Trucking Companies Paying to Keep False Info on DAC Report
The petition to stop false DAC Reporting against truck drivers has reached 639 . . . keep the signatures and comments coming. This abusive system continues to ruin the livelihood for an uncountable number of drivers:
- “The DAC Report is nothing more than an expensive joke on truckers and a useful tool for employers who cannot face the fact that they run a less than desirable company.”
- “My truck driving career has been unjustly ruined because of the abuses of the DAC service.”
- “I went to a funeral for family and ***** out of Nashville put false info on my dac report.”
- “I totally agree with this 100%. My husband was a new trucker and left a company, neither one of us knew that leaving this company would end his career. We paid out over $8,000.00 for him to become a trucker and now we can not get another company to hire him.”
- DAC does not take what the driver say, even when the driver shows DAC the proof.”
- “8 yrs experience with no wrecks or speeding tickets. can’t even get a job because of false info on my DAC.”
These trucking companies that use DAC as a retaliation tool against drivers, continue “updating” the false information that they have placed on the driver’s report. HireRight, which is now DAC, insures the false information remains on the driver’s report.
- “Quit working for ***** 07-08 and they falsely reported an accident as my fault and continue to report it as my fault every 30 days. I tried several times to get it expunged and ***** came back AFTER 30 days to put it back on. ***** is reportedly paying HireRight to keep a false record on me. So far no company is willing to hire me until the accident is removed and I have been out of work since I quit.”
For companies to do background checks on drivers in order to protect themselves from “potential litigation, fraud, theft and workplace violence,” is understandable. What is not understandable, nor acceptable, is how this system is set up entirely on behalf of the trucking company . . . giving drivers a near zero percentage opportunity to have false information immediately removed from their report.
Even in the case of HireRight, formerly DAC Reporting Services, the trucking company is the customer . . . paying for a service . . . on who’s side do you believe the investigating company will be on?
- “I applied to a company and chose not to even go to work there due to the pay not being reasonable. They then put on my DAC that I abandoned equipment. That report is STILL on my DAC, even though I never worked for that employer.”
STOP False DAC Reporting . . .
© 2009, AskTheTrucker. All rights reserved.
: dac, dac report, DAC Reporting Services, false, false information, HireRight, truck drivers
Related posts
Tagged with: dac • dac report • DAC Reporting Services • false • false information • HireRight • truck drivers
Filed under: dac report • trucking • trucking companies
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Senator Durbin,
First let me thank you for the many years of honorable service that you have provided for the people of the great state of Illinois. It is most commendable.
I write today concerning issues with the transportation segment, specifically the trucking industry. While in these tough economic time things are tough across the board the right of a company to add false information, untrue “fact” and unscrupulous data to someone’s employment records, in this case DAC reports is deplorable at least and in all likelihood illegal at best. When these comments are added to their records (DAC) it in all likelihood has eliminated a person from plying their trade where they best see fit, and have probably prevented the person from obtaining employment period.
This cannot be permitted to continue and all I ask is that you check this out for yourself. There are many folks who could relay to you this unfair treatment and how it has affected their lives. In these times of high unemployment I would think it is in all of our best interests to correct wrongs where they exist and correct them for the good of all. Transportation companies nor any industry should wield such a sabre that can in effect ruin someone’s chances of pursuing the American Dream.
I look forward to your response.
With Respect, Sincerely,
Mike McGuire, Concerned Constituent
I have written both Senator from Illinois, Durbin and Buriss with the above note. Get involved people!
That’s great Mick – this will be our next step in moving forward with the Stop False DAC Reporting issue … I cannot do it on my own, I’m going to need a lot of help from people, such as yourself. Thanks for your efforts – Allen
Get response back on my note regarding falsifying DAC reports from the senator. What do I get? A note regarding diversity, discrimination, and losing employment because of ones sexual orientation. I let him have it. Next time please read what is sent understand it or ask for clarification before you send out some lackluster and at best ridiculous response. Politicians.
They won’t even read Bills they are signing into law, most of the time … no surprise . . . like you said – “Politicians”
What possible motivation could there be for a trucking company to pay DAC, or any other reporting agency, to keep false information on an ex-employees report?
