Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Almighty Buck The Internet Your Rights Online

Will Your Credit Report Disqualify You For a Job? 513

Posted by kdawson
from the permission-to-google-you-sir dept.
coondoggie writes "Two companies that fired workers and rejected job applicants based on background checks, without informing those people of their rights, have settled with the FTC for $77,000 in civil penalties. Most experts we talked to think this case is just the tip of the iceberg. The companies — Quality Terminal Services and Rail Terminal Services — were charged with violating provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which requires employers to get permission to look at individual credit reports. If you don't get a job because of information in your report, the employer must show you the report and tell you how to get a copy from the consumer reporting company. There is no charge for the report if you request it within 60 days of getting notice that you did not get a job."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Will Your Credit Report Disqualify You For a Job?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:45AM (#29034273)
    Your credit report might disqualify you from posting on Slashdot.
  • Dumb. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by digitalunity (19107) <digitalunityNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:48AM (#29034287) Homepage

    IMO, unless you work directly with cash or are in a position where fraud would be easy, employers have no right to that information.

    Shit happens in peoples lives leaving them in precarious positions and things dont get paid on time. Having employers deny applicants based on their credit could put people in a downward financial spiral.

    • Re:Dumb. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sam the Nemesis (604531) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:56AM (#29034337)
      Agreed. Unless you have a job, how are you going to fix your credit?
      • Re:Dumb. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by EdIII (1114411) * on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @04:12AM (#29034717)

        Hell, there is something far more sinister than that. Some of those marks on your credit report can be *disputes*. Honest to God disputes. Errors even.

        I can't understand how credit reports are even legal. I checked a few years back and the policies of one of the credit agencies was basically this.... you could make a *single* negative mark against a credit report electronically. Positive Marks? Minimum ONE THOUSAND AT A TIME.

        The whole system is violation of due process, and The Constitution. It allows corporations to exact punishment against you, threaten you, coerce you, etc. all outside of a courtroom. Arbitration is not even involved. Just an electronic transaction in a database. All of it with a difference in the levels of sophistication, power, influence, etc. between consumers and companies.

        The TSA has a policy where they will threaten their workers if they have bad credit. That's farking duress. I know personally of several employees who paid of Sprint cell phone scams (cell phone bills for service that never existed. Google it) for $100-$200 out of FEAR. Not fear of those scam creditors, fear of the TSA canning their asses over a couple hundred bucks. I should post the letters on WikiLeaks. Full of very threatening language and when they list the options, *nowhere* is there an option that you just can't afford to pay the amount owed. They certainly make it sound like if you can't get the collection agency to agree to something, anything, then you are at risk for losing your job.

        The threat of being fired, interests rates going up, not being able to afford ever increasing lines of credit needed to just keep your family above water, all contribute to a very real mechanism in which these corporations can control you. Most people will be afraid and take the path of least resistance, hence the control realized.

        This is just the next evolutionary step in the system. The corporations and credit agencies will create a system where they can *control* you without ever spending any resources hiring law firms and going to court.

        The Constitution was just a speed bump.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by b4upoo (166390)

          What many people perceive as intense financial pressure due to a poor economy are what the poor feel whether the economy is good or bad.
          There are several issues with the credit system and the way people respond to it. To some degree people who fail to pay off a debt may simply be in a state of rebellion. That is not unlike many black youth who are involved in crime as a response to a system that they feel is against them.

        • Re:Dumb. (Score:5, Informative)

          by SirGarlon (845873) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @07:28AM (#29035921)

          The Constitution was just a speed bump.

          It seems you share a common misconception that the Bill of Rights protects you from private companies and individuals. It doesn't.

          The Constitution is about defining (and, supposedly, constraining) the powers of government, particularly its power to wreak havoc in people's lives. It's not about whether a prospective employer can perform a credit check.

          For the TSA case you mention, you might have a point, because there the employer is the government and is obligated to respect due process. A private employer? Nope. Unless you have an employment contract, they can kick you to the curb for whatever reason they like, or for no reason at all. The exception is that there are laws to prevent discrimination, so they can't fire you (or decline to hire) for being Ukranian or Buddhist or whatever. If for instance you get arrested, even if you never get charged with a crime, and your name appears in the paper, you can be fired. That's not discrimination.

