Investigations that stand up.
Independent investigation of misconduct, fraud and integrity breaches — scoped deliberately, evidenced carefully, and reported in a form you can act on.
Complex matters, held to a defensible standard.
We investigate for boards, executives, in-house counsel and business owners. The matters differ, but the requirement rarely does: an account of what happened that is built on evidence, gathered fairly, and able to be explained to someone who was not in the room.
Fraud, theft & financial irregularity
Workplace misconduct
Conflicts of interest
Complaints & whistleblower disclosures
Sensitive senior-leadership matters
Regulatory & enforcement exposure
These matters are covered in our corporate investigations service for boards, executives and in-house counsel.
Some matters cannot be looked into from inside.
Plenty of issues are properly handled by managers and HR. The ones that are not tend to share a few features: the people who would ordinarily investigate are close to the conduct, the facts are genuinely contested, or the decision that follows will be tested — by an employee, a regulator, an insurer or a court. In those matters, who did the work becomes part of whether the outcome holds.
- Leadership, or someone who reports directly to leadership, is implicated.
- The accounts conflict and there is no neutral person to weigh them.
- Internal relationships or reporting lines make a fair process difficult.
- A decision — dismissal, disclosure, recovery — has to be defensible later.
- The matter reached you as a protected disclosure and confidentiality must hold.
A deliberate, five-step approach.
Scope
We agree what is actually alleged, the questions the investigation has to answer, and the boundaries of the work. We also settle who we report to and what authority we have to request records and speak to people. Getting this in writing at the outset is what stops an investigation drifting into matters nobody asked us to examine.
Preserve & gather
We secure the records that bear on the questions — documents, system data, messages and correspondence — before ordinary business activity overwrites them. Where devices or accounts are involved, we discuss safe preservation with you before anything is accessed or changed. We then interview the people with direct knowledge, in an order that does not compromise the material still to be gathered.
Analyse
We test each allegation against the evidence rather than against the strength of the account given. Competing versions are compared, corroborated where the material allows, and left unresolved where it does not. We record what we could not establish and why, and we apply procedural fairness so that anyone whose conduct is in question has a genuine opportunity to respond.
Report
You receive written findings tied to the evidence that supports each one, expressed so a decision-maker can follow the reasoning without our help. Where the evidence is thin, contested or absent, the report says so. We set out the limitations of the work plainly, because a finding that overstates the material is the first thing that fails under challenge.
Support
We brief the decision-maker or the board on what the findings do and do not establish, and we remain available to answer questions on the work alongside your legal advisers. Any further steps — supplementary enquiries, responding to a challenge, appearing to explain the method — are bounded by the scope we agree at the time.
What you receive.
An agreed scope
The allegations, the questions and the boundaries, settled in writing before the work begins.
The evidence and its chronology
The material relied on, organised so the sequence of events can be followed and checked.
Written findings and limitations
Each finding tied to the evidence behind it, with what could not be established stated plainly.
A decision-maker briefing
A briefing for the board, executive or counsel, as agreed in the scope of the engagement.
Before the first conversation.
- A short summary of what is alleged, in your own words.
- The relevant dates, and the roles of the people involved.
- What records exist and who controls them.
- Whether a legal adviser is already engaged on the matter.
- Anything you are worried about losing — messages, system logs, access records.
None of this needs to be complete or tidy. If you are concerned about evidence being lost, raise it in the first conversation and we will talk through safe preservation before anyone accesses, reallocates or changes a device or account. Steps taken in a hurry — even well-intentioned ones — can put material beyond use, so it is worth a short discussion first.
Common questions.
Can you investigate senior executives independently?
Yes. We are engaged from outside the organisation and report to whoever holds the authority for the matter — usually the board, a board committee, or in-house counsel — rather than to the line of management the allegations touch. Where the reporting line itself is a problem, we say so before the work starts.
How do you work with our lawyers?
We work alongside your legal advisers rather than in place of them. They advise on legal risk and privilege; we establish the facts and report them. We do not provide legal advice, and we do not characterise findings as legal conclusions.
Is this a one-off engagement or ongoing?
Most investigations are engaged matter by matter. Organisations that expect a continuing need — reporting, triage, and investigations handled as they arise — can instead use an ongoing arrangement through Your Integrity Team.
What affects the scope and cost of an investigation?
The number of allegations, how many people need to be interviewed, the volume and condition of the records, and whether digital evidence has to be preserved and examined. We scope before we quote, and our published fees set out how we charge.
Where a matter turns on data, we run it with our digital forensics capability. Where it exposes a gap in how issues are reported and handled, our integrity assurance work addresses that separately. Our fees for organisations set out how engagements are charged.
Facing an issue that needs independent investigation?
Looking for this on an ongoing basis rather than matter by matter? See your Integrity Team.