I have received all sorts of enquiries over the many years that I have been a professional investigator in private practice. The people that make enquiries and provide instructions vary from members of the public, local authorities, company directors, charities, HR officers, housing associations, but most commonly the legal profession. The nature of those enquiries and instructions covers a broad range from covert surveillance, tracing debtors, undercover infiltration, process serving, forensic investigations, interviews and statements, due diligence and pre sue reports the list goes on and on.
Thanks to literature, the Internet, TV and cinema, a fair portion of enquirers have very little understanding of what professional investigators can actually achieve at all or within the parameters they prefer.
I’ve lost count of the number of times I have had in depth conversations about carrying out covert surveillance operations in which I’ve used some well-practised lines to get my message across to a very enthusiastic enquirer. “ None of my team has X-Ray vision” will inevitably feature as I explain that things just get in our way to obscure views of people and cameras. In a similar vein, “ We can’t see round corners” or “ None of the team is over 13 feet tall, ” gently explain how we may need more personnel to be able to cover areas that are out of sight or that when people are in private areas, we can’t just peek over high walls. Many a time, I’ve explained that ‘none of my team is invisible’ to make the point that, despite being trained and experienced, we can be seen. “ The enquiry subject may not see us but his neighbours will” makes the point that there is always a risk of third-party compromise. Bit by bit, the enquirer becomes enlightened to the actual reality and it just isn’t like the TV show they’ve seen.
Having dealt with the practicalities of any piece of work, I can begin to address the law. You’d be surprised how many people, including lawyers, are unaware of aspects of the Data Protection Act 2018. “ I just need a quick trace, ” they say. Before I can even begin to try, there is a process to follow and once again, I must manage the expectations of the enquirer. “ No, I can’t make use of the NI number you have or his car registration number.” Then there are the downright unlawful requests “ I don’t suppose you could provide his telephone records / bank statements / medical history, could you?” NO, I CAN'T!
Time, the greatest problem, features. “ I need this by tomorrow” spells trouble to me. A short deadline often arises through bad planning. Some very basic things can be done urgently but I find myself explaining to some people, “ I don’t travel by TARDIS, “as another gentle way of explaining that things take time. I may be relying on other people in a chain of some kind, there may be unexpected delays, unforeseen problems. Patience is a virtue. I will advise anybody NOT to accept the instructions unless they are 100% certain the task can be achieved in the time allowed because if, for some reason, it doesn’t work out, there may be a contractual breach to tackle.
Resources are another thing. Whatever the enquirer thinks might not actually be true. “ I need you to send your chap in Timbuktu to carry out an enquiry for me”. Well, we don’t have such a chap. I can make some enquiries for you or maybe I can find another way of tackling the problem. The solution that the client suggests might not actually be feasible, achievable or cost effective. It is sometimes necessary to explain to clients that the resources they have imagined don’t exist and the ‘easy remedy’ isn’t the answer.
On the same theme, some enquirers don’t grasp that they are embarking on a fool’s errand at times. In these circumstances, it is incumbent upon me to point out the flaws and consequences to their proposal. Sometimes it will require a degree of counselling and perhaps suggesting alternative solutions. Those solutions might not always be things I can offer but may be found elsewhere. The Police, Citizens Advice Bureau, local authorities, or law firms, for example.
There have been a few occasions when enquirers have approached me to carry out work that is really outside my comfort zone in terms of expertise / experience or my geographical coverage isn’t sufficient to offer a cost-effective service. When this happens, I always refer the enquirer to The Association of British Investigators (ABI). I explain that in an unregulated sector, it is crucial that their choice of investigator or process server is made carefully and that the ABI’s membership criteria and governance serves to protect clients from unscrupulous characters that prefer a short-term monetary outlook to that of accountable professionals.
This paints the picture of managing client expectations, but really, WHY is this actually important when, after all, it is a customer’s choice surely?
· It is essential that all investigations are conducted within the law.
· Clients should not expect miracles and must not be misled, as that will inevitably lead to disappointment and complaints.
· Clients have to understand the limitations of investigators in terms of availability, duration and resources.
· Clients need to be aware of any risks that they may face as a consequence of an investigation commissioned by them.
· Budgets need to be made crystal clear to avoid disputes.
· It is unusual in the United Kingdom for investigators to be qualified lawyers and so it is important that clients understand that any advice offered by investigators is NOT ‘legal advice’.
· Clients must understand that investigators are not at their beck and call and have other things to do and other cases to attend to.
· Terms of business must be provided to clients to consider.
I’ll close with an amusing tale. A client of mine is a highly experienced solicitor working in a government department. As he was hurriedly heaping a pile of work onto me, I interrupted him and pointed out the time constraints I had identified and mentioned that I had other commitments too. He said, good humouredly, “ Peter, you should never tell a client that they’re not the only one you know”. I explained that there was no use in me taking on more work than I could handle in the time allowed and that I needed to prioritise tasks before we went any further. He chuckled and said “When I was in private practice, we had some really horrible clients and the team were terrified of them. If they contacted us, we were expected to drop everything, and we could never suggest that we had anything else to do but their bidding”. I responded with my first thought. “ Were they criminals?” I asked. He chuckled again and said, “ No they were far worse than that … they were the media”.
It seems that expectations had not been managed.
Author: Peter Farrington, F/1297