I’ve no doubt that false information exists on many reports but the reporting agencies, like credit reporting agencies, are covered by the FCRA and FACTA. There are remedies.
Being covered by the FCRA and FACTA are meaningless here, by evidence of the thousands of drivers who have their careers ruined by the DAC Reporting Services and those companies who maintain the false info on their reports. What possible motivation do they have? Reasons as childish as just “getting even” … the entire system is set up in favor of the company . . . to say “there are remedies” is too easy of an “answer.” The “remedies” do not work as shown by the several hundred responses so far received on the petition.
I can see a class action claim for DAC abuse.
Let me know if you want me to look into it. I’m a scout for a number of class action law firms.
http;//www.Badisse.com
DAC ABUSE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
.
.
Get back to me about this issue. I’ve conducted some legal research and there appears to be a viable legal claim here for DAC abuse. For example, the following lawsuit mentioned DAC abuse based on “defamation”. The defendant relied on a “qualified privilege” to make statements to DAC against the employee,which protects them against any false statements. However,if the statements to DAC were made with the knowledge that they were false, the element of malice would defeat the privilege and the defendant would be held liable for the false reporting to DAC.
.
.
Read it for yourself.
.
.
THE FOLLOWING LAWSUIT WAS FILED IN 2009 BY A TRUCK DRIVER ACTING PRO SE (without an attorney). HE DEFEATED THE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS HIS LAWSUIT. IT INVOLVED “DAC” ABUSE.
.
.
” Plaintiff is a pro se litigant pursuing a claim related to losing his job as a truck driver. …Plaintiff has accused Raven of making defamatory statements about him to the EEOC and the DOL as well as to a potential employer, D. Krutiak Trucking (“Krutiak”). Raven has also been accused of releasing defamatory statements in a DAC Report, an employment-history database for motor carriers. Raven has moved to dismiss on the grounds that the statements that they made were privileged and not subject to liability. Plaintiff claims that these statements were knowingly false and have made it difficult for him to secure other employment….. (a) An employer or any person employed by the employer who discloses information about a current or former employee’s job performance to a prospective employer is presumed to be acting in good faith; and unless lack of good faith is shown, is immune from civil liability for such disclosure or its consequences. For purposes of this section, the presumption of good faith may be rebutted upon a showing that the information disclosed by such employer was knowingly false, was deliberately misleading or was rendered with malicious purpose; or that the information was disclosed in violation of a nondisclosure agreement, or was otherwise confidential according to applicable federal, State or local statute, rule or regulation…….This privilege carries a rebuttable presumption of good faith. Qualified privilege will not attach to the DAC Report or Raven’s communications with Krutiak if they were knowingly false, deliberately, misleading, or rendered with malicious purpose……..Plaintiff has alleged that Raven’s statements were knowingly false and rendered with malice. Since this Court must assume that these allegations are true for the purposes of this motion…Plaintiff’s defamation claim for the DAC Report and for communications with Krutiak cannot be dismissed now… Considering the foregoing, Raven’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED”
.
Eaton v. Miller Brewing Co.
Not Reported in A.2d, 2009 WL 1277991
Del.Super.,2009.
.
.
The above case teaches that to hold the trucking company liable, the allegation MUST not only allege that the trucking company made a false report to DAC; but that there MUST be sufficient evidence showing that the trucking company knew their report to DAC was false when it was made to DAC.
.
.
Again, I believe that there is a viable and strong class action claim here for DAC abuse. Which includes punitive damages for the harm the trucking companies caused drivers. After reading a number of complaints, it appears the trucking companies are using the DAC report as their own personal “black list” to retaliate against drivers and that the administrator of DAC may be assisting them. For example, drivers who completely lose their income due to false DAC reporting. Please get in touch with me so I can take this to the next level with the law firms I work with.
.
.
http://www.Badisse.com
.
.
Thanks David for all this info . . . I would suggest all you drivers out there who have been victimized by the DAC Reporting abuse, contact David through the link he has posted . . . it’s what I have been working on for a while now . . . Fight Back Against the DAC . . . thanks again, David — Allen Smith
I got one for you, I have been dac’d by my company for unsastifactory work record, incidents’accidents, and have been badmouthed on record with a reference check. I am currently disputing with dac/usis/hireright right now. Do you think you can help.