0

I recently got offered a job with Morgan Stanley and as part of the on boarding process, am required to undergo background verification. I provided all the required documents.

Now, in one of my previous companies(a small consultancy), there was an issue with my joining date. They had incorrectly registered a date two days earlier than my actual date as my date of joining( tentative date as the nearest Monday to my resignation week). I had noticed this when they provided me the relieving letter and had them correct it.

Now, as part of the background verification, the company(a 3rd party) contacted that consultancy and the consultancy told them the wrong date of joining. Apparently, they had not corrected the date in their database and had only edited the letter copy. I contacted my hr (had a kind of gut feeling) in the consultancy and had them correct it on the spot and also write to the 3rd party that they had made a mistake with the date and update them the correct date.

Now, I am plagued with concern that will this be construed as something fishy on my part ? Will it harm my chances there ? Also, if it causes an issue will I be given a chance to explain ?

Edit: I have resigned from my current company and will be joining them end of next month. Also, one of my concerns is that they will tell me that I cannot join because of the background verification and will be left high and dry. Usually if there is an issue when can I expect them to contact with the updates ?

Edit 2: I am based in Mumbai, India.

  • Yes, it is considered normal here... Many times backgrounds checks are initiated after joining... Or not done at all... I'm speaking in general not for Morgan Stanley – user96551 Jun 27 '15 at 16:21
  • 1
    you really think they'll care that much about a two day discrepancy? India must be harsh. Background checks usually search for crime or fraud type things. Not clerical errors... – easymoden00b Jun 30 '15 at 13:27
  • I don't know... Hence the question.... I wanted to know whether such things cause issue and what can be done about it... – user96551 Jun 30 '15 at 14:48
1

This very thing has actually happened to me as well, though with a different employer.

If the initial round of employment verification doesn't pass muster, or if the agency running the background check can't contact your old employer (such as if the phone number or email address of the contact you provided has changed), then they will contact you directly to allow you to correct the discrepancy yourself.

Typically they'll accept a copy of your W-2 or 1099 form (in the U.S., at least), or they'll take a secondary reference from each of your unverified workplaces that can vouch that you have in fact worked there for as long as what your resume said.

All in all, you shouldn't worry immediately about your job offer being revoked for a small mistake like that, and it's good that you jumped in front of it before someone else noticed the discrepancy. However, if they do contact you, don't waste time in collecting the information they need. If they don't get that information in time, they can and will return a failed background check to Morgan Stanley, who will then likely revoke your offer.

  • I am from Mumbai, India, updated the question to reflect this, will this same apply ?? – user96551 Jun 27 '15 at 14:23
  • They contacted the consultancy last Thursday and there has been no communication with me, should I think that I'm clear ? – user96551 Jun 27 '15 at 14:25
  • 2
    Maybe. I'm not familiar with the employment verification methods used in India, but regardless, they still should give you a chance to correct any errors that come up before they take the nuclear option of revoking your offer. – panoptical Jun 27 '15 at 14:26
  • 2
    As a side note, I wouldn't contact Morgan Stanley's HR any more about this, as they might think it looks fishy, and they're only going to use the official report they get back from the background check agency anyway. – panoptical Jun 27 '15 at 14:29
  • Yes, thank you... I struggled with the decision to contact the HR about this as it might raise red flags and decided against it. – user96551 Jun 27 '15 at 14:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.