Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Josef Kafka
Private Investigator available 24hrs-7 Days
Private Investigator available 24hrs-7 Days


What can you learn from GPS tracking?

It’s a fact of life that people keep secrets – even those people who you consider near and dear to you. Sadly, finding out the truth isn’t always as easy as confronting the person. Instead, you might have to take additional measures to get to the bottom of your suspicions.

If you visit a detective agency, they may advise you that the best way to find answers is by using GPS tracking. This usually entails strapping a gadget to the individual’s vehicle to monitor their movements. But what exactly can you learn from this measure? Well, quite a lot actually. Here are just a few of the questions you’ll quickly find the answers to.

Where are they going?

Up until now you will have had to take statements such as ‘I’m just nipping to the shop’ at face value. This isn’t ideal – especially when someone is gone for 60 minutes and only returns with a carton of milk. Meanwhile, GPS will show if they’ve stopped at any other locations along the way, whether it’s a mystery house, a bar or a hotel.

How long do they stay there?

GPS will also let you know how long someone has stopped off at a location. This information is especially valuable when it’s difficult for you to keep track of time. The results may indicate that the individual is merely taking short detours to some destinations, or it could show that they’re staying in the same place for hours on end.

Is there a pattern?

It’s important that you can establish a pattern in their movement. After all, this will give you more concrete evidence to confront the individual with. For instance, you may find that your partner is spending two hours a day parked outside a hotel. This may indicate that they’re having an affair.

Discretion guaranteed

GPS devices are extremely efficient for gathering information discretely. However, it’s not the only option that’s available to you. Depending on your suspicions, you could also have an individual observed and surveilled with a GPS investigator. Such options can be discussed further if you get in touch with the private investigators at 247 Investigations.
#GPS #tracking
#divorce #settlement
#Tracking #Tracing
#Matrimonial #Infidelity
#Pre #Litigation #Enquiries
+Private Investigations+Solicitors in France+Solicitors In London UK+Solicitors Onlin
Add a comment...

When is it okay to “spy” on my staff?

The law is very clear on the relationship between you and your staff. Employers must protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees and crucially, any other people who come into contact with their business.

If you think about it, this legislation does actually provide you with wide-reaching rights to monitor the activities of your team – inside and outside the workplace.

So, for example, you may want to engage the services of a private investigator if you are concerned that an employee is drinking heavily or taking drugs, as they may be putting themselves, colleagues or customers in danger. You can use a private investigator to act as a temporary member of your team, to observe and investigate. They can also monitor the staff member once they leave your premises.

If you are concerned that employees are approaching colleagues or customers outside of working hours in a way that is intimidating or inappropriate, then you have a right to check it out.

The most common use of a private investigator outside of the workplace is to control employee absenteeism. It’s believed that sickness pay and absenteeism costs UK industry over £29bn each year. You have a right to take measures to ensure your employees are not abusing the terms of what constitutes “sick leave”.

And you also have the right to protect your business interests, by preventing crimes such as theft of items, theft of your “intellectual property” and misuse of confidential information. In some cases, this means surveillance equipment in work; a specialist private investigator who can infiltrate the staff; or using a private investigator to interrogate computers to uncover deleted emails and other evidence of wrongdoing.

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000) is clear on what is and what isn’t allowed regarding the interception of electronic communications. There are also privacy laws to take into account, such as The Protection of Freedoms Act (2012) which governs when you can use CCTV and the Data Protection Act (1988) which controls how much information you can share (and with whom).

This is why engaging the services of a professional private investigator is so important. You have a right to take action if you are suspicious that staff are: breaching the terms and conditions of their contract; doing something that could endanger them, colleagues or customers; or acting in a way that undermines your right to protect your property. Private investigators know how to get the answers and monitor staff inside and outside the workplace, without stepping over legal boundaries. Contact us today.

+Pakistan Private Detective +Private Detective London
+private investigations uk +Detective Agency in Delhi +Private Investigator Puerto Rico
#intellectual property

Can a private investigator help with my divorce?

If you are currently going through a divorce, the use of a private investigator may be highly beneficial to you. You may never have thought about the advantages of why you should hire one for your case, however, their service could settle certain aspects of the process which may become confusing or complicated.

