• Text Size
• Print
• Email

  From:
  

  To:
  

  Hey! Check out this news page: https://www.thebackgroundinvestigator.com/Articles/Professional-Ethics,-Risk-Management,-and-Business-Liability--The-Record-Retriever/3161/index.php.

  SendCancel

National News

Professional Ethics, Risk Management, and Business Liability. > The Record Retriever

December 29, 2025 posted by Steve Brownstein

If your record provider is giving you "compliance advice" on what you should or shouldn't report, you aren't just getting a tip—you might be opening a massive legal can of worms. ????????

The Body: In the background screening industry, the roles are usually clear: The provider finds the data, and the CRA reports it. But when a provider starts telling you how to interpret the law, the "Reasonable Procedures" that protect you under the FCRA start to crumble.

Here is why this "advice" is a major red flag for CRAs:

1. Unauthorized Practice of Law: Most providers are experts in retrieval, not litigation. Following their "legal" interpretation can leave you defenseless if that advice leads to a lawsuit.

2. The "Joint Venture" Trap: By taking compliance direction from a provider, you risk being seen as a "Joint Venture" in court. This pulls the provider into your liability bubble—and pulls you into theirs.

3. Outsourced Judgment: You cannot outsource your "Reasonable Procedures." If you blindly follow a provider's filtering logic, you are failing your primary duty as a CRA to maintain independent oversight.

The Bottom Line: PBSA best practices encourage education, but they draw a hard line at legal direction. A provider’s job is to deliver the most accurate data possible; your job is to decide the legality of reporting it.

Don't let a "helpful" tip turn into a $5 million class-action lawsuit.