          Somewhere most Americans picked up this quaint idea that the law requires employers to treat employees fairly. Perhaps because there are a number of laws that do exactly that: anti-discrimination laws, the Americans with Disabilities act, laws regarding workplace safety and overtime pay... But as of today there is no law against discrimination with respect to criminal record, or credit history, or musical tastes, or political activities, or any of a million other criteria that are utterly irrelevant to the performance of the job but for some reason might matter to an unjust employer.

          Except as required by law, rights don't enter into it. If you want more rights, talk to your state legislator about outlawing this stupid and offensive practice of reviewing credit reports.

        • Re:Dumb. (Score:5, Interesting)

          by cyphergirl (186872) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @07:58AM (#29036143) Homepage Journal

          Security Clearances are getting yanked over poor credit these days, because someone with a poor credit background allegedly would have a motive for selling secrets solely so that they could pay off their debts. There was a huge story a few years back about a janitor who had been at one facility and had a clearance for decades lost his job and clearance because his credit score went down. (I'll have to search around and see if I can find it.) I know some great responsible people (now) who can't get a clearance because of some stupid credit card bill from their wild youth days.

          My guess is that the TSA is checking the credit of their employees periodically and threatening to yank their clearances, which would also yank their jobs. Maybe they should be firing the ones who steal stuff from my suitcase instead..... oh wait, they have no way of knowing who that actually was.

          Dumb.

        • Re:Dumb. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @08:30AM (#29036433) Homepage Journal

          It's worse than that.

          Credit is little more than a way to keep people working for low wages in crappy jobs. The entire credit system is little more than legalized slavery. We can see how the rise of the credit industry has coincided with a slow degradation of real income for workers.

          Banks and corporations are working hand in hand to make sure as many people are underwater as possible. Why else would your credit score go down when you cancel a credit card, and also go down when you get a new credit card?

          • Re:Dumb. (Score:4, Informative)

            by bendodge (998616) <bendodge.bsgprogrammers@com> on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @10:42AM (#29038219) Homepage Journal

            Credit is little more than a way to keep people working for low wages in crappy jobs. The entire credit system is little more than legalized slavery. We can see how the rise of the credit industry has coincided with a slow degradation of real income for workers.

            The credit industry is not interested in "being evil" just to be evil. They just want to make money. It's not even in their interest to keep people working for low wages. If you are a bank/credit company, would you rather have more rich clients or more poor clients? Credit scores are an attempt by the industry protect themselves from losses by people who can't be trusted with credit. It's the modern equivalent of the medieval shopkeeper refusing to give another loan to the guy who didn't pay off his last one. True, there are some companies that want you in debt, but didn't invent the whole thing - they're just abusing it. Now stop spouting nonsense.

        • Re:Dumb. (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @08:36AM (#29036487) Homepage

          It is purely designed as a way to oppress the lower class. There is no other use for it in it's present form.

          Sorry we cant hire you, your Credit score is under 670.

          we have to drop your car insurance or triple the price, your credit score dipped below 650.

          Sorry sir, your medical coverage has expired, because you lost your job, your credit score went below 620 and we cant cover you.

          Honestly, It's one of the most nefarious things done in America today and the Government encourages it.

          Also your credit report is the most inaccurate "report" on you. most have lots of glaring errors that take a LOT of energy and time on your part to remove.

          Me? I'm sitting here with the rare high score of over 720, but if I lose my job that will spiral down. you cant keep a high credit score if you cant pay your bills.

          Unemployed without insurance and have a child hurt, spouse hurt, or even yourself = your credit score slamming down to below 600 within 3 months. Nothing like owing $30,000 or more in medical bills to cause that.

          It is DESIGNED to punish the poor or those that lose their job. It's being set up to "encourage" you to take all the crap they dish out at work so you dont lose that job and get blackballed.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Rob the Bold (788862)

            It is DESIGNED to punish the poor or those that lose their job. It's being set up to "encourage" you to take all the crap they dish out at work so you dont lose that job and get blackballed.

            But if you take that away, people will have less incentive to become rich! Because what with higher tax rates and euthanasia and the lack of freedom to own other people, it's just not worth it to be wealthy.

