Johnson Matthey, True Screen Named in FCRA Class Action

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Johnson Matthey Inc., which operates as Johnson Matthey Testing, and True Screen, Inc. are in the crosshairs of a proposed class action filed over alleged Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Pennsylvania Criminal History and Record Information Act (CHRIA) missteps. The Pennsylvania resident who filed the 22-page lawsuit, a 60-year old African American man, says he applied for and was offered a job with Johnson Matthey Testing only to have the offer rescinded when True Screen allegedly produced a “misleading and inaccurate” criminal conviction report indicating an “infraction” conviction on the plaintiff’s record.

It’s important to note that the complaint mentions the plaintiff has in fact been arrested and charged with crimes on three occasions. According to court documents, the plaintiff in 1982 was charged with two misdemeanors that were ultimately withdrawn without resulting in any conviction. In 2009, the case continues, the plaintiff was charged with two more misdemeanors that were also withdrawn, with the man pleading guilty to two summary offenses. In 2014, the complaint says, the plaintiff was charged and found guilty of driving under the influence.

The lawsuit claims CHRIA “forbids employers from considering arrests or charges that did not result in conviction when making hiring decisions,” and allows for Pennsylvania employers to only consider felony or misdemeanor convictions “to the extent to which they relate to the applicant’s suitability for employment in the position for which he has applied.”

Though True Screen allegedly complied with the FCRA in sending the plaintiff a pre-adverse action notice letter, meeting the statute’s disclosure requirements, the lawsuit argues the “infraction” disposition noted on the plaintiff’s background check “does not exist in the Pennsylvania Crimes Code” and should not have been relayed to Johnson Matthey Testing. “Thus, [True Screen] presented [the plaintiff’s] criminal history information in its Criminal Conviction Report in a manner that misleads and is inaccurate, which consequently injured [the plaintiff],” the case summarizes.

“Thus, [True Screen] presented [the plaintiff’s] criminal history information in its Criminal Conviction Report in a manner than misleads and is inaccurate, which consequently injured [the plaintiff],” the case summarizes.