ISCR Case 17-02582.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 17-02582.h1

grantedFeb 8, 2018· Hon. Juan J. Rivera· hearing

Summary

A 43-year-old former Navy service member was granted a security clearance under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), despite initial concerns regarding his financial history. The applicant's financial difficulties stemmed primarily from a 2008 divorce and a subsequent job transition after his retirement in May 2013.

Specific allegations included a 2015 residential foreclosure, which occurred after he stopped making mortgage payments in December 2010 due to an inability to afford them following a transfer and his ex-wife's refusal to assist. The foreclosure was finalized in August 2014, with no outstanding balance remaining. Additionally, the applicant owed approximately $18,000 for a repossessed vehicle. He purchased the vehicle in February 2013, but after retiring and only finding part-time employment, he could not afford the payments. The creditor refused partial payments, requiring full settlement. A third debt was resolved in November 2015, with the applicant providing documentary evidence of payment.

The clearance was granted because the applicant's financial problems were largely due to circumstances beyond his control. He demonstrated that his financial issues were being resolved and were under control, and he maintained a good payment history on most of his accounts.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant's financial problems were attributed to circumstances beyond his control, including divorce and job loss.
He has shown that his financial issues are being resolved and are under control.
The applicant maintained a good payment history on the majority of his accounts.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(b)appliedConditions That Resulted in the Financial Problem Were Largely Beyond the Person's Control
AG ¶ 20(d)appliedThe Individual Initiated and Is Adhering to a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
AG ¶ 20(a)appliedThe Behavior Happened so Long Ago, Was so Infrequent, or Occurred Under Such Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur

Key Rule Quoted

“Once a concern arises regarding an Applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against the grant or maintenance of a security clearance.”
— Dorfmont v. Brown, 913 F. 2d 1399, 1401 (9th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 905 (1991)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 17, 2017
Answer filedSep 11, 2017Requested decision based on written record.
Hearing held—Applicant appeared pro se.
Decision dateFeb 8, 2018

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions Under Guideline F Due to Circumstances Beyond Control
Financial Responsibility Demonstrated Despite Past Issues
Stability in Current Financial Situation as a Basis for Clearance Approval

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant disclosed in his August 2015 SCA that his residence was foreclosed in 2015. He and his wife purchased a home in 2004. His 2008 divorce agreement required him to continue making the mortgage payments until the home sold. When he was transferred to another state, he did not have the financial means to continue making the mortgage payments and pay his living expenses and debts. His ex-wife refused to assist him paying the mortgage and she did not help on his efforts to sell the house. In early 2010, Applicant contacted the mortgage holder seeking to work out a solution, to no avail. After talking to an employee of the bank, he stopped making the mortgage payments in December 2010 seeking the foreclosure of the property. The foreclosure took place in August 2014. (FORM Item 3) There is no past-due balance or a balance on the foreclosed mortgage. (FORM Items 4 and 5)	For Applicant	Mortgage or Home Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	—
1.b	Applicant owes about $18,000 for a repossessed vehicle. (SOR ¶ 1.b) Applicant volunteered to the investigator that he purchased the vehicle in February 2013 while he was still serving on active duty and receiving full pay, allowances, and benefits. After he retired in May 2013, Applicant could not find full-time employment. He worked part time between May 2013 and September 2015. Applicant could not afford to make the car payments, missed a car payment, and the creditor repossessed the vehicle. When Applicant attempted make up the payment and recover the vehicle, the creditor refused to accept anything except full payment of the account. Applicant did not have the money to pay off the vehicle. Applicant told the investigator that he had not paid off the debt because the creditor would not accept anything except a full payment. He did not have the financial resources to make such a large onetime payment. (FORM, Items 3 and 4) $18,000	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	—
1.c	Applicant discussed the debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.c with the investigator during the June 2, 2017 interview and told him he had paid the debt. During the June 6, 2017 interview, Applicant presented documentary evidence showing that he had paid the debt in November 2015. (Applicant’s SOR answer.)	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶19)

Mitigating applied (¶20)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant disclosed in his August 2015 SCA that his residence was foreclosed in 2015. He and his wife purchased a home in 2004. His 2008 divorce agreement required him to continue making the mortgage payments until the home sold. When he was transferred to another state, he did not have the financial means to continue making the mortgage payments and pay his living expenses and debts. His ex-wife refused to assist him paying the mortgage and she did not help on his efforts to sell the house. In early 2010, Applicant contacted the mortgage holder seeking to work out a solution, to no avail. After talking to an employee of the bank, he stopped making the mortgage payments in December 2010 seeking the foreclosure of the property. The foreclosure took place in August 2014. (FORM Item 3) There is no past-due balance or a balance on the foreclosed mortgage. (FORM Items 4 and 5)

For Applicant

Mortgage or Home Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

—

1.b

Applicant owes about $18,000 for a repossessed vehicle. (SOR ¶ 1.b) Applicant volunteered to the investigator that he purchased the vehicle in February 2013 while he was still serving on active duty and receiving full pay, allowances, and benefits. After he retired in May 2013, Applicant could not find full-time employment. He worked part time between May 2013 and September 2015. Applicant could not afford to make the car payments, missed a car payment, and the creditor repossessed the vehicle. When Applicant attempted make up the payment and recover the vehicle, the creditor refused to accept anything except full payment of the account. Applicant did not have the money to pay off the vehicle. Applicant told the investigator that he had not paid off the debt because the creditor would not accept anything except a full payment. He did not have the financial resources to make such a large onetime payment. (FORM, Items 3 and 4)

$18,000

For Applicant

Auto Loan Debt

Admitted

(a) inability to satisfy debts

(c) a history of not meeting financial obligations

(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly

—

1.c

Applicant discussed the debt alleged in SOR ¶ 1.c with the investigator during the June 2, 2017 interview and told him he had paid the debt. During the June 6, 2017 interview, Applicant presented documentary evidence showing that he had paid the debt in November 2015. (Applicant’s SOR answer.)

For Applicant

Unspecified Financial

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION