One would think that if you had your identity used to fraudulently charge purchases and run up delinquent debt that you would do something about it, like file an identity theft report with the local police or call the creditors, right? Well, in a recent clearance denial appeal case reviewed by the Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals, this applicant tried to convince the judge that the numerous debts on his credit report were the result of identity theft. However, he never reported it and took no steps with the creditors to resolve the debts. The judge noted that it seemed quite odd that the applicant’s credit report showed that the purported identity thief made payments towards the disputed accounts before they eventually became delinquent. I don’t know of many thieves who would post payments to an account they fraudulently charged to. Also noted was the fact that the applicant failed to disclose a delinquent mortgage account on the SF-86 that he later admitted was his debt, compounding the credibility of his claims. Needless to say, the judge was not swayed by the applicant’s claims of identity theft in the face of evidence to the contrary.
In a recent Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals case, the judge was unsympathetic toward the applicant who was initially denied eligibility for placement into a Public Trust position as a contractor with the DoD. The denial was due to the fact that she failed to file federal taxes for years 2006-2007 and state taxes for years 2005-2007. The reason she gave the judge for not filing her taxes? Amazingly enough, she claimed she was influenced by her sister who had talked to her about a legal way (obtained from a book) to avoid paying income taxes.
In 2015 the Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals (DOHA) Board held 996 hearings for appeals on adverse security clearance determinations or eligibility for placement into public trust positions. As was the case in the previous year, analysis of the types of issues involved showed that cases with financial and personal conduct issues made up the overwhelming majority. The next two highest categories were drug involvement and foreign influence. Below is a breakdown by adjudicative category of the types of issues presented (Note- some cases had multiple issues):
It truly is amazing how an individual’s perspective on situations and life’s events can become totally skewed and out of sync with actual reality. In a recent Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals (DOHA) case the applicant, a former military service member, filled out the SF-86 and indicated that he had served as a military officer and was honorably discharged at the end of his enlistment. There are no issues here, right? Well……..if that information had been true then you would have been correct. However, come to find out, the applicant did not serve in the military as an officer, but rather was an enlisted member. Oh, and also, he did not receive an honorable discharge, but rather an “other than honorable” type. But wait, that’s not all, here is the best part: He also failed to disclose marijuana use while in a cleared status which led to him being discharged from the military!