Will the background check show this unauthorized work? :(

[tryingtomakeit 1]

I am terrified. I am on the last step of this loooong process. I have never committed a crime but was the victim of a crime (house and car broken into) and when the police came, he asked for my name and the name of the place I work (he also got address and driver's license number). I was on H4 at the time, and should not have been employed. In response to the question re where I work, I gave the name of a small business that I started, my position and the work place number. Now that I am at the I 485 and hearing about all the FBI and other background checks that will be done, I am terrified that this place of work will show up on my back ground check since I reported it to the police. Any experience with this? Do the background check show everything that has ever been reported to the police? Note that I was the crime victim, so I am not worried about anything unfavorable about my criminal history. I am worried about the work part.

[Coco8 1,039]

Are you getting a green card through your parter's employer?

 

I think that beyond you giving him where you work, how did you start the business? Whose name is on the paperwork? If it is the H1B holder, they are not allowed to work outside of the company sponsoring their visa. Who paid the taxes?

 

A couple of years back they started allowing work for H4 through an EAD, was this before that?

[tryingtomakeit 1]

I was not authorized to work - no EAD at the time. I am just curious to know if since my name and the workplace info was entered in the police's system, it would show up in the background check that is done for I 485. So the unauthorized work is the issue...because even though I was the victim, if a report in the system shows that I was working, I would be worried. Does anyone have any idea?

[f f 725]

did you file taxes on any income the business or you made? if you did good if not you will run afoul of the irs since you should have been paying taxes.

 

did you disclose this work in your greencard application? if you did you would not be asking this question and if not you lied on your application by not disclosing any employment you had in the us.

 

the question you should be asking is how do I inform uscos for my error in omitting it thus ending the lie rather than how do I keep my lie going.

 

even if you get your green card and even get citizenship they can all be taken away because you lied on this application. there is no fix or magic firm to fill out you havery to come clean and hope they forgive you.

 

 

[Coco8 1,039]

If you had a business, they could find out about that too, that is why I asked you whose name was on the business. Who paid taxes? Was the name of the business registered? Was number for the business under your name? Is there online information about the business? That is worse. 

 

If they do a name search or an ID search, you file report would appear. The issue is, would that report be sent to the FBI? Would the FBI have access to the report of this police department? I don't know. Someone who works for the police should comment on that and I don't know. They might only look for criminal activity or they might get everything with your name on it. 

 

If they get it, they might see that you got robbed and not pay attention to it or the information you gave them. Or they might realized that you mentioned you work and dig deeper, so the other information I mentioned earlier is relevant, particularly if they can find stuff about the business. 

 

Another problem I see is that, if a form asks or asked you about whether you did unauthorized work and you said no, you would be lying, which could be more problematic.

 

You might want to consult a lawyer because they should know exactly how the background checks are done.

[tryingtomakeit 1]

Coco - thank you for your thoughtful and helpful answer. I appreciate you stating the facts without judging me. I do not think that such report is sent to the FBI (although I really do not know).....but i did not know if the background checks requested by USCIS is a check of the "FBI" info only. I assumed the database used would cover information nationwide.

[Coco8 1,039]

1 minute ago, tryingtomakeit said:

Coco - thank you for your thoughtful and helpful answer. I appreciate you stating the facts without judging me. I do not think that such report is sent to the FBI (although I really do not know).....but i did not know if the background checks requested by USCIS is a check of the "FBI" info only. I assumed the database used would cover information nationwide.

Only it says they make the request to the FBI https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual-Volume12-PartB-Chapter2.html

 

The FBI probably asks information to the places that you lived in. But if they ask for criminal reports, traffic violations, etc, (rather than "give me anything") your case should be overlooked. 

 

[f f 725]

confirming all are true. I am trying to help you but I will not say it will be fine go on with your like which is what you wanted. life and especially immigration can be very cold some times. 

 

but the advise I gave is correct the form flat out asks you what work you did and you put none. now you are trying g to keep that work covered up. all that will happen is it will explode in your face.

 

and this does effect me since you could of paid a legal person to do the work rather than do it illegally which then pushes the wages down for legal workers so yes your illegal work does hurt me.

Edited July 1, 2017 by Ban Hammer
removed quote which was removed for tos violation

[tryingtomakeit 1]

Just now, f f said:

confirming all are true. I am trying to help you but I will not say it will be fine go on with your like which is what you wanted. life and especially immigration can be very cold some times. 

 

but the advise I gave is correct the form flat out asks you what work you did and you put none. now you are trying g to keep that work covered up. all that will happen is it will explode in your face.

Ok. Thank you ff. Keep up the good work.

[tryingtomakeit 1]

8 minutes ago, Coco8 said:

Only it says they make the request to the FBI https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual-Volume12-PartB-Chapter2.html

 

The FBI probably asks information to the places that you lived in. But if they ask for criminal reports, traffic violations, etc, (rather than "give me anything") your case should be overlooked. 

