Naturally there can be concerns when considering a surveillance and observations investigation. Whatever the issue is, there are several key factors to consider when deciding whether to investigate, including ensuring you are acting lawfully, and that you have the correct service provider.
We at Expert Investigations have put together the ‘J Plan’ to help you decide:
JUSTIFY: Can you justify the investigation?
You have information goods are being stolen, a fraud is being committed, someone is falsely absent from work, your data is being stolen and used by a former employee or you need to prove a cohabitation. You need evidence to confirm or disprove the allegation. Your enquires have only revealed so much, you now need proof. This makes the investigation justifiable.
PROPORTIONATE: Is what you are planning proportionate to you needs?
3 days surveillance to prove a skiving absent employee is working elsewhere? 5 days surveillance to prove a theft and misuse of your stolen data? A computer forensic examination to prove data has been emailed to the employee’s home? A period of surveillance to show one of the former matrimonial party is conducting undisclosed employment. This is all proportionate for your investigation. What you are doing is reasonable for what you wish to achieve and is proportionate to confirming or disproving the allegation/information.
LAWFUL: Is the investigation lawful?
You may need to use this evidence for use in an internal discipline investigation, a civil recovery exercise or criminal investigation or to disclose in any legal requirement. Investigation evidence is lawful and will not breach Human Rights or Regulatory Investigatory Powers at Work Acts, if procedures are adhered to correctly. Public Authorities must adhere to specific legislation, but generally outside the Public Authority arena you can conduct virtually all investigations without falling foul of legislation. The simple marker post is “Is what I am doing reasonable for what I wish to achieve?”
You have the allegation/information, what you are suggesting is reasonable and in a proportionate manner, you need the evidence assist and have closure. The investigation is necessary. It is not a ‘fishing’ expedition.