Specialist corporate investigators or a general private investigator?

Short answer: a general private investigator suits a single, well-defined task, such as locating a person, serving papers or observing one address. A specialist corporate investigation firm suits matters where money, companies, devices or several countries are involved and the findings may be used by lawyers, insurers, regulators or a court.

The difference is less about the title than about the work behind it. In the UK there is no compulsory licence for private investigators, so anyone can use the label. That puts the burden on the client to test what a firm can actually do before instructing it.

Fraud inside a business usually needs forensic accounting: reconstructing transactions, reading ledgers and bank statements, and showing who approved, received and benefited from each payment. A general investigator can establish where someone lives or works. Establishing how money left a company, and through whom, needs people who read financial records for a living.

Asset tracing needs corporate registries, land records, court filings and insolvency records in each relevant country, plus people on the ground where records are thin. It also needs judgement about what the evidence proves. An asset report that supports a freezing order has to say what each asset is, why it is linked to the person, where that came from and how confident the investigator is.

A cyber incident, an altered screenshot or deleted messages need digital forensics carried out in a way that preserves the evidence. If a device is examined carelessly, the evidence can be lost or challenged. The investigation also has to fit around the IT responders, the insurer and the lawyers, each of whom has their own obligations.

Bug sweeps are a specialism of their own. Technical surveillance counter-measures need equipment and training that most general investigators do not have, and a sweep is only as good as the person interpreting the readings.

Five questions show quickly whether a firm fits the matter. Who will do the work, and what have they done before? What will you receive at the end, and could your solicitor use it? How will evidence be preserved and documented? Which records and sources will be used, and are they lawful? How are scope and fees agreed, and what happens if the work changes direction?

Legality matters as much as skill. Obtaining someone's bank, phone or medical records by pretending to be them, or by paying an insider, is an offence under section 170 of the Data Protection Act 2018, and evidence gathered that way can damage the case it was meant to support. Investigators who process personal data should also be registered with the Information Commissioner's Office. A firm that promises private bank statements without a court order is a firm to avoid.

Where the findings may go to court, ask whether the investigator understands how evidence will be used. A witness statement, an exhibit bundle and an expert report under Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules have different requirements. Work prepared with those requirements in mind from the start saves cost and argument later.

Many matters need both kinds of skill. A fraud enquiry may start with forensic accounting and end with surveillance; an allegation may need digital evidence and witness enquiries. The useful question is whether the firm can coordinate the specialists the matter needs, with one person responsible for the whole investigation.

At Cato & Veil, the first conversation with Neel Chakrabarti is free and confidential. We will tell you whether the matter needs us, a different specialist or no investigator at all, and scope and fees are agreed before any work begins.

Cato & Veil practice note. Legal points are general information; take advice from your solicitor on your own matter.