 

Thanks Coco.... I really appreciate you sharing your thoughts, although we all do not really know. Yesterday I read the same website you sent me. It says they ask for criminal and "administrative" records, so I was not sure if administrative records mean files in which the person is a victim. Plus the "FBI name check" seems to be a different thing, so I am not sure if that will include names of victims and then bring up the victims' files.... I just have to see what happens. It is what it is.

[Coco8 1,039]

8 minutes ago, tryingtomakeit said:

It says they ask for criminal and "administrative" records, so I was not sure if administrative records mean files in which the person is a victim. Plus the "FBI name check" seems to be a different thing, so I am not sure if that will include names of victims and then bring up the victims' files.... I just have to see what happens. It is what it is.

I think FBI name check is criminal records. I found this court case that says that it is not clear what  "administrative record" means. Relevant extracts below (Full text: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-paed-2_07-cv-00445/pdf/USCOURTS-paed-2_07-cv-00445-4.pdf). I doubt administrative records means files in which the person was the victim. Also, you name would appear as filing the police report; you were a victim but not as related to another person or case that they could have access to.  

 

...authorizing an inquiry of the FBI as to whether an applicant also has an “administrative” record – without any further indication of what the term “administrative” record means in this context. The government’s brief then asserts that the vague term “administrative” ipso facto authorizes the FBI name check procedure. It is crucial to note that the regulation itself does not refer to an FBI name check. These leaps of argument are not supported by any statutory language, principles of statutory construction, principles of administrative law or logic. There is no showing that the term “administrative” record is synonymous with or inclusive of an FBI name check. Indeed, there is no showing whatsoever as to what an “administrative” record is, as maintained by the FBI. Both the Cannon Declaration and the Supplemental Cannon Declaration refer to “administrative cases” in their descriptions of FBI’s Central Records System, see e.g. Cannon Declaration ¶ 9, but not to “administrative” records. There is no basis to determine how an “administrative case” differs from an “investigative case” and whether that distinction relates to the difference between an administrative and criminal record, or how either relate to a “name check.” These different terms create a baffling maze.

[...]

The record does not show what was meant by the use of the word “administrative” or how that relates to a criminal record. Nor does the record show why the agency did not use the normal meaning of the “criminal background check,” which would mean, in common parlance, whether the person had been arrested or convicted,...

 

[tryingtomakeit 1]

8 minutes ago, Coco8 said:

I think FBI name check is criminal records. I found this court case that says that it is not clear what  "administrative record" means. Relevant extracts below (Full text: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-paed-2_07-cv-00445/pdf/USCOURTS-paed-2_07-cv-00445-4.pdf). I doubt administrative records means files in which the person was the victim. Also, you name would appear as filing the police report; you were a victim but not as related to another person or case that they could have access to.  

 

...authorizing an inquiry of the FBI as to whether an applicant also has an “administrative” record – without any further indication of what the term “administrative” record means in this context. The government’s brief then asserts that the vague term “administrative” ipso facto authorizes the FBI name check procedure. It is crucial to note that the regulation itself does not refer to an FBI name check. These leaps of argument are not supported by any statutory language, principles of statutory construction, principles of administrative law or logic. There is no showing that the term “administrative” record is synonymous with or inclusive of an FBI name check. Indeed, there is no showing whatsoever as to what an “administrative” record is, as maintained by the FBI. Both the Cannon Declaration and the Supplemental Cannon Declaration refer to “administrative cases” in their descriptions of FBI’s Central Records System, see e.g. Cannon Declaration ¶ 9, but not to “administrative” records. There is no basis to determine how an “administrative case” differs from an “investigative case” and whether that distinction relates to the difference between an administrative and criminal record, or how either relate to a “name check.” These different terms create a baffling maze.

[...]

The record does not show what was meant by the use of the word “administrative” or how that relates to a criminal record. Nor does the record show why the agency did not use the normal meaning of the “criminal background check,” which would mean, in common parlance, whether the person had been arrested or convicted,...

 

Thank you very much Coco. That is very nice of you to share resources. I also appreciate that you told me the truth in a respectful way.

Maybe I am just overthinking the whole thing...and the local police database doesn't translate into a national database for victims. I have no choice but to wait and see what happens. I am trying to search online for any info but not finding much myself.... so I will just try to see if I can stop worrying. Thanks so very much.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Do not lie, filing back taxes are a good idea.

 

youre treading the line of TOS violations very finely here in some of your responses.  

[tryingtomakeit 1]

Dear Transborderwife;

Do not judge. Taking people at their word is a good idea.

 

Thanks for the advice. Have a good holiday.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Just now, tryingtomakeit said:

Dear Transborderwife;

Do not judge. Taking people at their word is a good idea.

 

Thanks for the advice. Have a good holiday.

Not judging I'm explaining the rules.  Thanks you too