If you're not sure how a private investigator could help you with a divorce settlement, here are a few reasons which may be of benefit in your particular circumstance:

1. Cheating

A private investigator may be able to assist if you suspect your partner is having an affair. Having a 'feeling' that something is wrong isn't enough to make accusations in court. You will need to be aware of the type of evidence you are looking for and the type that is relevant to prove your case. This is where private investigators can help. It must be noted that private investigators can't hack into phone conversations for example, but can trace internet conversations which may contain key information.

2. Hiding assets

There is a large number of cases where spouses are hiding valuable assets, such as houses or large amounts of money. If these assets should be split between the two of you, there is often no way of proving that you are in part ownership without evidence. A private investigator can delve deep into databases and records to find out whether there are any hidden bank accounts which should have been declared.

3. Custody battles

A large percentage of the time, the children involved in a divorce can cause a massive issue between both parties. Who should be legally allowed to take full custody of the children? Drawn out custody battles are no fun for anyone, therefore a private investigator can assist by recording secret footage. Should their behaviour have any negative impact on the children, you may have a winning case.

For more information on hiring a private investigator to assist with your divorce settlement, please contact 247 Investigations today. Or to read more blog posts for help and advice, take a read of our blog here:

#divorce #settlement
#Tracking #Tracing
#Matrimonial #Infidelity
#Pre #Litigation #Enquiries
+Private Investigators UK
+Private Investigations +Solicitors Online +Solicitors in France+Solicitors In London UK

Post has attachment
Facebook privacy policy in breach of European directives

Facebook has come under fire in recent weeks regarding its security and privacy policies, and a new report commissioned by the Centre of Interdisciplinary Law and ICT at the University of Leuven in Belgium now claims that despite making significant changes to its privacy policies in the wake of recent criticism, Facebook is still in breach of European Law. They argue that the reforms undertaken by Facebook only expand older sections of the privacy policy and fail to take into account the points that had been made recently, which means that the social network is still violating European consumer protection law. The authors of the report conducted an extensive analysis of Facebook's privacy policy to determine whether its newest updates had brought it into line with the current European regulations regarding consumer protection, privacy and security. They stated that the website's current policies do not "comply with the Unfair Contract Terms Directive", and that these failures existed as far as back as 2013, and still continue to exist today.

Essentially, Facebook fails to comply with regulations regarding to profiling for third party advertising firms, as its privacy terms do not meet the "requirements for legally valid consent" of its users. In addition, it also fails to offer its users "adequate control mechanisms", regarding how their content could then be sold to and used by third party advertising corporations. This means that under the current terms, your images, videos, text and other content could be acquired by third parties, and then used to sell their products to consumers unless you opt out of these terms, a process which the report claims Facebook makes too difficult for its users. They said that it is "problematic" that default privacy settings automatically opt users in to these profiling schemes, and that this breach laws regarding consumer consent and protection. Additionally, the report also took aim at Facebook's collecting of location information. In the current Facebook mobile application there is no way to turn off the process by which it collects and uses your location data, and other information stored on your phone or tablet. The only way to get around this feature is by turning off location services on the mobile device directly, something which the authors of the report deemed unacceptable. They said that under the current privacy terms users are not offered a choice with regard to "their appearance in “sponsored stories” or the sharing of location data" with third parties, and that this must be changed to bring the policy into compliance with European law. Specifically, these issues violate the European "e-Privacy Directive" ( Under Article 5 (3), it states that websites must obtain "free and informed consent" from their users before accessing or storing any information acquired from their device. It was this article that saw the introduction of 'cookie warnings' on websites, which needed consent before storing information about any specific user.

Despite this report, Facebook continues to maintain that its privacy policies do not breach Belgian laws regarding surveillance, data collection and internet privacy, and that its new privacy policy had been made more "clear and precise" in wake of the recent changes made to it. However, the website is already under investigation by the Article 29 Working Party, which was set up under Directive 95/46/EC to protect the privacy of citizens across Europe, and is made up of delegates from a number of different European countries. The Dutch data protection authority are also continuing their investigation into the legality of the privacy policy in Holland.

You can see the report in more detail at the following link:

Post has attachment
NSA and GCHQ can listen to phone calls, Snowden report reveals

The latest revelations from the Snowden leak show that Dutch technology supplier Gemalto, one of the largest sim card manufacturers in the world, has been hacked by operatives of both the American National Security Agency (NSA) and Britain's Government Communication Headquarters (GCHQ). This means that both these agencies could have carried out surveillance on billions of mobile phone users around the world.

