رواية بوليسية. المباحث الخاصة. أوكرانيا.

[НСК-СБ]

From whom: odin-detective@rambler.ru
To: vd@vd.ua
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 19:55:14 +0400

Dear editors!

Everyone has long been accustomed to the fact that in the pursuit of interesting news and sensations, journalists "process" reliable information in accordance with their views and desires. But..
The link is not valid in the article of your publication, journalists Alisa Yurchenko, Anna Kibenok, using materials from the International Association of Detectives https://forum.detective-agency.info , turning the information upside down, they created the impression among readers that Ukrainian detective agencies work exclusively illegally and strive to maintain this situation.

If you carefully read the materials and developments of our Association, you can understand that:
1) Ukrainian detective agencies operate exclusively in the legal field, are registered as LLCs, state of emergency, regularly pay taxes in accordance with paragraph 74.60.0 of the All-Russian Classifier of Economic Activities of Ukraine.
2) These agencies do their best to lobby for the adoption of an adequate Law on Private Detective Activity
3) Fight against any manifestations of fraud in this area.
4) In fact, all the statements made by the MOD member used by the authors in the article are taken out of context and used exactly the opposite.

We are ready for communication and discussion with your publication, with any other media in order to convey to the public the concept that private detective work in Ukraine is necessary, legal and in demand.

Respectfully,
co-founder of Detective-collection agency ODIN LLC
Senik Sergey Vladimirovich
Kharkiv, st. Karl Marx 32, of.3
t. 0577611124
Website - odin-detective.uaprom.net

-------------------------------------------------- -------
Well done, Sergey! Good and correctly written !!!

 

[частный детектив Хмельницкий]

Dear Colleagues! Today we received an answer to our question about the article under discussion:

From: Alisa Yurchenko <alissa@vd.ua>
To: <helpkm@mail.ru>
October 24, 2011, 14:44
Dear Igor Nikolaevich, hello! Thanks for the feedback about the material.
We are also open to dialogue and cooperation. If the publication again raises the theme of the work of detective agencies, we MANDATORY will contact you. A few words about the principles of the publication and the section "Special Look" in which this material is posted. The text should have an unusual angle, which was not raised earlier by other publications. The title of the column “SPECIAL VISION” obliges to this. Those. we immediately emphasize that we express our opinion on any phenomenon, supported by FACTS and quotes from specialists (by them we mean market participants, representatives of market regulatory bodies, lawyers, as well as analysts specializing in this topic). The topics raised once in the “Special Look” section can be repeated only in connection with their actualization (a bright, large-scale event, a new trend in the market). This section covers topics at the intersection of politics (including regulatory) and business operating in various directions, so the frequency of repetition of the same topic is not more than once a year.
In the paragraph relating to the activities of the agencies you listed, we indicated that among private detectives the initiative of the three organizers of the press conference was ambiguous, and after the press conference, a discussion of the news appeared on such and such a forum. That such a discussion has taken place is a fact. Our goal was to emphasize that not all detectives adhere to a single point of view. I emphasize that we did not approve or try to say that, in the person of the agencies you listed, there is a RESISTANCE to the adoption of this bill.
I studied in detail ALL versions of the Ukrainian bill, as well as Russian law. And she herself is convinced that all these documents are far from ideal and even minimally necessary. They have a lot of confusion, inaccuracies, holes. All of them are simply written off from Russian law with some changes. By the way, I shared these considerations with representatives of detective agencies, who PUBLICALLY advocate the adoption of proposed bills. My subjective conclusion is from communicating with private detectives: unfortunately, even those who have grown up to publicly lobbying for the adoption of this bill have a poor idea of WHAT it should be (although they have some groundwork) and what of it now. I believe that the situation is similar with those who are against talking about the illegality of the work of private detectives and for a DAMAGE bill. If this category of detectives, to which, if I understood correctly, consider yourself and you, were really interested in adopting such a law, then your deputies should have been received by MPs for a long time. But none of the deputies who worked on this topic received such proposals (at the time of publication of the article). Although transferring them is as simple as possible. In this regard, we made a logical, in our opinion, conclusion, which formed the basis of the perspective - most detective agencies simply have no incentive to lobby for the adoption of this bill.
All materials in editorial headings, including "Special Look", initiated exclusively by journalists and editors of the publication. The assumption made on the forum that the material is custom-made DOES NOT CONFORMITY.
Respectfully,
Alisa Yurchenko,
Special Look section editor
All-Ukrainian weekly "Power of Money"

