For Krishan Tucker, a single mother in Atlanta, everything she does revolves around creating stability for her two children.
She spent years climbing the corporate ladder in the healthcare consulting industry, driven by a determination to give her boys a life away from her own upbringing. After a layoff, an abnormal mammogram and the end of her marriage, Tucker looked to catch a break in late 2025, landing what she described as a “miracle” job paying $165 an hour. The offer, however, never materialized.
Tucker’s employment was terminated after a background check conducted by third-party screening firm HireRight indicated discrepancies in her work history while onboarding through MBO Partners. The report cited “potential conflicts” linked to past contract roles and freelance consulting work that later turned into her own business.
“Before I could even start, it was just torn,” Tucker told Atlanta News First Investigates. “I just cried and screamed. This is not something I did wrong. It’s literally a small problem and that was a mountain that stood between me and a job that provides a living for me and my children.”
Believing the job offer was finalized, Tucker had already found a new home to rent with the help of friends and family. Her start date in what was supposed to be her new job was set for mid-December.
However, the job offer was quickly taken off the table. When she reviewed the background report herself, Tucker identified a major error: according to notes in HireRight’s system, a company that Tucker was contracted with between 2017 and 2018 reported that she had never worked there. After contacting her former employer directly, Tucker learned that the verification request had been submitted under the wrong last name.
“[The HR rep] said, “Well, the thing is, they sent the request asking me to verify employment for Krishan Tucker, not Krishan Dawson,” said Tucker, whose last name was Dawson. Tucker reportedly disclosed this key detail on her background check form.
That same HR rep at Tucker’s previous company reportedly sent an email to HireRight on December 17, 2025 to correct the error.
“I just learned that the verification request for Krishan Tucker is actually Krishan Dawson. I can confirm that Krishan Dawson was on assignment [here],” read a portion of the HR representative’s email to HireRight.
Although the error was later corrected, HireRight allegedly continued to flag inconsistencies with Tucker’s employment dates, which Tucker believes was the result of the name error in her background check.
While the error with her background check was beyond unfortunate, Tucker is far from alone, as consumer advocates say background check errors are both widespread and costly.
According to Consumer Justice, estimates put the chances of errors occurring during a background check at 50% (2), a level that the National Consumer Law Center described as “rampant.” Ariel Nelson, staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center, said weak oversight allows screening errors to persist, often to the detriment of consumers (3).
“If Congress, federal agencies and states do not act to ensure that background screening companies are closely monitored and held accountable for their repeated mistakes due to poor policies and practices, consumers will continue to pay the price by losing housing and job opportunities while employers and landlords lose qualified employees and tenants,” Nelson said.
Background checks are now standard practice, with about 95% of employers using them, according to the Professional Background Screening Association (4). HireRight is one of the largest background screening firms in the United States, serving more than 40,000 employers.
Read More: The average net worth of Americans is a surprising $620,654. But it means almost nothing. Here’s the number that counts (and how it skyrockets)
But consumer reviews and federal complaint data suggest there are lingering concerns with HireRight, as the company averages roughly one star on both Google and the Better Business Bureau (1). Data reviewed by Atlanta News First Investigates shows HireRight complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau nearly tripled in 2025, with 91 complaints submitted across 29 states.
While HireRight generally responded to background check errors in a timely manner, public records do not indicate how often those responses resulted in corrections.
Additionally, some online complaints about HireRight seemed similar to Tucker’s experience. In one Better Business Bureau filing, a job applicant alleged that a drug test in late November incorrectly indicated marijuana and prescription medication, despite a recent negative test for another employer (5).
On December 23, MBO Partners issued a “Final Adverse Action” notice, revoking Tucker’s offer of employment (1). The company said it could not comment on the specifics of its case because of federal privacy laws but emphasized that candidates are given an opportunity to review and dispute background check reports before employment decisions are finalized.
Tucker is now juggling part-time work while continuing to apply for full-time roles, and has since filed a lawsuit against HireRight. Meanwhile, consumer advocates say her experience is a reminder that there are steps workers can take when a background check affects a job offer.
The first step is to know your rights. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, employers are required to notify applicants when a background report contributes to an adverse employment decision and must provide information about the screening company used and the applicant’s right to dispute inaccurate or incomplete information. Workers are also entitled to a free copy of the report used in the decision (6).
Experts also recommend reviewing your credit and background reports before applying for jobs to catch mistakes early. Job seekers can request a free copy of their credit report at AnnualCreditReport.com, and may want to review state and local laws that limit what potential employers can ask and when.
If errors appear in your background check, disputes should be filed directly with the reporting agency, along with any supporting documentation. Agencies are typically allowed up to 30 days to investigate, which is a timeline that may conflict with immediate financial needs such as rent, health care or child care.
Workers who believe a screening company has mishandled their report can also file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Join 200,000 readers and be the first to get the best Moneywise exclusive stories and interviews — clear insight curated and delivered every week. Subscribe now.
We rely only on verified sources and credible reporting from third parties. For details, see our editorial ethics and guidelines.
Atlanta News First Investigates (1); Consumer Justice (2); National Consumer Law Center (3); Professional Association of Background Screening (4); Better Business Bureau (5); Federal Trade Commission (6).
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.