A sim card is a microchip that allows your mobile phone to connect safely and securely to the mobile network run by your service provider - everyone has one in their mobile telephone. It logs the user into the network, allowing them to make and receive calls and write and send text messages securely by encrypting all of the data that passes through to the network via a mobile mast, which connects the data with its intended recipient. The files leaked by Edward Snowden show that in 2010 the NSA and GCHQ worked together to form the Mobile Handset Exploitation Team (MHET), a surveillance unit dedicated to targeting mobile telephones around the world. MHET hacked into the sim cards made by Gemalto by acquiring their encryption keys, a password which is able to decrypt the data sent by the mobile phone. In order to use these keys for surveillance purposes, an aerial would need to placed near the user to intercept the data, which would then be deciphered and accessed.

Gemalto manufacture around 2 billion sim cards each year for over 450 mobile telephone networks in 85 different countries around the world. Early indications show that mobile phone users in the United Kingdom on Vodafone, EE, O2 or Three could have been affected, as Gemalto is the primary supplier of sim cards for these networks. In the USA, Gemalto supplies sim cards to AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon. However, as most other mobile networks have used Gemalto sim cards at some point in their history, experts are suggesting that almost anyone with a sim card in their phone could potentially be affected by these revelations.

At this moment in time the Government and legal agencies are not quite sure where this hack sits within the law. However, what is certain is that listening in to private conversations does violate data protection laws most countries, including the United Kingdom. Some legal experts are predicting in order to obtain the encryption keys the NSA and GCHQ may have also violated Dutch law relating to business data protection. The use of the encryption keys in countries other than the UK and the USA could also breach security laws, for example if a key was used to hack the phone of Spanish citizen without informing the Spanish security agencies before doing so.

Gemalto and the mobile phone networks that they provide with sim cards are currently investigating the hack, and trying to determine if its effects can be halted. Surveillance and hacking experts, however, have suggested that aside from replacing all of the affected sim cards, there is little that can be done to prevent these agencies from potentially listening in to phone calls, or monitoring text messages. Users of specialist secure mobile telephones, like the encrypted Blackphone made by Silent Circle, or encrypted messaging applications like Chatsecure, won't be affected by the hack.

In the United Kingdom, however, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) (2000) already allows law enforcement agencies like the Police force or National Crime Agency to access the same level of data. Mobile phone networks and service providers are also required by law to allow live surveillance of specific users in cases of emergency, such as an abduction, or where phone records could aid a criminal investigation.

National Security Agency
Dutch technology
mobile phone

Post has attachment
Samsung's voice recording smart TVs breach US privacy law, reports claim

Campaigners in America are claiming that the voice recording function in Samsung's new Smart TVs is in breach of American privacy law. The complaint, made by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a consumer rights group based in America, accuses Samsung of violating two different American federal privacy laws which relate to the collection, transmission and disclosure of electronic data - the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. The complaint states that the voice recognition function has been described as "both unfair and deceptive" by consumers, and that the organisation "routinely intercepts and records" private conversations between users. It also makes specific reference to attempts made by Samsung to "disclaim its intrusive surveillance activities" in an in depth privacy policy, which although it states the ways in which their electronic data will be collected and disclosed, does not make amends for the harm done to users of the device. EPIC have called for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the independent agency of the United States Government established to protect consumers from harm, to start legal proceedings against Samsung and other Smart TV manufacturers whose products include a similar voice recognition feature. The debate around privacy, data collection and Smart TVs has been going on for some time, but where did it start and why is this now coming to fruition?

Samsung announced the new voice recognition functionality with great fanfare in 2013, but quickly came under fire from many of its users for what they deemed an 'Orwellian policy' whereby data collected by the voice recognition function is sent unencrypted over the internet to third parties. Samsung had originally stated that this data was encrypted, but was later forced to change its privacy policy when these complaints were made. Additionally the voice recognition function, powered by third party software built by Nuance Communications, is not capable of discriminating between private conversation and commands meant for the control centre of the Smart TV. This means that everything users say whilst the function is turned on is collected, stored and transmitted to third parties unencrypted over the internet, "regardless of whether it is related to the provision of the service". Although the debate has been going on for some time, EPIC now believe that they have enough of a case to approach the FTC and ask for an in depth enquiry into Samsung and other devices which include similar software to ensure that they are in full compliance with privacy laws. It is not clear yet as to whether the FTC will agree with the claims made by EPIC that Samsung are in breach of federal law, but we should be getting a clear statement from them very soon. A spokesperson for Samsung has denied the claims made by EPIC in this formal complaint, stating that they are "not correct" and do not "reflect the actual features of our Smart TV". They also said that they take "consumer privacy very seriously" and that their products are always "designed with privacy in mind”.

