Obtaining traffic and credit records

[Eve]

Hello,
I need some help on a stolen car scenario on current assignment. The scenario I’m studying is on what seems to be a dodgy stolen car claim.  The only information  I have to work with is two sets of keys are missing and the claimant has made two contradictig statements on how many keys are available.

From what I understand so far the claimant will need to authorise for the release of traffic, credit, and criminal history records however, I’m not familiar with how this is done.

The authority forms (from the claimant) to do traffic and credit checks would this come from the insurance company or does the investigator need to obtain them from the claimant??  
Do these forms have a name?
I’m doing an investigation plan so any other related info in gathering information and how to go about doing background checks  would be really helpful!

[shadower]

Eve, you will need a "request for records" form - each state has their own procedure, here in Victoria you can pick them up from local police station. One each for licence and criminal history. We submit  them with a photocopy of subjects licence for identification purposes. They must be signed by the subject authorising the release of records to you or your principal agency.

cheers Eric.

[rrocade3]

Eve

the investigation company that your are doing the job for will have all the relelvant forms from or for the client. With regards to Criminal History, traffic history, or any required records these are to be produced by the insured owner and or driver for any claim to proceed. This includes all bank records, telephone records, credit card statements, purchase records etc. You organise it with them that they have the majority of these records prior to your interview with them. With regards to criminal history some clients have a form you get the insured to fill out and you fax it off to the checking agency. This will depend on which client wants you to do the job (Suncorp, AAMI, Alliance, RACQ, NRMA, etc etc etc)

The investigation company will also have a blank autority to obtain documents form which you get the insured or insured driver to compile and this is then sent off by the office or the client to obtain any outstanding documents ie bank records, telephone records etc.

[shadower]

Hey rrcoade, why give them the heads up about the statements, phone records etc before the interview....I prefer to ambush them :twisted:  :twisted: . I generally question them about the incident, where they were etc, how much they owe on credit cards, etc etc in the initial interview then hit them with the request/demand after they have given me some sort of story about it. I get some surprising results! But you are right, the client company should have all of the forms requesting these details for you - if not then I would look for another company to subbie out to Eve.

shadower

[shadower]

oops, spelt your name wrong rrocade3,  sorry. :oops:

[rrocade3]

Hey Shadower.

I find that I don't need or want to "ambush" anyone. I use whatever method the paying company wants me to use in accordance with their policies and procedures. After years of teaching and using cognitive and investigating interviewing I do not need to "ambush" and that was when I was in the Army as well.

I find that the insured's with nothing to hide are more than happy to comply with the Instructing Clients requirements. The insured's that jump up and down are the ones who normally have something to hide or a skeleton in the cupboard. Human behaviour.

I then adjust my investigation method to the type of insured that I am going to interview and for the type of case I am investigating. For example if it is a MVA or MVT by having all the information on the one day you can go through everything and cover it all instead of coming back which saves everybody time, money and saves you chasing up the insured for the required paperwork.

Again my method for example a fraud, assault, non compliance in government departments etc would be totally different again. But everyone has their own unique style and you should use whatever works best for you.

For you though Eve the best thing you can do is when you finish your course, is to try and link up with an experienced investigator in your area so you can tag along and see how they do it. The best thing is to try and get tag along with a number of different people so you can see how each person does their investigation process and then find the best method for you. But remember if you are doing a factual investigation for as a sub contractor you will be given detailed instructions from the instructing client on what is required and how they want everything done. Investigation companies also have their own policy procedures for different instruction clients. Follow that as well and you won't get into too much trouble.  

When dealing with private clients then you need to design and develop your own policies and procedures and forms to collect or obtain this information if it is not willing provide by the interviewee.

Shadower is right that if a company you are asked to do work for does not have the required documents in place to collect the required information then I too would be careful and give them a wide berth. You not only need information correctly but have your own backside covered in the way that you obtain that information.

Regards

V.

[Homer]

Eve. I have been in industry since 1985 and have worked on cases with rrocade3, so I know her methodology and style and highly trust her judgment. She is absolutely correct. I also find it best to give people the courtesy of advising them wha info is required. otherwise, imagine turning up at their house and waiting around forever while they go searching for paperwork etc all the time or,a as she says, you have to return. 99% of people I have interviewed seem open and honest and willing to co-operate. Make your style suit your personality and all will be fine.

[Agent Shadow]

.. I stongly agree with rrocade3 and Homer....one also needs to be mindful of the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness...so be mindful of the 'ambush technique'.....

[shadower]

procedural fairness, natural justice....show me an insurance company that operates with these when an insured makes a claim and I will change my wicked wicked ways...    

Eve, all of the above are right depending on the instructions from your instructing agency.

All of the claimants that I have dealt with were "prima facie" honest and very helpful in the first interview. It was only after 'ambushing them" with the request for further details, eg phone records, bank accounts, etc that they became very negative and suddenly their innocence became questionable  :roll:  Most were downright liars and frauds, the rest were evasive and had something to hide - don't you love a good mystery.

As I said before, it was the standard operating process of the firm I subbied to and they have been on the panels of 4 of the larger insurance companies for several decades so I suppose they appreciate the results.

How do I feel about the ambush....that's another story. I no longer do factuals.

shadower

[BigGeorge]

Wow!

I am shocked, I am stumped at what I read in this thread.

To have the mindset of judging someone bad because he refuses to allow you to invade his privacy and walk all over his rights and obligations under the Insurance Contracts Act is a very worrying situation. Those kinds of attitudes and practices make you unsuitable to investigation. These are civil matters we are dealing with, not terrorism suspects! You are not the PIC or NCC or ASIO for goodness' sake. If an investigator came to me behaving such as you described, I'd quickly show him the door. And no, I wouldn't be deemed under the policy to have failed reasonable cooperation.

