Property, casualty, life, Health Insurance

[Taylor West]

Recently i was offered a position where i need to be licensed for property, casualty, life, Health. They said i need to pass a background check. 8 years ago i go a misdemeanor, being young and dumb. my plea deal was it would be hidden on my background and the only people that would be able to see it is if i wanted a federal job.my lawyer told me to ALWAYS mark no on questions about my background. with that being said i have not had any problem passing any of my background checks since. Will this show up? should i be concerned. i don't want to leave my field being a medical secretary if i risk not passing the check.

 

[fed up]

It could show up, depends on how deep they dig. I tried to hire an agent when I was with Farmers. He had a misdemeanor from his teen-age years and it showed up. His was breaking and entering when he went into his girl friend's garage to retrieve something. It showed up and Farmers would not appoint. If your's concerns money of any kind it could be a no go

 

[somarco]

Not a lawyer . . .

Juvenile records are commonly shielded. Supposedly records are no longer expunged.

A misdemeanor from 8 years ago is probably not a hindrance even if it isn't shielded. Was the lawyer that advised you to mark "no" on background checks the same one that advised you on the misdemeanor?

I would think that checking no to background checks would raise a flag or two. From the employers perspective, "What are you hiding?".

Have you run a background check on yourself to see what shows up?

FWIW free legal advice is often worth what you pay for it.

 

[Taylor West]

what i mean by marking no is. "Have you ever been convicted of anything." i was told to always mark no. and yes i have ran a background check on my self. ( i have even paid for one) nothing shows up. the lawyer is the same one that represented me when i was younger.

 

[fed up]

Not a lawyer . . .

Juvenile records are commonly shielded. Supposedly records are no longer expunged.

A misdemeanor from 8 years ago is probably not a hindrance even if it isn't shielded. Was the lawyer that advised you to mark "no" on background checks the same one that advised you on the misdemeanor?

I would think that checking no to background checks would raise a flag or two. From the employers perspective, "What are you hiding?".

Have you run a background check on yourself to see what shows up?

FWIW free legal advice is often worth what you pay for it.

My son did some stupid things when he was a teen. Paid the fines, did the community service, waited out the probation. It was to be expunged. His security background for the Military found everything. Depends on how deep they dig

 

[Taylor West]

Thank you!

 

[Markthebroker]

Recently i was offered a position where i need to be licensed for property, casualty, life, Health. They said i need to pass a background check. 8 years ago i go a misdemeanor, being young and dumb. my plea deal was it would be hidden on my background and the only people that would be able to see it is if i wanted a federal job.my lawyer told me to ALWAYS mark no on questions about my background. with that being said i have not had any problem passing any of my background checks since. Will this show up? should i be concerned. i don't want to leave my field being a medical secretary if i risk not passing the check.

Mark "no" on civilian applications as they probably cannot find it, and mark "yes" on any government applications, as they probably will.

It will be helpful if we know what this "young and dumb" charge was. If it involves and issue with moral torpitude like fraud, embezzlement, burglary etc, then you may have a problem. If it doesn't involve and issue with moral torpitude, and was something like a dui, drug possession, reckless driving, etc. then you likely won't have anything to worry about.

 

[Allen Trent]

what i mean by marking no is. "Have you ever been convicted of anything." i was told to always mark no. and yes i have ran a background check on my self. ( i have even paid for one) nothing shows up. the lawyer is the same one that represented me when i was younger.

the problem is that many carriers have a zero tolerance policy when answering a question NO that should have been yes. I have seen some cases where the carrier had no problem with the actual issue from years or decades ago & would have appointed had it been answered yes & disclosed. But because the person answered NO & lied, they were denied & not permitted to reapply for several years.

IMO, I would answer yes. the way the question is worded, you must answer yes & explain.

 

[Markthebroker]

the problem is that many carriers have a zero tolerance policy when answering a question NO that should have been yes. I have seen some cases where the carrier had no problem with the actual issue from years or decades ago & would have appointed had it been answered yes & disclosed. But because the person answered NO & lied, they were denied & not permitted to reapply for several years.

IMO, I would answer yes. the way the question is worded, you must answer yes & explain.

Very good point Allen. When you attempt to explain a mistake, and ask for a second chance, most people will work with you, in almost any situation. Everyone makes mistakes. It's what you do next that matters.

When someone thinks you are lying to them are trying to pull a fast one, rarely will they want to work with you.

 

[RichardCO]

I'd recommend answering yes, with explanation. If you're entering this industry this is a question asked every time you add a license, apply to new carrier, etc. Best to put it out front now, if it matters better to know now.