Comments
| Bad break | 3 weeks, 6 days ago In order to prevail, you would have to prove that the company was going to hire you, but did not solely because of the report. Additionally, the investigator probably reported to your prospective employer that they could not verify you worked there. That is different than saying you didn't work there. That puts the oneness on the employer to call that former employer to verify your employment if they did, in fact, want to hire you. A separate issue is that any cause of action would have to sound in contract. The investigator was not in privity with you. To put it more simply, the investigator only owed a duty to the company that hired them, not to you. |
|---|
Members should use caution and good judgment when posting cases for review by the HelpMeSue.com community. Members could be held legally responsible for damages to a person's or entity's reputation if a court were to find that the post constitutes libel or defamation. Under federal law (the Communications Decency Act), because HelpMeSue.com does not censor posts or investigate them for accuracy, HelpMeSue.com is not legally responsible for the posts that members post, even if those remarks are defamatory. However, this law does not protect the person who writes the post from responsibility for it.