FRAUDBUSTERS: ASK A LICENSED PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR
Part 3
Q: I'm currently working on a case that has several named defendants. Recently, I received a telephone call from an investigator who had been retained to conduct surveillance for another of the named defendants. The investigator had more than two hours of film of the plaintiff engaging in activities he reported he could no longer perform as a result of his injuries. The client he had worked for had settled the case, and the investigator wanted to know if I was interested in buying the film. Have you ever heard of this, and is it ethical?
A: In the past I've split the cost of doing surveillance between named defendants; however, it has been my client who has requested the fee split. If the other defendants had settled their portions of the case, I would still want to ask if they had any objections to my using the film. It's possible that part of the settlement included an order not to release any information from the case. If all parties agree that the film can be used by other defendants, it's then up to you to negotiate how much money, if any, you're willing to pay for the film.
Q: Recently an investigator we hired had to testify in court with respect to his investigation. From his testimony it was learned that he wasn't a licensed investigator, but his employer was. The investigator worked under the employer's license. Is this appropriate?
A: There are states in which private investigators don't need to be licensed. In these states, all an individual has to do to work as a PI is work as a PI.
In those states that do require a license, it's appropriate for employees to work under the employer's investigator's license. There are instances, however, when insurance companies or their representatives responsible for hiring a PI need to pay attention to such work arrangements. Some licensed investigators have Errors and Omissions insurance coverage for themselves but not for unlicensed employees working under their license. If this is the case, eventual liability would ultimately rest with the hiring company. What I'm trying to point out here is that insurance companies have many things to consider besides cost per hour when they hire an outside investigator.
Q: We hired an investigator to do a background investigation on a plaintiff. The case settled, so we called the investigator and told him to cease all efforts. When I received the report a week later, it included information obtained after I had advised him to stop. Why would this happen?
A: Most likely the investigator had contacted people about the plaintiff's background prior to your closing the file. It's possible these people got back to the investigator after that point. Most likely the investigator included the information as a courtesy to you.
Q: Why are some companies named after individuals while other companies have generic names? Is there a reason for this?
A: It's a matter of choice. In California, names must be approved by the Department of Consumer Affairs, Bureau of Collections and Investigative Services. A company may not use a name that implies it's a governmental agency. For example, a company couldn't call itself F.B.I. Investigations. If the owner's name is in the title of the company, for example, John Doe Investigations, a fictitious business name statement needn't be filed. Additionally, if the company is a corporation, a fictitious business name statement isn't necessary.
Copyright, The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprinted with permission.