For someone who claims to be educated, you clearly lack the ability to infer from the “anonymous complainants” criminal history (not just traffic violations) that she has exhibited poor judgment, obsessive tendencies, and erratic behavior. Why is this important? Well... coupled with the fact that we were given a false address, along with an ever-changing story as to why she wanted us to locate this individual, we came to the sensible conclusion that we needed to terminate the investigation. This criminal history is not fabricated, and it was fortuitous that we were able to find information that confirmed our suspicions of this client. Making “annoying phone calls” is clearly indicative of someone that has the potential to stalk, or even harass someone. Furthermore, there is no excuse for driving on a suspended license; clearly she decided to exhibit reckless disregard for the law.
As an investigative agency, we failed to vet this client appropriately. She came to us in emotional distress, and was quite convincing, however, her story began to evolve over time, and she began to exhibit a sense of vitriol, confusion, and entitlement. This is not uncommon—we sometimes get duped by clientele who initially appear to have legitimate investigative needs, but in reality have scores to settle, a thirst for revenge, or some other malicious cause for information.
If the client has financial issues, that needs to be discussed with her CPA, and she should probably hold off on hiring an agency and paying a handsome retainer. When a client hires us to do an investigation, we immediately begin focusing on finding facts pertinent to the case. In the case of this “anonymous complainant”, let’s just call her “Kim” for the sake of this rebuttal, we immediately did database searches on relatives of the subject, the subject himself,, and began staking out potential living quarters (shelters in this case). The surveillance aspect involved 2-person surveillance on the subject who was employed in a tightly secured premise for a construction company. The premises were situated in a location that makes it difficult to perform a successful vehicular surveillance during rush hour, not to mention that there were numerous cameras on site which were monitored by the receptionist. “Kim” was unwilling to listen to the difficulty and obstacles involved in performing the surveillance. Sometimes, surveillance is a matter of luck. You simply cannot predict when you will be able to successfully I.D. a subject and begin trailing them. Furthermore, if the subject has a "lead foot," then the chances of losing him are sufficiently greater, which was the other issue in this case.
For a spectator that clearly is not familiar with the intricacies of this case, we find your allegations that a “service was not provided” to be offensive and derogatory. We routinely meet with clients to provide closure to cases and present all evidence collected. Every investigation is conducted with the utmost ethical standards, and there is not a single minute unaccounted for which we bill. Clearly, in this case, it was made impossible to do so because “Kim” was so adamant about finding an ex-boyfriend for reasons other than her stated purpose (possibly to stalk, harass, posing a potential imminent danger to him). We provided optimal service until the point when she began changing the intent of the investigation (from a stolen vehicle to monies owed), treating us in an abusive fashion, and making demands that we sell information to her. Our investigations swiftly began changing the target of the investigation to the complainant, and discovered that her credibility was tainted, and some of our presumptions indeed were true. We will NOT jeopardize the privacy, well-being, or security of an individual on behalf of a career criminal like “Kim”. She had no legal legitimate purpose to hire us… she felt that we could be manipulated so she could be the end user of critical personal information.
Our Company has many satisfied customers. Coincidentally, the clientele that are the happiest, are also the ones that indeed have a legitimate legal issue, whether it be the welfare of a child, the activities of a spouse, or the possibility that a person on disability is potentially malingering.
I am sorry that you believe that investigators “wheel and deal” like attorneys. The reality of the matter is that there are striking contrasts between the two professions. Investigators are in the business of finding FACTS… we are unbiased, objective fact finders. Nobody on our staff is a “crook”, and if indeed they were a crook, they would not have been credentialed by the Private Securities Division of VA, which requires an extensive criminal background check. However, we can safely assume that an individual that runs numerous toll booths (as did “Kim”) without paying, can be characterized to be a crook.
Furthermore, we are elated that you have decided to look elsewhere for an investigative agency to hire. Clearly, it appears that you may have much in common with “Kim” and may be trying to look for a firm that can be manipulated into selling information to you. We appreciate legitimate inquiries from people with honest concerns. Furthermore, I would recommend that you set aside your biases and step back and evaluate a situation more objectively in the future. I am sorry you may have had bad experiences with law enforcement, or attorneys in the past, but you should know better than to lump all in one category.
We are sorry that you have decided to remain anonymous along with “Kim”. In any case, our Company attorneys are being forwarded these messages for review, as we believe they are slanderous in nature. Telstar Inc. also is deeply troubled that RippoffReport.com has allowed these slanderous posts from “Kim”. We will begin exploring every legal avenue.
Best,
Michael
Why file a report here? Ripoff Report is a permanent record! Other complaint sites copy our content then remove reports for money.