This debate looks to be the first of many regarding data collection and privacy laws related to home entertainment and other electronic devices. Many experts are predicting that the 'internet of things', where every piece of electronic equipment is connected to the internet and can collect, process and transfer data, could become a reality within the next decade. This means that not only will we see more and more of these cases appearing over that time period, but also that the outcome of this one could set a precedent and have a significant impact on those to come.

#voice recording
#privacy law
disclaim its intrusive surveillance activities

Will Wiki action kill off the NSA’s dragnet surveillance?

The fallout from Edward Snowden’s revelations about mass surveillance shows no signs of stopping any time soon, and given that there are likely to be more leaks still to come, it’s probably safe to assume this saga is a long way from over. One of the latest developments has seen a lawsuit filed against the NSA for allegedly violating US freedom laws, by the Wikimedia Foundation, the group that manages the popular online encyclopaedia.

Their legal action is co-signed by eight other organisations, and is aimed at bringing an end to the mass surveillance being carried out by the US spy agency, the NSA. In particular, the foundation said it was seeking to stop ‘upstream’ surveillance by the NSA, which focuses on communication with people outside the US.

The action was announced in a blog post by Wikimedia Foundation executive director Lila Tretikov, who said they wanted to bring about the end of mass surveillance in order ‘to protect the rights of our users around the world’ (

Documents released by Snowden reveal that the NSA had tapped into the internet’s backbone – a network of superfast cables linking transit points and ISPs - to gather the data. Targeting the backbone in this way was to cast a vast net that inevitably scooped up data that was unrelated to any specific target and was likely to include everyday, domestic communications. This, says Lila Tretikov, is ‘straining the backbone of democracy’ and violated the rules over what the NSA could spy on.

She added that Wikipedia was founded on freedom of expression, inquiry, and information and that by ‘violating’ users’ privacy, the spy agency was threatening the intellectual freedom that was ‘central to people’s ability to create and understand knowledge’.

The founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, said he hoped that the action would result in the end of the NSA’s ‘dragnet surveillance’ of all internet traffic and that surveillance eroded the ‘original promise’ of the internet, which was an ‘open space for collaboration and experimentation, and a place free from fear.’

Should we be worried?

Wikipedia is one of the largest and most popular reference websites. It is accessed by hundreds of thousands of people around the world every day to find out about all kinds of stuff, as well as contribute to articles themselves. In the pre-internet days, if you wanted to find out about a nuclear reactor, for instance, you could get some general information from the local library, or from specialist publications.

If you wanted to know how a homemade bomb was put together (research for a novel, perhaps?), you’d have found it a lot more difficult. Now, a quick online search will come up with plenty of options to choose from, including one by Wikipedia, although their post is a discussion of the issue rather than a step-by-step guide on bomb making.

‘So what?’ you might say. ‘I don’t mind if my internet activities are being snooped on, because I’m doing nothing wrong, certainly nothing illegal – only those who are up to no good have anything to worry about.’ There may be a lot of truth in that, but it’s worth remembering that while you know what your motivation is for researching bomb-making, the snoopers who are scooping up all your data don’t.

If you’re doing a lot of this kind of research, which also includes checking out some extremist websites, you may inadvertently be creating a profile for yourself that can easily be misunderstood. So the worry is that if this inaccurate ‘profile’ exists, it can be used against you at some point in the future. Does this sound too far-fetched? Or is the former CEO of the Intel Corporation, Andrew Grove, right when he says that ‘only the paranoid survive’? Maybe we’ve all got something to fear!

Post has attachment
Are we a nation that is ruled by fear?

During the Second World War the nation was warned that walls have ears. Later, into the sixties, the caution was that you could find “reds under the bed”. Even in the US, during WW1 a 'Spies are Listening' poster warned that “the web is spun for you with invisible threads”. It seems excessive, yet many people still believe that we are constantly in danger from what others might do to us as we muddle through our daily existence - these days by the threat of terrorism. However, there is an equal and opposite concern for many, caused by the increasing and often covert methods used by those listening in to our lives on behalf of the British government, claiming that it is all for our own good. Are we in fact being ruled by fear?