    • Just one of many things that in no way affect your job performance but will disqualify you from many jobs.

      Looking for work is easily my least favorite work, and it's not just because you don't get paid to do so (unless you're looking for another job while at your current job.)

    • by antic (29198)

      I am hopeless when it comes to remembering to pay bills, usually because I am working too hard instead!

    • by u38cg (607297)
      I do agree with you, it sucks. But from the other side of the fence, where I currently work, there's another problem. They know nothing about you. They sent you a CV, that they wrote. They came to an interview, and gave the answers they made up. References just tell you where someone worked these days. So how responsible and sensible is this guy? Credit checks are just one way of finding out *something* about a candidate.
      • by penix1 (722987)

        Credit checks are just one way of finding out *something* about a candidate.

        Do you honestly believe that? All that a credit check shows is that they are in a database maintained by others. That database was intended to see if a person was profitable to lending institutions. Put aside identity theft for an instant. All the things that are considered "irresponsible" are profitable and give you a higher score. Paying off credit cards fully every month for example is a negative on your credit score. You are not

    • by MacTO (1161105)

      > Having employers deny applicants based on their credit could put people in a downward financial spiral.

      Yipee! That means an upwards financial spiral for those of us with good credit! :)

      Anyways, as unfair as this seems, would you really want to work for people who are so shallow that they believe that a credit report is an indication of a person's honesty (e.g. you won't steal). Even if you are willing to work for shallow people, are you willing to work for people who step over that rather fat line th

  • by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:53AM (#29034313)

    In this economy, there are literally dozens of out of work people applying for just about every opening. Assuming you were turned down for a position, how would you ever know that the reason was due to a background check? Maybe you smell bad or your facial hair is unkempt. Maybe your fingers were stained orange from the Cheetos you eat all day long in your mom's basement. It could have been your broken flip-flops or the raggedy jeans you haven't washed since January. It's possible that the interviewer was put off by your labored breathing and the whistling sound from your nose. I'd bet the abundance of nose hairs was also a factor. While perfectly natural, it probably wasn't the best idea to let loose a SBD in the interview. Shampooing with RID or conditioning with Nix might have kept those jumping lice to a minimum. Finally, ranting about the GPL and Open Source might be friendly banter here on Slashdot, the interviewer was probably asking about the festering open sore on your leg.

    It reminds me of people who send random requests under the FOIA. Sure, there is a chance that you may hit on something, but without any actual evidence, how could you ever really know whether there is something there?

    • by tnk1 (899206)

      Yes, the amusing thing is that the HR person or hiring manager probably actually told the applicant the reason for their failure. It is possible, however, that there was an insider who discovered what happened and was a friend of the applicant.

      Most likely, though, they told him afterward because they thought that they could do whatever they wanted with this information and not bother to get his permission or provide notification.

      • "Most likely, though, they told him afterward because they thought that they could do whatever they wanted with this information and not bother to get his permission or provide notification."

        I agree, if someone has the arrogance to do this to existing employees then they will also have the arrogance to tell the person exactly why they are being sacked and act as if they are doing the person a favour, throw in a dash of self-righteousness and they will also update the persons contact details for the repor
  • by Misanthrope (49269) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:57AM (#29034341)

    The whole idea behind credit reports being used for anything other than whether or not you should be extended credit leaves me sickened. I've known too many hard working people who've had tough times for legitimate reasons who have been horribly screwed by this crap. Even the government mandated free credit reports are kind of bizarre, I had to forcibly tell these scum to cancel an account at one of the "bureaus" three times over the phone for an apparently ongoing reporting service that I didn't have a way to op out of and I still didn't get all the charges back.

    • by legirons (809082) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @03:53AM (#29034615)

      The whole idea behind credit reports being used for anything other than whether or not you should be extended credit leaves me sickened.

      In fact, if you get paid in arrears, or if you put anything on expenses, then it's you who is lending to your employer. So need to do the credit check on them!

    • by cgenman (325138)

      I'd consider myself a pretty fiscally responsible guy who tries far more than the average person to keep on top of these things. I try to check my report every year or so [ftc.gov].

      I still can't see one of the 3 bloody bureaus. To access my information, they want to know financial information details on a bank account that I closed in college. And the hoops to jump through to get in without that are a lot more effort than I have been able to put out for this.

