Private Investigators being driven out of business by adverse legislation

On Saturday 25 April 1998, approximately 200 Private Investigators, Members of the Association of British Investigators, will be meeting at The Quality Friendly Hotel, Walsall to discuss the ramifications of the Debtor’s Charter on their livelihoods.

In 1984 the Data Protection Act became Law and was considered by Private Investigators that it was the worst piece of legislation ever passed because it gave rise to the Debtor’s Charter. It closed many doors that could be opened by Private Investigators tracing debtors who had absconded without giving their creditor’s their new address.

The situation was worsened on 3 February 1995 when changes to the Debtor’s Charter came into force. This in essence, made it a criminal offence for a Private Investigator to obtain information by deception from anyone or any organisation licensed under the Data Protection Act of 1984.

Unfortunately deception is an integral part of the Private Investigator’s armoury. He has to tell lies to obtain the information his client is seeking.

One Private Investigator, Peter Heims, said that the passing of the new legislation has reduced his success rate of tracing debtors from 90% to 70%.

On 24 October 1998, the 1984 Data Protection Act will be amended by a Bill introduced to bring it in line with European Legislation under EU Directive for 95/46/EEC. The Bill is currently being drafted by the Home Office and the potential result could be devastating. The possibilities are:

• All information on the subject will have to be gathered fairly i.e. no deception. This means that the Private Investigator will not be able to make any more pretext calls. Say I am tracing a debtor who previously resided with his mother and father and then absconded. Normally the Investigator would approach mother posing as a friend, or if the debtor was a tradesman, an offer of business. What mother is going to give her son’s address to a Private Investigator who tells her the truth (that he is trying to trace her son in respect of a debt he owes)?
  
  
• The Investigator will need to advise the subject in advance that he is going to make enquiries about him. Or even worse, tell him that surveillance is going to be conducted upon him i.e. an insurance investigation, to see whether he is malingering.
  
  
• It will be necessary for the Private Investigator to submit to the person he has investigated, a copy of the report the PI intends to submit to his client.
  
  

That of course, is the scenario in its worst possible form, but nevertheless is thought provoking. It would of course also apply to Investigative Journalists as well as Private Investigators.

The cynics will probably say to themselves, ‘Hard luck. Who cares if Private Investigators do lose their livelihood. They are only snoopers!’ It goes far beyond this because organisations such as Pension Funds, Investment companies, Shares etc, or any company that loans money to the public in one shape or other, will be affected by the debtor who absconds leaving outstanding money due to them and does not divulge his new address.

At the moment millions of pounds are being lost to British Industry and Commerce through the ‘Gone Away’ or the ‘The Moonlight Flit’. The proposed legislation in October 1998 could well increase this figure to billions of pounds.

Members of the Association have been advised to write to their Members of Parliament with a view of pointing out the value of the Private Investigative business to Industry, Commerce and public at large.

The Guest of Honour at the meeting will be The Hon. Bruce George, MP for Walsall South.