In my opinion, we will be able to cooperate with this publication if they do not mind
My answer was this:

Hello Alice.
One feels a professional approach to the study of not a simple topic. Nevertheless, we have at our disposal a pilot layout of the first part of the then future article, where there is no mention of anyone who is opposed to the adoption of legislative acts on the NPV. In the final version (which was published), there are three agencies that, allegedly, in their opinions speak out against the legalization of NPV in Ukraine. It’s a little annoying that it is these three agencies, among many other colleagues, who are trying to claim that the NPV in Ukraine is legal (by the way, in opposition to the three initiators of the press conference) and sincerely believe that the adoption of the relevant Law is absolutely necessary. But, as you rightly noted, the Law is sound, meaningful and tied to realities, and not written off from the worst analogues. But I seem to be repeating myself.
Regarding the legislative initiative. You can, of course, blame us all for legislative indecision, but this will only be a piece of truth. Imagine how you can create a bill, how can you propose and transmit something if most legislators (however, like the rest of the citizens) present private detective activity as spying on unfaithful wives and gathering dirt on political opponents? At the same time, the living part of detectives and agencies for the most part is scattered, relies in their work at their own peril and risk, and often hears, “you are outside the law.”
So that you do not consider Ukrainian detectives to be absolutely amorphous subjects, I will share with you the news. Ukrainian detectives who participated in the 2nd Conference of the International Association of Detectives (October 1-3, 2011) and who have been cooperating for more than one year, decided to legalize the All-Ukrainian Association of Private Detectives. The process of registration of this public organization is currently underway. One of the objectives of the Association is to participate in the proposals, preparation and promotion of the productive Law on NPV, as well as to help professional private detectives and agencies get out of the "shadow". In this narrow direction, I think, we are the first. There are many difficulties, but they are all solvable. And, of course, we are all open to communication with the media, if this happens in the context of dialogue, maybe even disputes, but without distorting reality. Therefore, we will always be happy to discuss topics related to NPV with you, including and on the pages of your publication (by the way, No. 324 I could not find on sale )
Your response to my appeal and the continuation of our dialogue will be posted on the MOD Forum in the topic I previously indicated. I hope you do not mind? My intuition tells me that the current situation is the beginning of our cooperation
Sincerely. Igor.

 

[Детективное агентство Симферополь]

Thanks Igor!

 

[частный детектив Хмельницкий]

There was a telephone conversation with the section editor. In addition to positive emotions and a mutual desire to cooperate in the future, nothing has been received. And for myself I made it one more time — even if I overwhelm my emotions — I need to be restrained (it's about my “Zadolbali!” (About the illegality of the NPV in Ukraine), which got into the article because of my restraint) ....

 

[Игорь Коракс]

That's good that they came to a consensus. Well done Igor.

 

[Детективное агентство Симферополь]

It is very good that a common language has been found! We will cooperate!

 

[частный детектив Хмельницкий]

A quote from the final part of communication with the editor:

".... It does not always happen that after talking with the characters of the material, who are not very happy with the text, such a good impression is left )"

We would always like that and in everything !!!

 

[Анатолий Маланченко]

Igor, Respect!

 

[Детективное агентство Тула]

The thing is that the “Special Look” journalists Alisa Yurchenko and Anna Kibenok were initially set up for a SPECIAL presentation of facts (with elements of scandal) in their publications.
In my opinion, nothing good will come of further prospective cooperation with them.
In working contacts with journalists, MOD functionaries, in order to popularize their views and opinions, it is necessary to focus on serious and conservative analytical publications, and not on outrageous journalistic youth.
In any case, wait and see.

 

[Детективное агентство Москва.]

In this situation, I agree with Konstantin. We, it seems to us, have found a common language with this publishing house and journalists. But what they wanted to say with this publication, they said, and, unfortunately, no one offered us to speak on the pages of this publication with their point of view. And all the amiable conversations are only for averting our eyes, so that we don't raise a wave yet. In any case, the fact that they did not give the text for approval - this already characterizes the data of the journalists and the publication in which they work.