      Most people don't spend all of their time wondering if t

  • I am aware that this is a cliché here on Slashdot, but nevertheless this is a situation where it must be pointed out.

    There is a correlation between bad credit and job performance. It might not be a particularly strong correlation, but it is used to justify credit checks by employers.

    However, what they don't tend to consider is that it is probably more likely that an outside influence was the cause of both factors. For just one example: a major illness (either the employee herself or a family memb
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by BadAnalogyGuy (945258)

      This is a slippery slope you're walking. Assuming that you want to demand that employers have concrete reasons to deny you a job, you must give them access to your medical history as well as the history of your family? Sure, they can't deny you because they can only show a correlation between bad credit and bad job performance, but then should they be able to dig deeper into the reason for your bad credit?

      If you are going to prevent them from accessing personal information, where does this stop? Can they re

      • The truth is not a slippery slope. I simply pointed out that a bad credit report has NOT been shown to cause poor work performance, or vice versa. That does not logically give them reason to "dig in" to anything further. Quite the contrary, it shows that they have already dug farther than they should, and come up with nothing useful.

        You seem to be assuming that they have both motive and justification to keep digging until they do come up with some kind of damning evidence against you, and THAT is the "sl
      • I should also point out that in many (maybe most?) states, your permission is also required before they can contact a present or past employer to inquire about job performance. And there are very good reasons for that: historically, inter-company communications that did not involve the employee tended to be very one-sided and resulted in all kinds of abuse, up to and including damaging retaliation from said past or present employers.

        Of course they can ask questions in their interview. And in some states
    • So what? There is a correlation between being black and being a criminal, and it's illegal to use that data when hiring! As people of color have poorer credit scores, this is just one more way to redline deserving people for no other reason than racism.
  • It's nothing new... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by cco (28383)

    This has been going on for a long time. In 2001, Vulcan (Paul Allen's company) withdrew an offer because I had too many parking tickets (~$1000) on my credit report (parking tickets are a fact of life if you work in downtown Seattle). Paying the tickets wasn't enough, and the offer was withdrawn.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by BadAnalogyGuy (945258)

      Let's see. An investment firm is refusing to invest in you because you wasted money on parking tickets instead of investing a little and gotten a parking space.

      2001 wasn't 1998, you know.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by cco (28383)

        The tickets were from the '90s, and the firm that has employed me for the last six years has ~$3B under investment (including some from Allen personally).
        Credit reports are a stupid way to evaluate a worker, especially a programmer.

      • by cgenman (325138)

        A parking space in Seattle can easily run you 100 dollars a month (which is actually cheap by major city standards). Conversely, items will stay on your credit report for 7 years. As such, that $1,000 in parking tickets represents up to 7 years of parking.

        Over the course of those 7 years, a legitimate parking space would have cost 8,400 dollars. By getting lots of parking tickets, grandparent poster actually saved 89% of the total costs associated with parking. Even if the parking tickets represented ju

    • by Itninja (937614)
      I work in Seattle and always manage to pay my parking tickets without a problem. They only go on your CR if you fail to pay them. And it's ridiculously easy to do at that.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by SeaFox (739806)

      This has been going on for a long time. In 2001, Vulcan (Paul Allen's company) withdrew an offer because I had too many parking tickets (~$1000) on my credit report (parking tickets are a fact of life if you work in downtown Seattle).

      Getting them might be. Not paying them to the point it shows up on your credit report is quite another.

    • by glomph (2644) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @08:02AM (#29036169) Homepage Journal

      I worked in Downtown Seattle for 14 years, ending a few months ago. Never got a parking ticket. Take the bus, or a bike, Señor Mantecapo.

