Posted by Roger Proctor Sr on 12/11/07 5:12pm
Msg #225535

Background checks

Ok somebody is going to have to help me figure this one out....please that is.
I sign up with a company and fax all the necessary required forms including my background check and being sure by asking if the background check I submitted was satisfactory given the o.k. so I thought great. I get a call from this company wanting me to do a signing below my regular fee and I figure what the hey I want your business so no problem. I completed the signing yesterday and today I get a email from them saying oh by the way your background is not acceptable after all we need for you to get one from one of these companies instead (which by the way one of the companies they recommended they have a partnership with) what is this all about? It is sort of like closing the barn doors after the horses already got out it just doesn't make sense to me. Any input would be deeply appreciated.

Reply by Lee/AR on 12/11/07 5:53pm
Msg #225540

Pompous answer: It's an ABA. Real answer: It improves their bottom line at your expense.
Forgeddahboutit.

Reply by Loretta on 12/11/07 6:34pm
Msg #225544

Re: Background checks..

Service Link talked me into paying $54 to have a background check done using the company that "they" chose. I did this in October and got no closings. I called and she told me that they are using a signing service for my area and I would have to go through them. Well, of course they are low ballers and I won't do their work for the price they offer.

$54 lost. I will never do that again.

Reply by Lee/AR on 12/12/07 7:26am
Msg #225599

Re: Background checks..in general

Some history here: the GLBA was passed in 1999. If you read the actual Act, it does NOT require us to have a BGC. However, 7 years later, a certain national organization began both offering & very strongly hyping their BGC to all & sundry "in order to be in compliance with the GLBA". (One must wonder why it was not needed for 7 years--until said nat'l org. hyped it---and draw your own conclusions.)

Prior to this hyping, whenever a co. was working with a bank who wanted us to have a BGC, the hiring co. paid for it. I personally have had (& not paid for) maybe 4, 5 BGCs. If any of these are not acceptable to a new-to-me hiring entity--and same insists on 'their Affiliated Business Arrangement co' doing it---well, it's just another way for them to cut fees...period.

Reply by LKT/CA on 12/11/07 6:49pm
Msg #225546

I don't know about other states but the California Secretary of State REQUIRES applicants to be fingerprinted and background checked. After passing the test, once the SOS receives the application, it takes 6 - 8 weeks for the background check to be completed before commission is received. And now with the new law changes coming Jan. 2008, new applicants have to include photos of themselves with their application.

I returned the email I received and told the person that he had my permission to submit the information they already had on file for a background check but I was NOT paying for it since the CA SOS already took care of a complete and thorough check.

Reply by Terri Garner on 12/11/07 7:24pm
Msg #225551

Actually, the very first time you're commissioned the SOS did the fingerprinting and background check. Any subsequent renewals did not include a background check. Now, however, that has changed in 2008. Every applicant, whether submitting for a renewal or new commission will have to submit livescan fingerprints, along with 2 - 2X2 Passport photos with their application for commission. The background check will not only be one from the DOJ (as previously) but will now also include a FBI background check.

Since the applicant pays for the background checks (about $70-$80) for livescan and background checks, I would like us to be able to obtain a copy of those background checks. One that we could use to, hopefully, fulfill those requests from other companies. But in the absence of that, I'll certainly advise companies that my commission would not have been granted had I not passed those checks with the Secretary of State, so if it is sufficient for the SOS, it should be sufficient to know that I passed and proof is the commission

Terri
Lancaster, CA

Reply by MichiganAl on 12/11/07 7:12pm
Msg #225550

It clearly isn't about the background check. I'd say it's not much different than a company that makes you pay to sign up with them. I would normally tell them to take a hike as I won't pay a company just to get on their maybe we'll call you list. But heck, they've already sent you business. If you think they want to send you more signings, then I guess you've got a business decision to make. No reason to cut your nose off to spite your face.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 12/11/07 7:28pm
Msg #225552

Unless you're sure that you can establish a relationship with this company, take the money for the signing you completed and consider it a lesson learned. They're asking you to pay for an "acceptable" background check from an affiliated company, they won't meet your fees, and unless I'm missing something there's no guarantee that you will get work from them in the future.

Where's the upside for you?

Reply by CONNIE/PA on 12/11/07 8:25pm
Msg #225561

I'd recommend not sending the closing package back until the company confirms in writing that they will pay you despite their oversite of your background check information. You will not only be putting pressure on the signing agency, but the title company who needs the package back will also force them to comply if they want to be paid.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/11/07 9:19pm
Msg #225579

Re: Absolutely NOT!!

"I'd recommend not sending the closing package back until the company confirms in writing that they will pay you despite their oversite of your background check information. "

You absolutely cannot hold the package hostage - return the package as scheduled and fight it out with the company later - you were told your background check was okay then they changed their mind - here's what I'd do - MHO - tell them you want it in writing that you'll be paid for this one signing based on the previously submitted background check which they approved - it's not your fault someone on their end goofed. Don't take any more assignments from them until they pay you for this one. Then, once you've ironed this out and have been paid for this signing, next time they call and request another BGC tell them they're welcome to submit your information for screening - on their dime. If they require it they can foot the bill. JMHO

However, again....do NOT hold that package....that, IMHO, is playing with fire and can be occupational suicide.

Reply by jba/fl on 12/11/07 9:59pm
Msg #225583

Re: Absolutely NOT!!

Not to mention need for that E&O and that is for mistakes of another kind - not something willful and wanton, which this would be. JMHO, .02 etc.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 12/12/07 6:28am
Msg #225592

If you submitted your background check prior to the assignment, and if they have given you the assignment after their receipt of the background check...they have waived any further requirement. Demand payment in full.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 12/12/07 6:31am
Msg #225593

If they have accepted your work, your claim is even stronger. The work you did is your property until they pay for it. Tell them to either pay you or return your property to you.

Reply by Lee/AR on 12/12/07 7:05am
Msg #225597

Also, Roger...

Two things: One- do not drop your fee to get business with a new co. as they will not go up in the future. Two-given the yes/no situation on the BGC, do you really want to work with them?
They don't sound all that great.

Reply by Roger Proctor Sr on 12/12/07 10:18am
Msg #225614

Re: Also, Roger...

Well I wrote them a letter inquiring about this matter and as of now have not received any response. I appreciate all of your input and hopefully have learned something from all this. Thanks Again
HAGD
Roger

Reply by desktopfull on 12/12/07 10:03pm
Msg #225801

Re: Bet they're getting a cut of the fee.

That sounds to me like the scam that Mtg. broker's here in FL got caught doing. They would make the borrower purchase homeowner's insurance from a specific company in order to get their loans and maintain the insurance with that company for the life of the loan. Guess what? The Mtg. broker either owned the insurance company or had an interest in the company and received fees for the insurance purchase each year. Now we have an anti-coercion statement for the borrower's to sign saying they chose their own insurance company.