Due diligence is about trying to look around corners. Not only do you look backward at a person’s history, but you also want to try to anticipate potential problems for the client if they hire Mr. X. or go into business in Country Y.
Country Y for the purposes of this blog today is Canada.
Investigators get information in exchange for money, so why in the world would an investigator want to tell people how to get that information for free?
As I wrote last week on our companion blog, The Divorce Asset Hunter in an article called Giving it Away is Great for Business, it’s not a matter
Some people just like privacy, but others form companies with a view to concealing any link between that company and themselves. If you are hiding assets from creditors, that’s a plus (for you, not the creditors).
Picking a company name can be more difficult than many think. A lot of the obvious company names are
The big guys have been going bankrupt, but the real carnage is yet to come:. Among America’s small businesses. Potential creditors need to get organized for the fight which appears to have been kicked off in New York this month with a fascinating case.
We have seen the big names going down including JC Penney,
Not for the first time, the most compelling piece of information in an investigation is what isn’t there.
We’ve written often before about the failure of databases and artificial intelligence to knit together output from various databases and I discussed the idea of what isn’t there in my book, The Art of Fact Investigation.
Great work by the Atlanta Journal Constitution on an issue that’s bugged me for years: the brazen violation of federal law by investigators and the lawyers who hire them.
At issue is the Gramm Leach Bliley Act, meant to protect the confidentiality of banking records. You are not allowed to pretend to be someone