Advanced Investigation Services - anyone?

[ScarletPimpernel]

Advanced Investigation Services doesn't appear in the ICO register of data controllers either - although Clanhatton etc. does. All trading names and styles are supposed to be registered.

 

I note that Clanchatton is a member of the CSA - and their code of conduct states that members must operate lawfully at all times. Maybe worth a complaint, if only to see what risible nonsense the industry's club will come out with as an excuse for doing nothing.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I mean, even Ken Maynard wouldn't think of doing that Maybe they'll meet at the CSA meeting and discuss it?

 

 

 

You might say that; I couldn't possibly comment...

[ScarletPimpernel]

No, I don't think that DCAs or private investigators need SIA accreditation. Their websites do need to comply with the Companies Act, though, and guess what - this one doesn't.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Companies House for their website fail. Contact is the Technical Offences Dept.

 

They are obliged to show their company registration, place of registration (i.e. England, Scotland, NI), and registered office address.

[ScarletPimpernel]

The SIA Licencing aspect is interesting. The SIA say that a licence is NOT required for:

• activities exclusively for the purposes of market research;
  
• activities exclusively concerned with a credit check;
  
• professional activities of practising solicitors and Barristers;
  
• professional activities of practising accountants;
  
• professional activities of journalists and broadcasters;
  
• activities exclusively relating to reference to registers which are open to the public; registers or records to which a person has a right of access; and published works;
  
• activities carried out with the knowledge or consent of the subject of the investigation.
  

I suspect that DCAs will claim that their activities are covered as 'carried out with the knowledge or consent of the subject of the investigation' because you consent to sharing of data in credit agreements; 'activities exclusively relating to reference to registers which are open to the public; registers or records to which a person has a right of access' because they use elctoral rolls. I suppose they could argue that paying for access to other databases such as CRAs is a 'right of access'.

 

However, this is worth following up. Certainly, where a company name makes clear that its function is investigative one would expect them to be properly licenced - even if it is only a trading style and he reality is that it's designed to scare rather than reflecting the true nature of the company's business.

 

Looking at the relevant Act, I note this in relation to licenceable activities:

 

This paragraph does not apply to the activities of any person who carries out any inquiries or investigation merely incidentally to the carrying out of any activities which (disregarding this sub-paragraph) are not the activities of a security operative.

 

So, when is an investigations company not an investigations company? When it's a DCA, presumably...

[ScarletPimpernel]

Sadly, you are reading it wrong; the rules are not yet in effect.

[ScarletPimpernel]

The 'oversight' - actually a criminal offence - now appears to have been rectified.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Send an email to [email protected], marked for the attention of the Consumer Credit Licencing Fitness Team.