Protecting Financial Privacy Has a Flip Side

Though the zeal of politicians to protect personal privacy rights [“Financial Privacy Rules Seen as Just Beginning of Fight,” July 2] is laudable, their haste to enact ill-considered legislation with unintended consequences is not. Failing to carve out proper exemptions for legitimate investigations has been one of the consequences that Congress and regulators are currently wrangling over, and if they fail to address these concerns, people who already have been victimized by the irresponsible and unscrupulous are the ones who will suffer.

Legislation and Federal Trade Commission decisions over the past several years have taken a toll on the ability of private investigators to track down “deadbeat dads,” further victimizing women and children; to combat identity theft and to expose stalkers, leaving victims vulnerable to exploitation; and to locate assets hidden by judgment debtors who may have defrauded thousands of elderly or gullible investors.

In a Catch-22 situation, federal law now legitimately makes it the duty of employers to investigate workplace harassment, discrimination and crime, but 1996 amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act have been written and interpreted in such a bizarre manner that in many instances, you have to get the perpetrator’s permission to investigate his or her misconduct in advance and in writing.

Jan B. Tucker

San Fernando Valley

district director

California Assn.

of Licensed Investigators

Toluca Lake