This has been brought to a head now by the surveillance legislation being rushed through Parliament, probably as you read this. It may already be on the statute book. Reaction has been thoroughly mixed, with the Prime Minister gaining cross-party support for the measure, yet The Independent front page headline quietly suggesting – “Cameron plots to bring back snoopers’ charter”.

How we have reached this point

A brief back story takes us to earlier this year, when the European Court of Justice struck down regulations enabling Communication Service Providers to retain communications data for up to one year for law enforcement purposes. Therefore, unless kept for business reasons, companies may delete it and this would potentially cause serious problems for long-term criminal investigations and the like. At the same time, some companies wanted a clearer legal framework to underpin the cooperation they offer to law enforcement and intelligence agencies to access content under a warrant signed by a Secretary of State.

The outcome is the emergency Data Retention and Investigation Powers Bill, which is intended to respond to the judgement and bring clarity to existing law. The government said that it would also announce new measures to increase both transparency and oversight. A “sunset” clause means the legislation automatically falls after two years.

The coalition partners and the opposition seem satisfied with this, but others are not. Civil liberties groups, probably unsurprisingly, are up in arms (although that may not be the best of terminology) and The Guardian claims to have seen internal Home Office documents that offer doubts concerning such promises. Objectionists suggest that, for example, overseas companies would be required to comply with interception warrants and communications data acquisition requests. Many simply see it as further state intrusion into our personal or business lives, snooping on what should be private and confidential communications.

Enter Edward Snowden

The whistle-blower and US government’s nemesis has also entered the fray. Still in Russia, where he is believed to be asking for an extension to his initial asylum period, he was recently interviewed by The Guardian. He expressed surprise at this turn of events, and the sudden urgency. He feels that this mirrors a move in the US seven years ago when the National Security Agency (NSA) cited the same concerns. Snowden also believed it to be very unusual for such emergency legislation to be introduced except in a time of war, adding that “...we don’t have bombs falling. We don’t have U-boats in the harbour”.

Do you have nosy neighbours?

To reduce the debate to its simplest terms, think about the people living around you. Is there one house where the curtain twitch as you walk by? Do the people living there ask where you’ve been if they haven’t seen you for a few days or are keen to know who those visitors were? If so, you might have one of two reactions to their behaviour. The first is to find them thoroughly irritating. The other is to know that you can rely on them to watch out for anything happening in your area that shouldn’t be, or surveil (unasked) your house when you’re not around. In other words, do you find them intrusive and unacceptable or a price worth paying to feel more secure?

The rule of fear and you

For neighbours, read government and their security operations. Of course, just as with neighbours, your response might well depend on the environment where you live. A life spent in a relaxed rural backwater might lead to a different state of mind to that of a busy city suburb. The likelihood of any terrorist activity might well affect your thinking – although, equally, those furthest removed can often have a more polarised or insular view than those who spend their daily lives in a multi-ethnic environment.

The government’s problem is that any claims over security concerns can only be proved right by something going wrong. A bomb in an airport would probably show that they were right but they would quickly be blamed for not preventing it. Plots thwarted tend not to make the news, unless in high-profile court cases which do remind us that not everyone living in our land always has its best interests in their heart. Recent events in Syria and Iraq give further cause for concern.

At the end of the day, it’s always your personal view on whether the balance between privacy and security, protecting and snooping is being effectively set and maintained.

Communication Service Providers
Secretary of State
Sunset Clause
British government

Post has attachment
Here’s the scenario. You’re looking to employ a new au pair, nanny or perhaps a home helper. You receive a CV or resumé that looks fantastic. You invite the candidate for an interview and your meeting is going really well. You like what you see and feel a great rapport building and you’re already beginning to imagine how the person might fit in around the place. You notice your candidate is eloquent, well presented and has a long list of credible looking references. Everything’s looking perfect and you’re all but sold.

Unfortunately, these things aren't always what they seem - most of the time, if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

You’re on the brink of hiring someone on the strength of words on a page, words from their mouth and a good ‘gut feeling’. The sad truth in today’s world is that all those things really aren't enough to warrant the enormous amount of trust you're about to hand over to them.

How can you make sure your potential hire is really trustworthy enough to be given the keys to your life?

You might think that following up on character and professional references and receiving positive feedback is all the proof you need. Think again. There are ways round every system and all someone trying to conceal their true identity needs to do is enlist the help of others to work the system.

