Method you can put in front of a regulator.
Nothing enters a file without a source we can name and a date we can prove. Where a record is closed or contradictory, we say so rather than fill the gap.
Four steps, and you know where the file stands at each one.
Scope the question
Which decision the check supports, how deep it needs to go, which jurisdictions are in play, and what output you need. NDA signed, fee and timeline agreed.
Collect from source
Registries, courts, regulators, licensed databases and local-language media, archived as retrieved so every claim can be traced back later.
Assess and review
One analyst writes, a second reviews. Genuine concerns separated from name collisions, and confidence stated finding by finding.
Deliver and stand behind it
In the format you asked for, with a call to walk through it. Follow-up questions, and later audit questions, are included.
Where the findings come from.
We name our source classes openly, and will share the specific source list for your jurisdiction before you commission any work.
The checks we run on ourselves.
Two pairs of eyes
Author and reviewer are always different people. The reviewer's initials are in the file.
Source archiving
Every document captured as retrieved and dated, so a finding can be re-checked years later.
Conflict check
Run before acceptance. If we cannot act independently, we decline and tell you why.
Post-delivery support
Questions from your committee, auditor or regulator answered by the original analyst.
Your enquiry is as sensitive as its subject.
Engagements are handled on a need-to-know basis. We never disclose who we are researching for, and we do not resell what we gather.
NDA before scoping
Mutual non-disclosure signed before we discuss a subject or a jurisdiction.
Data minimisation
We ask only for the identifiers a check actually needs.
PDPL & GDPR-aligned handling
Lawful basis, subject rights and cross-border transfer covered in the engagement terms.
Encrypted delivery
Files released through an encrypted channel to named recipients only.
Named access only
The assigned analyst and reviewer see the file. No shared inboxes, no pooled offshore teams.
Retention on your terms
Working papers held for an agreed audit period, then destroyed on schedule, or returned.
What we will not do.
No pretexting or intrusion
No false identities, no access to data we are not entitled to, no surveillance. If a record cannot be obtained lawfully, it is not in the file.
No conclusion without evidence
Allegations are reported as allegations, with source and status. We do not convert rumour into a finding to make a report look decisive.
No legal advice
We establish facts and frame risk. Whether to onboard, decline or file remains your decision, taken with your own counsel.