  • Once again, corporations are not people, but they want human rights. Their bottom line is their self interest, and people are their biggest liability unless they are proactive. Screw the employees and the customer; shareholder dividend is the goal, whenever possible, and permissible by law. Its seems peculiar that this company is shrewd enough to perform the illegal research, and yet, somehow incapable of following procedure, or limiting their legal exposure. Hmmm... I wonder if perhaps some of the emp
  • Swiss bank account (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ecbpro (919207)
    You see, this is one of the good reasons there is the Swiss bank secrecy system. It is no-ones business how much money you have or owe! (but there needs to be a system that makes sure you pay your taxes). It is really a pity that US citizens are not allowed to use it anymore...
  • I understand that every country has their public/private sources of information on a person that can be accessed by certain people for certain purposes: countries would not function without it. This whole 'credit report' thing has me a bit slumped though; it's certainly not something that is as prevalent in its use here in the Netherlands. Sure, banks have set up a system that contains all your loans and telephone companies might not give you a phone if you have a bad history of debt and Experian says so,

    • by Ihlosi (895663)

      Question: is it possible /not/ to have a credit report to your name ?

      You can have one that's empty. Expect to have every application for any serious loan denied due to "insufficient credit history". Same goes for jobs from employers that do credit checks.

      Can you go through life without one ?

      Yes, if you never take out any kind of loan, line of credit, etc.

      • by jonbryce (703250)

        Remember that things like phone contracts are credit lines, as is a current (or checking[sic]) account. So it is very difficult to avoid it.

    • Yes it is possible (both in the US and Europe) but expect to have problems getting loan's, credit, bank accounts, anything that requires a ongoing contract of service for payment (non prepaid mobile, cable/Sat TV, home rental)

      Managed to have a blank/no credit records in both the US and the UK (lived in both) until I was in my early 30's, but it made things very difficult as the funny thing is no credit report (which basically means you have never needed a credit line/loan, never mind defaulted) is considere

    • Can you go through life without one ?

      Sure, but getting an apartment in a metropolitan area during a rental crunch might be a problem. And/or getting treated properly in an emergency room might also be a problem too (if you talk to anyone who works in an emergency room, they'll tell you about it).

      That being said, if you have a plausible explanation for not having a credit history, like you've just turned 18 years old, or you've just immigrated to this country recently. That's enough for many landlords (although personally, I wouldn't recomme

    • No credit rating (Score:3, Interesting)

      by matria (157464)

      After my divorce, I discovered that the wife inherits any bad credit from the marriage, but does not inherit a good credit rating. I kept my married name since I had also had a small business as well as an online presence in that name. I had a valid driver's license, and took the joint Sears store card with me, since I had a laptop under warranty from Sears, as well as a car which was registered in both our names. We had purchased several cars, a house, and had numerous store and bank credit cards for more

    • If you use credit, and that means getting a loan in almost any form, having a credit card, etc, you will have a credit report. What happens is the companies who loan you money or extend you a line of credit report your payment history to the three credit reporting agencies. The information reported is pretty basic, more or less all they say is if you pay on time or not. These companies then keep a file of your info.

      So if you never use credit, you won't have a credit history. However, that doesn't really hel

  • by wickerprints (1094741) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @05:11AM (#29035033)

    The problem with credit rating is not that it exists, or that it lacks sufficient predictive value for creditworthiness. It's that over the last few decades, credit rating has increasingly become a proxy for overall responsibility and our legal system has upheld its widespread misuse. Credit score is now a prerequisite for nearly everything that has to do with money. Your insurance premiums are a function of your credit score. Your ability to secure a job is dependent on your credit score. Whether a landlord will rent to you depends on your credit score. Just about anyone these days asks you for permission to peek at your score--even your mobile phone provider.

    Credit rating was never meant to be used in this way. And yet, everyone does it because it works, and nobody is willing to stand up to it. The future of credit rating is that it will begin to use increasingly sophisticated methods to quantify how much risk you present to a lender, and on the flip side of the coin, it will be used to determine whether you can do ANYTHING. What jobs you are allowed to hold, which people you will be allowed to socialize with, what goods and services you are allowed to buy, which schools you will be allowed to attend, how many children you will be allowed to have, and where and when you will be able to travel.

    Creditworthiness is the new class system. What else did anybody expect in a capitalist, consumer-driven society? This is merely the logical conclusion of a set of conditions on a system. Your entire worth as an individual will be quantified and reduced to a single number, and you will be completely under the control of powerful financial entities that sees society as a source of passive income.

    The dirty little secret is that credit rating is a system imposed by the rich elite onto the working class. The rich do not have credit, because they have no need for it. Everything they could want, they simply buy. And they buy it with money that the working class earns as a result of real work, but gets funneled to them through--guess what--credit.