Before entrusting someone you've just met with the safety and well-being of your children or giving them 'access all areas' to your home and valuables, the only way you're going to find out their true colours is by hiring a private investigator. Only a highly trained and skilled investigator with access to cutting edge covert investigation equipment and technology will be able to find out if you really should be hiring them or not.

Remember, this isn't paranoia. It's talking perfectly reasonable steps to protect your family and home. If someone is indeed putting up a front, there's only one way to catch them; with their guard down. After this, you’ll know for sure that you’ve either found the perfect person for the job or to avoid them at all costs.

* #Investigations
* #Security
* #Glasgow
* #Edinburgh

Call us now, 24 hours a day, 7 Days a week on either 0871 234 0007 or 07010 600 247 or alternatively fill in our contact form at and we’ll quickly be in touch.

Private investigators often get a bad rap. A man from Hertfordshire recently went public with his criticisms of a private investigation company, which was employed by his bank to assess his credit reliability. The investigators had accessed his Experian account, without formally acquiring his consent, and he has made clear that he considers the action an unacceptable breach of privacy. His bank responded that it was legitimately entitled to conduct searches of credit reference agencies, such as Experian or Equifax, because the bank required the information to offset risk in dealing with any questionable customer.

In this case as some others, the private investigation company were assisting a corporate system with a valid commercial search. While the customer is resting his legal case on whether or not his consent was acquired by the bank, perhaps there will come a time when credit reference agencies will be able to refer to such inspections as “public data searches”, for which explicit consent is not required. In recent years we have seen the damage that can be done by an excess of bad debt, surely a bank taking necessary steps to avoid such debt is in the public interest? If so, private investigators are providing a valuable service, which should not be treated as unacceptable or seedy.

Partially due to the bad press accruing to cases like this one, private investigators will be required to acquire licenses from autumn 2014 onwards. Such licenses will only be after the candidate has gone through an official training process and a criminality check. Home Secretary Theresa May has insisted upon the importance of maintaining rigorous standards in the field of private investigation, to protect public privacy and to crack down on “rogue investigators”.

Of course, as in any industry, there are investigators who do not observe strict legal or ethical boundaries and who discredit the entire profession. While it is reasonable for the government to want a guarantee that investigators are legitimate operators, in this case the bad behaviour of a minority of operators is being used as an excuse to hamper the work of all detectives. While new restrictions are being put in place later this year, and investigator will be harshly punished for breaking the rules, the proposed investigative licenses will not come with any known increased powers or privileges. If the law passes, clients will still want the same services from investigators that they presently require, but the investigator could face jail terms as a result.

What the Home Secretary appears to fail to understand, is that Private Investigation is an industry that contributes positively to society. By offering legitimate services to individuals and corporations, Investigators empower their clients to make wise commercial, financial and personal decisions. The value of such services is clear from the continuous demand for high quality investigation services, from respected banks, law firms, and high-profile individuals.

However, in order to effectively provide what is a very specialised service, investigators need more power and better tools than those that will be accessible under the new licensing laws. For example, we provide tracing services for missing friends and family members, lost heirs, and absconding business partners, not to mention stolen goods or information. Undertaking these kinds of searches, which are highly emotionally and/or commercially important, requires more than a standard search engine and a phone book. It requires access to more sensitive information, outside the public domain. Of course, our investigators are responsible professionals and can be trusted to use such information for the client’s purposes, otherwise maintaining absolute confidentiality.

Similarly, we’re often called upon to carry out background checks, whether on new employees, potential family members, or new tenants and mortgage holders. As the Irish housing crash indicated, landlords and property developers are involved in a high-stakes game, in which a great deal relies on the word of the customer. Before signing major deals, it is reasonable for them to want access to the land registry to confirm, what if any other properties that the tenant has owned prior, and reliable background checks in property rentals or ownerships they should be able to call on investigators to conduct that search.

Debt collection is another service that all too frequently is required by individuals and companies within our society. The success of any economy depends on the good-faith of borrowers, both large and small, and there needs to be a strong system by which those who skip out on debts can be found and held accountable. While state detectives may not have the remit or resources to undertake debt collection, private investigators can fill the gap and ensure that debtors don’t suffer unfairly. Again, this kind of search requires advanced access, and investigators should be able to undertake legitimate searches without fearing legal repercussions.

In a time when our industry is being publicly questioned, 247 Investigations promises the highest levels of honesty, integrity and confidentiality.

Wait while more posts are being loaded