healthcare, childcare, or law enforcement can still go back indefinitely. But generally in CA it is 7 years. The only hitch is that many employers will break the law to discriminate against former law breakers. If that makes sense.
How the hell do they discrimate if the company that runs the background check can't report more then 7 years?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-07-2009, 12:18 AM
MannysBebegirl's Avatar
MannysBebegirl MannysBebegirl is offline
Mannysbebegirl
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: TX-US
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Question about Real Estate

Hello Sir,
My boyfriend is interested in becoming a real estate agent (he is an ex- con) he is out now. How hard is it? Any tips? Or just any advice? He has had a really hard time gaining employment and just any information or helpful tips would be greatly appreciated... Thanks for your time.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-12-2009, 08:46 AM
godchaser's Avatar
godchaser godchaser is offline
denise04
 

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: greenville sc
Posts: 49
Thanks: 0
Thanked 29 Times in 9 Posts
Default time limit

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOffender View Post
Did a little researching and found out that at least half of the 50 States have laws that limit the report of a criminal conviction in background checks to the past 7 years.

Has anyone had any experience with this? That is to say based on your experiences do companies comply with these State laws?
no they dont mine was over 20 yrs ago and i still cant get a good job
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-18-2009, 03:40 PM
StayUp StayUp is offline
Job Hunter
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: City of Carson, CA
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I went to a temp agency interview yesterday and the moment she saw I had a felony, the interview ended before it began. She pretty much told me they dont place felons due to risk factors and making their agency look irresponsible.

I left there feeling really dumb. Practiced for interview questions I never even got a chance to answer.

If there is a 7 year law limit in my state then why do I even need to disclose this to them?

I can understand my DUI but the felony sounds like it is legally none of their business.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-18-2009, 09:17 PM
cornered cornered is offline
Alferd Packer fan
 

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CO-US
Posts: 1,909
Thanks: 831
Thanked 931 Times in 545 Posts
Default

There needs to be a correction. The Colorado statute was mis-typed. This will cause some difficulty in researching it via the state statute website (michie.com). This is the correction in it's entirety-


12-14.3-105.3. Reporting of information prohibited.

(1) Except as authorized under subsection (2) of this section, no consumer reporting agency shall make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information:

.....(a) Cases under title 11 of the United States Code, or under the federal bankruptcy act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, predate the report by more than ten years;

.....(b) Suits and judgments that, from the date of entry, predate the report by more than seven years or by more than the governing statute of limitations, whichever is the longer period;

.....(c) Paid tax liens that, from the date of payment, predate the report by more than seven years;

.....(d) Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss that predate the report by more than seven years;

.....(e) Records of arrest, indictment, or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, predate the report by more than seven years;

.....(f) Any other adverse item of information that predates the report by more than seven years.

(2) The provisions of subsection (1) of this section do not apply to the case of any consumer report to be used in connection with:

.....(a) A credit transaction involving, or that may reasonably be expected to involve, a principal amount of one hundred fifty thousand dollars or more;

.....(b) The underwriting of life insurance involving, or that may reasonably be expected to involve, a face amount of one hundred fifty thousand dollars or more; or

.....(c) The employment of an individual at an annual salary that equals or is reasonably expected to equal seventy-five thousand dollars or more.

(3) A consumer reporting agency shall not furnish for employment purposes, or in connection with a credit or insurance transaction or a direct marketing transaction, a consumer report that contains medical information about a consumer unless the consumer consents to the furnishing of the report.

(4) A consumer reporting agency shall not include, in a consumer report made to a person requesting credit information pertaining to a consumer, the names of any other persons who have requested credit information pertaining to that consumer or the number of such inquiries made more than one year preceding the date of the consumer report; except that such information shall be retained for two years and provided to the consumer as provided in this article.

(5) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (4) of this section, a consumer reporting agency shall not furnish to any person, including a developer of credit scoring, a record of inquiries in connection with a credit or insurance transaction that is not initiated by the consumer. The term "credit or insurance transaction that is not initiated by the consumer" does not include inquiries resulting from the collection of an account or for purposes of reviewing an account.

Source: L. 97: Entire section added, p. 388, § 6, effective August 1. L. 2002: (5) added, p. 381, § 2, effective April 25.



I remember how the credit reporting agencies used to abuse the rights of others many years ago. I remember being turned down for real estate loans back in '87 because they had in their reportts that I was a multiple felony convioct from Florida, and the charges were supposedly drugs. I got a kick out of that, even to this day, as of right now I am 40 years old and NEVER been to Florida! Back then I had a lawyer I know from my teenage years talk with them. Within 6 months the garbage was off. But without a lawyer back then, it would have never been removed.

Even now I am still, 8 years later, fighting identity theft. Just because I have a few legitimate "grey areas" on my credit, it's nearly impossible to get the false information removed. In fact recently I had to harass a credit reporting group to get a satisfactory response.

I told the credit reporting group rep. that garbage they reported as a collection account, was forgiven/removed back in '03 BY the creditor as paid in full. The creditor NEVER took it to collections. Didn't matter. Somehow, it went to collections and I was able to get the creditor to verify that not only did they not post it as a collections account, but it was already paid off. That was in 2006, and I remember going to the collection agency that claimed it as a debt and beating so hard on the manager's desk top that is left my hand bruised. But, they removed it. Yet again, it showed it's ugly head this year. Well, this time I told the credit reporting group rep that they can try to prove the debt after a judge subpeonas the records for my trial. She was puzzled and in a variety of words not suitable for here I told her what I was planning on doing to their employees (I was reflecting back on some gruesome videos showing the SE Asian tribes and their execution methods). I may get 30+ years if not life, but after I'm found guilty I guarantee I'll sue the crap out of them.

Within two days it was removed, and they apologized.

When it gets that bad, ya gotta break the law, because it's clearly the only moral option available.
__________________
"I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." -- Elie Weisel
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:51 AM.
Copyright © 2001- 2013 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics