Job applicants whose Accurate Background employment screening report listed a prison sentence instead of the actual outcome of a criminal case may be covered by a proposed class action alleging the background check company violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Accurate Background, LLC has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
A proposed class action filed on October 30, 2026 alleges that Accurate Background, LLC, a company that runs background checks for employers, produced screening reports that described job applicants as having been sentenced to prison when they were not. The case, Johnson v. Accurate Background, LLC, No. 2:26-cv-02023, is in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and is assigned to Judge Brett H. Ludwig.The plaintiff, a Wisconsin resident, says she was offered a job at a Ross Stores location in July 2026 after telling the employer about a misdemeanor record. According to the complaint, the Accurate Background report delivered to Ross on July 30, 2026 stated that she had been sentenced to prison time, even though her offense was a misdemeanor that Wisconsin law does not punish with prison, and left out the work-release privileges the court had granted. She says Ross then notified her that it was considering adverse action based on the report, and that she lost the job opportunity. Accurate Background has not yet responded in court.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What Does the Complaint Allege?
The complaint says Accurate Background reported that the plaintiff was sentenced to 90 days in prison with two days of credit, and to 30 days in a county house of correction, without listing her actual sentence. It argues that reporting “prison” for an offense that cannot carry a prison sentence, and failing to distinguish jail from prison, made her record look more serious than it was.The plaintiff alleges that this reflects Accurate Background’s standard policies for employment reports, not a one-time mistake, and that the company has produced more than 5,000 employment reports under the same procedures in the past two years. She alleges that the company acted in negligent or reckless disregard of the FCRA, and says the report cost her wages and harmed her reputation.
What the FCRA Requires
Section 1681e(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires consumer reporting agencies, including background screening companies, to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information in the reports they prepare. A separate section, 1681k, requires agencies that report public-record information likely to hurt someone’s job prospects either to notify the person at the time or to keep strict procedures to make sure the information is complete and up to date.For willful violations, the FCRA allows statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per consumer, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. The complaint brings a single claim under section 1681e(b).
Who Could Be Covered?
The complaint proposes one class: everyone who was the subject of one or more Accurate Background consumer reports that reported prison instead of the actual disposition of a criminal case, from two years before the October 30, 2026 filing through the end of the case. The complaint estimates at least 1,000 class members, identifiable from Accurate Background’s records. The company, its affiliates and officers, people who opt out and the presiding judge are excluded.Ross Stores is named only as the employer that ordered the plaintiff’s report and is not a defendant. The proposed class is not limited to Ross applicants or to Wisconsin.
What Happens Next?
Accurate Background will have a chance to respond to the complaint. The plaintiff, represented by Siri & Glimstad LLP, would later have to ask the court to certify the class. If the case settles or the plaintiff wins after certification, class members would be notified, and OpenClassActions.com will cover it.Questions
Who would be covered by the Accurate Background lawsuit?
The complaint proposes a class of everyone who was the subject of an Accurate Background consumer report that reported prison instead of the actual disposition of a criminal case, from October 30, 2024 onward. The complaint estimates at least 1,000 people. No class has been certified.
What does the FCRA require of background check companies?
Section 1681e(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information in a consumer report. For willful violations, the law allows statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per consumer, plus punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.
Is Ross Stores being sued?
No. Ross Stores is named in the complaint only as the employer that ordered the plaintiff’s background check. The only defendant is Accurate Background, LLC.
Is there an Accurate Background settlement or claim form?
No. The lawsuit was filed on October 30, 2026. There is no settlement, certified class or claim form.
Sources
• Class action complaint, Johnson v. Accurate Background, LLC, No. 2:26-cv-02023 (E.D. Wis., filed October 30, 2026)• Docket, Johnson v. Accurate Background, LLC, via CourtListener
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681e, Fair Credit Reporting Act (Cornell Legal Information Institute)
