Pepsi Employment Background Check FCRA Class Action

Sometime in or around August 2016, plaintiff Altareek Grice applied for a position at Pepsi Beverages Company. According to the complaint, as part of the process, Pepsi ordered a consumer report from Carco Group on Grice. But Pepsi did not make this known to Grice by disclosing it to him “in a document that consists solely of the disclosure” and they failed to get his consent to their obtaining the report. Both of these, the complaint says, are violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

The class for this action is

  • All persons living in the US and its territories,
  • As to whom Pepsi or its related companies procured a consumer report for employment purposes,
  • Between September 11, 2015 and the date of the judgment entered in this case,
  • Without providing a clear and conspicuous disclosure in writing beforehand, in a document consisting solely of the disclosure that it may obtain a consumer report for employment purposes.

The FCRA was designed to regulate how private personal information is released and used. If, after reading the report, the company decides to take adverse action (such as not hiring the subject), the FCRA says it must provide the subject with a copy of the report and a summary of rights under the FCRA. Without the initial disclosure that a credit report may be done, however, the subject has no way of knowing that the report played a part in the process and doesn’t have the opportunity to find or correct errors in the report.

The complaint claims that Pepsi knew or should have known about its obligations under the FCRA. It says, “Pepsi obtained or had available substantial written materials that apprised it of its duties under the FCRA. Any reasonable employer knows about or can easily discover these obligations.” Snd we might add that Pepsi probably has a lawyer or two somewhere on its staff to advise it on these sorts of things.

The complaint alleges that procuring the report on plaintiff Grice was “facially contrary to the express language” in the law, and that Pepsi is therefore liable for statutory damages for each violation, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Employment

Most Recent Case Event

Pepsi Employment Background Check FCRA Complaint

September 11, 2017

Sometime in or around August 2016, plaintiff Altareek Grice applied for a position at Pepsi Beverages Company. According to the complaint, as part of the process, Pepsi ordered a consumer report from Carco Group on Grice. But Pepsi did not make this known to Grice by disclosing it to him “in a document that consists solely of the disclosure” and they failed to get his consent to their obtaining the report. Both of these, the complaint says, are violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

pepsi_fcra_complaint.pdf

Case Event History

Pepsi Employment Background Check FCRA Complaint

September 11, 2017

Sometime in or around August 2016, plaintiff Altareek Grice applied for a position at Pepsi Beverages Company. According to the complaint, as part of the process, Pepsi ordered a consumer report from Carco Group on Grice. But Pepsi did not make this known to Grice by disclosing it to him “in a document that consists solely of the disclosure” and they failed to get his consent to their obtaining the report. Both of these, the complaint says, are violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

pepsi_fcra_complaint.pdf
Tags: FCRA, Failure to provide proper notice and/or obtain proper authorization