Honesty is not assessed based on the extent to which someone gives you access to private and confidential information! I can't believe those of you who take that attitude are licensed to conduct investigations and are receiving work from insurers. And "ambush"?!!

You are not entitled to ask for, never-mind demand, access to credit card records, bank records, and whatever else to enable you to trawl for any dirt which you hope will paint a bad picture of a claimant. Any inquiries and request for access must be based on evidence and on the policy conditions and disclosures. Nowhere in the policy of insurance or in the Insurance Contracts Act does it say you can trample over a claimant! Providing proof of a traffic record and perhaps a criminal record (if the insurance proposal asked for disclosure) is one thing, but your approach, your attitude, your reasoning is completely stunning! I used to fire people for that kind of behaviour.

I say I've investigated stolen car claims for more years than most and I've had more "wins" than most. And for more than thirty years I worked for most of the insurers, but I achieved successful outcomes through skills and proper practices, not by beating people over the head with a truncheon.

I worry what student investigators will learn from attitudes like this!
 :roll:

BG

[jdfocus]

Hey BigGeorge, Shadower

I’m a student just starting certIII and this is my first post, following the track of where this thread is going and the fact that my module says I Need to put a post up and get some feedback PLEASE, to answer one of my question, hopefully my comments will be as controversial as “shadowers”
But getting back to the “shadowers” comments
“I am a female and a little one at that, going into this industry. After a little investigation experiment last night, which could have turned out bad, I realised that Safety is FIRST in this business, There is no way I’d Every Be a Cowboy, my first focus will be Safety First” anyone got a thought tips on that??? BigGeorge?

So ‘Shadower” in your experience your underlying thoughts your trying to say is that, any person who is set upon by and insurance company to be investigated? That then you conceded that persons actions to be questionable? As in, this person is potentially, A Liar, A Cheat and or a thief and a person with those thoughts actions is potentially Dangerous. So its important to have the upper hand, to add to extra personal safety?? Well that is my positive spin on your comments
Big George I think treating all with respect which is what I think you are basically saying is the was to go for some many reasons
Can anyone give me some extra tips on Safety?
This is my last question so I can send in the module, and I really do want some extra tips on safety
JD[/color]

[shadower]

Big George, my my, haven't I opened a war wound or two!! Hope I don't offend your principles any further.

No where in my post did I say that I was happy to carry out the instructions of my instructing firm, however "thems the rules of engagement".  I did indicate that I wasn't doing it anymore because I did find it difficult!

However, the principles that the investigation follows is that once a certain claim triggers 3 or more conditions a full blown investigation is initiated. These investigations are intelligent, insightful, thorough, professional and unfortunately invasive.

To negate a claim such as these the insurer has to show to VCAT, or whatever governing body makes a decision, that the claimant had
1. motive
2. proximity to scene
3. is not truthful

I won't go into all of the details of how these points are proved but examination of phone records, credit details etc, to compare with details given by the claimant in first interview, is a major component of the investigation. Yes, it is invasive, but according to the policy documents I have seen, a full and full cooperation with the investigation is neccesary. I had a few claimants that refused details, that was there decision to make and their claims have been tied up with court actions.

It would be nice to be able to carry out such investigations with care and compassion, I don't think the insurance companies provide that in their service these days George - it's all about the money and time.

As I said I found it difficult going, it was a test of my moral code, and I found that I couldn't do it. In the cold light of day though, these people are considered to be attempting to defraud the insurance companies and when successful they are increasing our premiums and committing a criminal offence.

By the way, I had 100% with the 'ambush' method - very poor choice of words I know, but it seemed to fit at the time. (apart from the two who decided not to cooperate fully)

Cheers shadower.

[shadower]

jdfocus, hi there

size is not really important in this profession, if you are talking physical that is! You must walk tall and do the best you can. Stick with your principles and operate with a moral code.

Being wise is important, particularly when it comes to your personal safety. Use, and abide by, your personal radar. If it feels scary, then it probably is a time to lock up and go home.

Have some personal operating procedures, such as always have your car doors locked if doing surveillance, have all of your tools of trade close by your hand if operating in the dark in the car to avoid turning on a torch or interior lights etc. In the same thought, don't smoke in the car, not only is it a really really stupid addiction, the glow from your coffin nail will highlight your presence.

When dealing personally with clients, witnesses, claimants etc, show some presence, do not be a wilting wimp. You don't have to monster them, be precise and positive about that which you want to discuss. Be direct and not evasive - you are in charge of the process. Naturally you pitch your levels of these to suit the audience, a client would be treated on a different level to a suspect. These points will add inches to your size.

Big George might be able to tell you that is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog that matters - I am far too young to know such old anecdotes :wink:

hope this helps with your course

cheers shadower

[jdfocus]

Shadower, your tips are greatly greatly appreciated

[Ms L James]

Evening all,

jdfocus I too am a smaller female investigator and have found, especially of late, that my size and appearance have been to my detriment when in a situation regarding my safety.

I am not meaning to sound that it is a frequent occurrence, and I cannot speak for other investigators, however when I have found myself in an inappropriate or unsafe situation I have requested the interviews be concluded and an escort for any further interviews.

I completely understand those investigators out there that will read this and roll their eyes being that the client will have to pay for two investigators to do one job however I have also found my claims officer is more than happy to offer an escort.

If there is one thing I have learnt over the course of the last year it is that money is a strong motivator and at times this will go hand in hand with people becoming agitated and aggressive.

Again this is only my experience and each situation is different.

Learning to read people and an ability to talk people through awkward situations has been a must to date.

Good luck in your study and future.

P.s An increase in female investigators is an exciting prospect in this industry (one that may need a separate forum section :lol:  now wait for the male reactions...)