When I started working for my present employer (a bank), I was sent a letter saying that some company called "BTI" would do a background check on me. They said that by law, if I sent a written request to a specific address, I would be provided with a copy of that background check. Being curious, I did just that. Supposedly, I received a copy of what was sent to my employer...

There was a surprising amount of low-value incorrect information on the background check. The good news was that incorrect information contradicted other information so some of it was questionable. (For example, my undergrad university said that they employed me until I graduated but I had a different employer during that time that also said I was employed with them...) Luckily, the incorrect information wasn't in the criminal background section (which was correct in that I don't have a criminal record...)

What was really interesting about the background check was that they only checked for a criminal record in the county I presently live in. While that would probably bring any convictions in the state, I was surprised that they didn't try to do more research since I lived in several states in the prior few years (and they knew which ones)...

People use the term "background check" as if there were some agreement on the meaning of the term. Outside the public sector there are few rules, and, like the OP, you never get to know the results, or have an opportunity to rebut the information. You just never hear from the employer again. There is a federal law that says that if you are not hired based on the results of a credit report or investigative consumer report, you are supposed to get a letter that says so, but, as far as I know, no applicant has ever received such a letter. What incentive is there for any employer to send one? It's just an invitation for lawsuits. So people get passed over for jobs for things like arrests that did not result in convictions, inaccurate information, or even information that's about other people with similar names. The OP should have a criminal records check run on himself, using an agency such as Choicepoint.

Bob, in your advice column last week the comment was made that you always seem to have topics that apply to the reader's current situation. I was in agreement then and it struck me again when I read this column. I have just accepted a new position - the next steps are being held up by my background check. In fact, I received a follow-up call on this just today. Luckily (I think...), the discrepancy is that evidently the company hired by my prior employer to provide my work history details has an incorrect starting date for me. I had thought this would be reasonably easy to get corrected. However, after reading the comments above, I definitely am going to make sure I know all of my options!

Background checks are inconsistent. Choicepoint, Hireright, etc. all have different information. Employers know this...just remember disclose little details, unless your in california, so if something comeback...at least you acknowledged it.
The background check is really a character test.

Two comments:

First, regarding the background checks: I once worked for a firm that verified courthouse records & other information for banks and finance companies prior to a loan being issued. The staff checked on things like liens, lawsuits, judgements, titles, etc. Very often, they'd come across information on the lines of showing that a lien or lawsuit was filed against someone with a name similar to yours. BUT, and this is very important, they COULD NOT verify whether or not it was yours, as most of these filings do not include identifiers such as drivers license numbers, SSN's, etc. Now, my old firm ALWAYS qualified this information on the reports by reminding all that the information ONLY meant that the courthouse had paperwork showing someone with a name similar to or the same as you had a situation, but that it DID NOT mean that it was you.

And at least once a week, someone would get an irate phone call because they were turned down for a loan, and someone would blame our report without paying attention to the qualifying information. So be wary.

Second... I went through a span of almost 4 years between permanent, full-time IT jobs. I couldn't tell you how many times I was promised, especially after a 2nd or 3rd round interview, an answer in a few days, and never heard from them again. One company even promised me that my hiring was only pending review by the CEO... and a month later, the position was advertised again, and they never responded to my "I'm still interested!" letters. [Not that I really want to work at a place that treats people like this, but the bills must be paid!]

One big help was that I spent a good bit of this time working for a friend's small company, doing IT work (setting up their network, a Terminal Server, training, etc.), and then continued this when he got more involved with a related company in the same business. Obviously, I was able to use him as a good professional reference! On those occasions when a company called him to follow up on references, he was able to give me a good one (I hope because I earned it, not because we are good friends).

Building up professional relationships like this took some time, but I think it paid off when I finally landed a contract position last year, in that I had recent positive references to counterbalance the neutral ones that my previous employers were giving out (yes, I checked those privately too).

There's little point in dwelling on the past. Do some networking, get some people you know to get you some small pieces of piecemeal work, or do some volunteer work. Build up a "portfolio" of recent succesful projects, and the after effects of the old position and the backstabber's poisoning will fade into the background before you know it.

The quality of information used for the background check can also be erronous.

We were acquired by a large public company, that required background checks. We had drug testing, but they wanted the full enchilada. Weren't we surprised when 30% of our 250 employees raised red flags! Such a high number made us dig into the process a little more.

The information used to drive the background search?

First Name + Last Name.

No SSN, no middle initial, no current address, no cross check whatsoever. As others mentioned, there is no quality system out there like the credit reporting agencies, and different companies provide different results.