A class action lawsuit has been filed against a consumer reporting agency for allegedly violating federal law by providing inaccurate and misleading information in consumer reports. On February 10, 2026, Jashar Morris filed the complaint in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina against Criminalrecordcheck.com Inc.
The lawsuit alleges that Criminalrecordcheck.com Inc., a consumer reporting agency, violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by failing to ensure maximum possible accuracy in their reports and not notifying consumers when adverse public record information was reported to potential employers. According to the complaint, Morris applied for a job with Allied Universal in North Carolina and was offered employment on October 28, 2025. However, after Allied requested a consumer report from Criminalrecordcheck.com Inc., his job offer was withdrawn due to alleged inaccuracies in the report provided on November 3, 2025.
Morris claims that the report incorrectly stated he had been charged with “violent crime/drugs/machine gun,” which he denies. He argues that this description is both patently inaccurate and materially misleading since his actual conviction was for possessing a firearm during a drug trafficking crime without any violent crime or machine gun charges involved. Despite challenging the report’s accuracy on November 13, 2025, Criminalrecordcheck.com Inc. maintained its initial findings as accurate.
The complaint highlights that such inaccuracies could significantly impact employment opportunities and are contrary to FCRA requirements for reasonable procedures ensuring accurate reporting. It further accuses Criminalrecordcheck.com Inc. of failing to notify Morris contemporaneously about reporting adverse public record information to Allied Universal, thus depriving him of an opportunity to address or correct it before it affected his employment prospects.
Morris seeks statutory damages ranging from $100 to $1,000 per violation for himself and others similarly situated under two proposed classes: one concerning misrepresented criminal charges or convictions and another regarding failure to provide proper notice of adverse public records. Additionally, punitive damages, costs, attorneys’ fees, and other relief available under FCRA are sought.
Representing Morris is Dana Smith of Siri & Glimstad LLP along with Jayson Watkins (pro hac vice forthcoming). The case is under Case ID 1:26-cv-00148.
Source: 126cv00148_Morris_v_Criminalrecordcheck_dot_com_Inc_Complaint_Middle_District_North_Carolina.pdf