  • Actually, I like it.

    I'm very good with money. Not a total tight-arse, but I manage my money (even over the GFC I've increased wealth by 70%). If somebody is employed, and as part of that employment, they have to balance a budget or place orders with vendors that are the best value based on what is needed, the best employee is somebody who is good with money. Somebody with proven history of bad personal financial decisions is not going to know any better with somebody elses money.

    I actually have a major p

  • by Jason Levine (196982) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @08:32AM (#29036447)

    I'm a victim of Identity theft. Some thieves got my name, address, date of birth and SSN, filled out an online form and got a credit card in my name. (Despite the mother's maiden name being wrong. Thank you very much Capital One!) The only reason I found out about it was that the thieves tripped up. They paid to have the card rush-mailed to them and *then* they changed the address from my address to theirs (or at least a drop box of theirs). The card was mailed out before the address change went through and landed in my hands.

    I never did catch the thieves (slow working police who weren't prepared for an ID theft case and an uncooperative Capital One), but I learned how to prevent ID Theft: Freeze your credit. Then the thieves can't open any new lines of credit in your name. The only downside is that you can't open up any new lines yourself without first "thawing" the credit file temporarily. (Did that when I bought my new car.)

    As a side benefit, people can't look at your credit file either. So jobs can't run background checks without your prior approval and banks can't pre-approve you for credit card after credit card that you don't want or need.

    Here's some more information on credit freezing: http://www.consumersunion.org/campaigns/learn_more/003484indiv.html [consumersunion.org]

  • by roc97007 (608802) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @01:56PM (#29041287) Journal

    How does one prove that one was denied a job because of a credit report? This question is not rhetorical.

    A friend of mine, who has fallen on hard times, suffering the double whammy of unemployment coupled with massive debt, has been unable to find a job for almost three years. He often gets close -- getting past the phone screen, first and second interview, tour of the facilities, and then, at the point where one would expect either an offer or "we have decided to look elsewhere", he gets -- nothing. The prospective employer simply stops responding, as if he dropped off the face of the earth. We are pretty sure something is going on, and it's almost certainly the results of a credit check, (we know his credit is ghastly) but as the company will no longer communicate, he does not know how to proceed.

    I'm a little conflicted. I'm fairly libertarian in my views, and believe a company has a right to hire whom they please, but in this case it leaves someone who has had a few setbacks absolutely nowhere to go. Except, perhaps, a life of government subsistence, or I dunno, a life of crime. He wants to work and pay back his debt, but (if this is true) his debt is what is preventing him from finding work -- a classic catch-22. Where does one go from here?

  • Catch-22 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sirgoran (221190) on Wednesday August 12, 2009 @02:10PM (#29041489) Homepage Journal
    While this is an old story it's also still a problem.
    About 6 months ago I read a similar story about business's using the credit reports as a guide to see if a prospective employee would steal or not. The idea being that the better your scores the less likely you are to embezzle, or steal from your employer.
    I didn't think about it at the time and forgot about it.
    Then my neighbor was turned down for a job based on her credit.

    She lost her job a while back (over a year ago), and instead of getting a new job right away, took the severance package and enjoyed some time off from working. By the time she was ready to work again, jobs in her field were hard to come by. After being off for so long and no longer having the severance package to help pay bills, she started falling behind with her bills. Her mortgage company, seeing all the Fed money, refused to refinance the home since she doesn't have a job and started the foreclosure process. She finally found a possible job, and was told that pending a "background check" the job was hers.

    By getting this job everything would be golden for her. She could pay her bills and then refinance the house. The problem was that she didn't get the job. The reason was due to the foreclosure on her house. That showed up on her credit report. So here's the rub. Can't stop foreclosure without a job, can't get a job due to the foreclosure.

    Granted, it's her own fault for not getting another job so soon after being unemployed, but I've seen dozens of folks do the same thing. You get a large payout and take a vacation.

    I wonder how many other people are caught up in the same sort of issue?
    You want to work, but can't due to the credit report, but if you had the job, you could resolve the bad credit report.

    - Goran

Can't open /usr/fortunes. Lid stuck on cookie jar.

Working...