Contemporary Information Corp, a Duluth, Georgia-based provider of criminal records and tenant screening services, has spent decades helping housing professionals evaluate applicants using public record data. Founded in 1986, the company delivers housing court records and other screening data to resellers and end users while maintaining strict legal and regulatory compliance through its proprietary processes. Led by executives William Bower, Ryan Green, and Sabrina Bower, the organization emphasizes accuracy and consistency in reporting. With access to extensive criminal and housing court databases, Contemporary Information Corp operates within a complex data environment where differences in timing, sources, and interpretation can affect results. These realities make understanding variations in tenant screening reports essential for landlords and property managers seeking to make informed leasing decisions.
Reasons Tenant Screening Reports Can Differ for the Same Applicant
A tenant screening report is a background check landlords use to decide whether to approve a lease. Two companies can produce different results–for example, when one report lists an eviction filing or criminal record and another shows nothing. Many gaps reflect differences in coverage, timing, or matching practices rather than fraud.
Depending on what a housing provider orders, a tenant screening report may include eviction cases, criminal record checks, credit information, and address or name history. Many reports condense these items into short entries or risk scores. Because each vendor selects its own data sources and display format, reports often look different even when they cover similar categories.
Housing court records often drive these differences. Eviction courts do not publish case information in a consistent format, and online access varies by county and state. Some screening companies connect to electronic court networks, while others rely on narrower databases or courthouse searches. When access differs, a case may appear in one report but not in another.
Even when two reports find the same eviction case, they may describe the outcome differently. An eviction filing means a landlord started a case, not that the tenant lost or was removed. Some screening reports show filings regardless of result, while others emphasize judgments or leave out cases the court dismissed.
Timing also affects what appears on reports. Courts, criminal record systems, and repositories update on different schedules, and screening databases refresh at various intervals. A newly filed case or recent dismissal may reach one vendor’s data source before it reaches another, so one report may show a filing or outcome that another has not yet captured.
Identity matching creates another source of disagreement. Screening companies compare name, date of birth, and address to decide whether a record belongs to an applicant. With common names or similar identifiers, a vendor may attach the wrong record or flag a questionable match. One company may include the record because it meets its internal match threshold, while another excludes it because the identifiers do not align.
Law also limits what screening reports can show. Courts can seal or expunge certain criminal and eviction cases, and record-relief rules in some states limit how long older cases remain public. A case that once appeared online may later disappear once those protections apply, so reports run at different times or through different access points can present different histories.
Criminal record coverage varies. Some reports rely on local courthouse searches, while others pull from statewide or multi-jurisdiction databases. In some states, county courts do not report misdemeanors into a centralized repository, so a report based on local courts may show a case that a broader search does not return.
Package design adds another layer of variation. One report might be a court-heavy package that includes eviction filings and county-level criminal searches, while another might be a credit-forward report that limits court searching or returns only some public records. The resulting reports can look inconsistent even when they screen the same applicant.
Consider a scenario where an applicant has an eviction case that ended in dismissal. A report that searches filings and local court records may show the case, while one that focuses on judgments may not. Landlords can address this by separating “record found” from “risk confirmed” and confirming the outcome before treating an entry as final.
About Contemporary Information Corp
Contemporary Information Corp is a Duluth, Georgia-based provider of tenant screening and public record services established in 1986. The company supplies criminal records and housing court data to resellers and direct users while maintaining compliance with industry regulations. Its leadership includes William Bower, Ryan Green, and Sabrina Bower. CIC participates in professional organizations such as the National Consumer Reporting Association and supports community initiatives, while maintaining large databases of criminal and housing court records to support informed decision-making.
©2026 The Dedicated House. All rights reserved. No part of this blog post may be used or reproduced without the written consent of the copyright owner.
Click the links below for any posts you have missed:
Staying Cool: When to Call for Emergency AC Repair
Designing a Cozy Lifestyle that Flows Seamlessly from Home to Everyday Travel
Environmental Impact: Reducing Your Carbon Footprint with Organic Garden Fertilizer
The Importance of Routine Heating and Cooling Maintenance
How New Vehicle Warranties Drive Customer Confidence in Auto Purchases
How to Repair Broken Ceramics or Figurines Using Quick-Cure Clay
I’d love for you to join my email list! You’ll receive a notification straight to your inbox which will include links to my latest home project posts! Simply enter your address below.
Thanks for stopping by! Have a wonderful day/night depending on where you are in the world! Go with God and remember to be kind to one another!
Toodles,
Leave a Reply