Checkr Class Action Lawsuit, Background Check Errors Cost Job Seekers Employment—What You Need to Know About FCRA Violations 2026
A new class action lawsuit filed in January 2026 alleges Checkr misreported criminal records on background checks, causing job applicants to lose employment opportunities. Plaintiff Natasha Davis claims the background check company wrongfully reported criminal records that weren’t properly associated with her, resulting in job denials and significant emotional distress. The lawsuit, filed in Florida federal court, alleges Checkr maintains deficient procedures because reporting more information is more profitable.
What the Lawsuit Alleges Checkr Did Wrong
The class action claims Checkr “knowingly and willfully maintains deficient procedures” because including more data on background reports generates higher profits, even when information is “plainly unassociated with the consumer.” According to the complaint, Checkr prioritizes volume over accuracy when processing roughly 1.5 million background checks per month for over 100,000 employers.
The lawsuit alleges Checkr violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a federal law requiring background check companies to use reasonable procedures ensuring maximum possible accuracy. During the past five years, Checkr has faced at least 80 lawsuits related to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. These cases reveal four common background check errors: incorrect criminal history information like wrong dispositions or severity levels, reporting expunged or outdated convictions that shouldn’t appear, attributing criminal records belonging to someone else with similar names, and mixed files where another person’s criminal background appears on your report.
Davis argues Checkr failed to use sufficient identifiers to correctly match criminal records to the right individuals. The lawsuit states “Because of the inaccurate and misleading information provided to her potential employer by Defendant, Plaintiff was defamed and suffered significant distress as a result of the precarious situation that Defendant’s failures caused.”
Who May Be Eligible for the Class Action
While the Davis lawsuit is newly filed and class certification hasn’t occurred yet, potential class members likely include individuals who underwent Checkr background checks containing inaccurate criminal record information that resulted in employment denials or delays. Companies that frequently use Checkr or its subsidiaries like GoodHire face related lawsuits, with Uber facing a class action lawsuit alleging Checkr uses criminal history reports to determine drivers’ work eligibility.
Past Checkr cases demonstrate the widespread nature of these errors. In Maurice Allan Davis v. Checkr Inc., the plaintiff was denied a cell tower technician job due to multiple marijuana possession convictions that were inaccurately reported and belonged to another individual with a similar name and date of birth. The case illustrates how background check mistakes devastate job seekers’ careers.
What Damages Plaintiffs May Recover
Individuals affected by inaccurate background checks may be entitled to compensation under the FCRA. The law allows recovery of actual damages like lost wages from job denials, statutory damages ranging from $100 to $1,000 per violation, and punitive damages if the violation was willful. Courts have recognized that because Checkr has been sued numerous times over flawed procedures, this suggests grounds for punitive damages “to be taught an exemplary lesson that it is simply unfair for such a company to make staggering profits off of procedures that are so inherently flawed.”
Employment opportunities lost due to background check errors create significant financial harm. When someone is denied work based on false information, they lose not just immediate income but also career advancement opportunities and professional reputation.
What You Must Know
Obtain Your Background Report Immediately
Under the FCRA, you have the right to request a copy of any background report prepared about you. If a potential employer denied your application after a Checkr background check, request the report immediately. Look for incorrect charges, wrong dispositions (guilty instead of not guilty), outdated information that should be expunged, or records belonging to someone else.
The law requires background check companies to comply with 15 U.S.C. § 1681e of the FCRA, which mandates reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy of reports prepared for employment purposes. If you discover errors, document them with court records showing the correct information.
Preserve Evidence of Job Denial
Keep all communications from employers regarding job denials or delays following background checks. Save emails, letters, and notes from phone calls. If the employer specifically mentioned the background check as the reason for denial, document this carefully. This evidence becomes critical for proving damages in a Gmail Class Action Lawsuit or individual FCRA claim.
What to Do Next
Dispute Errors with Checkr
The FCRA gives you 30 days to dispute inaccurate information directly with the background check company. Send a written dispute letter to Checkr identifying the specific errors and providing documentation proving the information is wrong. Checkr must investigate your dispute within 30 days and notify you of results within 5 days of completing the investigation.
Consider Legal Representation
If you suffered significant damages from an inaccurate Checkr background check, consult with a consumer rights attorney experienced in FCRA violations. Many attorneys offer free consultations and work on contingency, meaning you don’t pay unless you win. This is particularly important if you lost multiple job opportunities or if Checkr failed to correct errors after you disputed them.
Visit [INSERT COURT CASE LINK] for the official Davis v. Checkr case filings. The Federal Trade Commission provides guidance on background check rights at consumer.ftc.gov.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Fair Credit Reporting Act?
The Fair Credit Reporting Act is a federal law enacted in 1970 that requires background check companies to ensure accuracy in consumer reports. The law gives you the right to consent before employers conduct background checks, access copies of your reports, and dispute inaccurate information.
How do I know if Checkr did my background check?
If you applied for jobs with companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Amazon Flex, or major retailers, Checkr likely conducted your background check. Employers must notify you before ordering a background check and provide you with a copy if they take adverse action based on the report.
Am I eligible for the class action?
Class certification hasn’t occurred yet in the Davis lawsuit. Potential eligibility depends on whether you had a Checkr background check with criminal record errors that caused employment harm. Monitor the case or consult a Kaiser Class Action Lawsuit attorney for updates.
Do I need proof I was denied a job?
While direct evidence of job denial strengthens your claim, FCRA violations can be proven even without explicit denial letters. Defamatory false information on your report itself constitutes harm under the law.
What if my criminal record was expunged?
Expunged records should never appear on background checks. If Checkr reported sealed or expunged records, this violates the FCRA and you have strong grounds for legal action.
Last Updated: January 27, 2026
Disclaimer: This article provides general information about the Checkr class action lawsuit and is not legal advice.
Take Action: Request your Checkr background report today and check for errors that may have cost you employment opportunities.
Stay informed, stay protected. — AllAboutLawyer.com
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah