Theme for discussion ...

[Роберт]

What reports Alexander after all, no one even knows how many there are black holes in Russia that generally collect information on the same civil or criminal cases ... after all, none of the existing organizations, neither the MOD, nor the ARD, nor anyone else We didn’t carry out any research in this direction ... but, by the way, everyone who is not too lazy is trying to make some proposals for changing the Laws .... without even knowing if there are any real problems in the implementation of any BH rights in criminal or civil proceedings .... that’s probably what you should do .... if of course there is a desire and opportunity ..... to see if there are problems .... in my opinion, there are no problems ... and all the information, both in the criminal and in the civil process is accepted normally .... this is from practice ... and if so, then then fence the garden ...

Well. What did I say ?! Only the fig generally need a license then? You can simply by proxy in court represent the interests of the client. Without a license, you can draw up a contract with a client for the provision of legal assistance. Problems then.

 

[Роберт]

And status is the demand for detectives. This is fundamentally important. And the standards will immediately comply. Because getting a client and not doing his job will become more difficult.

Robert ... regarding the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings in particular ... read the Code of Criminal Procedure ... everything is written there .... And regarding the demand for services .... there is a good driver's saying ... "it wasn’t about the woman. ... "

How about a wall of peas. I’m talking about the status of a profession, about prestige, about increasing demand for services, about creating a market for them, and the thing is that you just need to read the CPC and remember about the bribe

 

[Роберт]

I forgot to ask Andrei Zakharov, why did you take such a gang at the scouts, if everything is so good here?

 

[Роберт]

I’ll write my answers to the questionnaire. 2, collecting information for the statement of claim, organizing the security of a large financial structure, checking employees and partners. The amount of 500,000, of which the costs of performing the work were paid. The execution of these works took 5 months. I ask you to congratulate me on the initiative. Like the first one who answered. I ask my colleagues to continue.

Robert, thank you for supporting my initiative Honestly, I didn’t think that someone would be interested in my proposal: roll: and even got a little tense: cry: I did not serve in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, but I suppose that the investigators regularly report to the statistical authorities about his work. Perhaps their report form can be slightly modified and laid out for the general viewing of detectives.

By the way, I, as a member of the SRO Sudexpertov, I can add that the members of the SRO every three years are required to provide two expert opinions. This is to confirm their practical work. Otherwise, the expert must again take a training course (60 thousand rubles) and pass the exam. In my opinion, if you open a special branch in the MOD, where each member will regularly upload their own statistics, this will be only useful. If only because before entering into a discussion with a colleague, the detective will have a clear understanding of how much his opponent is competent in the practice of private investigation, and not in theory.

You see how interesting! Didn’t you answer your questions yourself? Personally, I doubt that someone else will answer. And forget about the profile. Useless. This has already been discussed a few years ago. But I will draw a conclusion from this. Since there is nothing to brag about, then there is no work.

Why so? It would be strange if I started this procedure, I didn’t have what to answer: D There are cases and there are many of them. Search for defendants, Interviews (survey on record), Identification of individuals and legal entities, Search for anonymous, domain name owners, Search for companies and warehouses, Test purchases, etc., etc.
I can even give references to arbitration for 2015, in which the court accepted my evidence as evidence:
Case No. A40-60566 / 15
Case No. A40-23705 / 15
Case No. A58-1533 / 2015

Simply, if each of us will "represent" our business in this way - then what's the point? Inconvenient, uninformative. Therefore, I propose to draw up a reporting form. For convenience and visibility.

Did you keep silent about the cost? : D

 

[Группа К]

Robert looks at the root. There is not a word about detectives in the CPC. But there is a provision on experts. Hence, it is necessary to seek the inclusion of detectives in the list of subjects who can act in court as experts with all the ensuing rights and obligations. In the meantime, there is no need for methods by which not only Krioni or Andrei Valerievich Zakharov or Robert can come to court and present their evidence, AND EVERYONE IN THIS FORUM KNOW HOW TO DO IT AND IT IS EASY TO EARN! What rests? SRO is a real way out that will allow the detective association to reach a new near-process level. Here is my opinion.

 

[Группа К]

I’ll write my answers to the questionnaire. 2, collecting information for the statement of claim, organizing the security of a large financial structure, checking employees and partners. The amount of 500,000, of which the costs of performing the work were paid. The execution of these works took 5 months. I ask you to congratulate me on the initiative. Like the first one who answered. I ask my colleagues to continue.

Robert, thank you for supporting my initiative Honestly, I didn’t think that someone would be interested in my proposal: roll: and even got a little tense: cry: I did not serve in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, but I suppose that the investigators regularly report to the statistical authorities about his work. Perhaps their report form can be slightly modified and laid out for the general viewing of detectives.

By the way, I, as a member of the SRO Sudexpertov, I can add that the members of the SRO every three years are required to provide two expert opinions. This is to confirm their practical work. Otherwise, the expert must again take a training course (60 thousand rubles) and pass the exam. In my opinion, if you open a special branch in the MOD, where each member will regularly upload their own statistics, this will be only useful. If only because before entering into a discussion with a colleague, the detective will have a clear understanding of how much his opponent is competent in the practice of private investigation, and not in theory.

You see how interesting! Didn’t you answer your questions yourself? Personally, I doubt that someone else will answer. And forget about the profile. Useless. This has already been discussed a few years ago. But I will draw a conclusion from this. Since there is nothing to brag about, then there is no work.

Why so? It would be strange if I started this procedure, I didn’t have what to answer: D There are cases and there are many of them. Search for defendants, Interviews (survey on record), Identification of individuals and legal entities, Search for anonymous, domain name owners, Search for companies and warehouses, Test purchases, etc., etc.
I can even give references to arbitration for 2015, in which the court accepted my evidence as evidence:
Case No. A40-60566 / 15
Case No. A40-23705 / 15
Case No. A58-1533 / 2015

Simply, if each of us will "represent" our business in this way - then what's the point? Inconvenient, uninformative. Therefore, I propose to draw up a reporting form. For convenience and visibility.

Did you keep silent about the cost? : D

The above arbitration cases went approximately 60 thousand rubles each without overhead. He did not want to hide the cost of such investigations, did not indicate the cost only for reasons of presenting everything in a convenient format. For example, in a consolidated table. Therefore, I asked my colleagues about the reporting form of the Ministry of Internal Affairs

 

[Роберт]

Robert looks at the root. There is not a word about detectives in the CPC. But there is a provision on experts. Hence, it is necessary to seek the inclusion of detectives in the list of subjects who can act in court as experts with all the ensuing rights and obligations. In the meantime, there is no need for methods by which not only Krioni or Andrei Valerievich Zakharov or Robert can come to court and present their evidence, AND EVERYONE IN THIS FORUM KNOW HOW TO DO IT AND IT IS EASY TO EARN! What rests? SRO is a real way out that will allow the detective association to reach a new near-process level. Here is my opinion.

Only you need to accept the changes, not only in the law on the Black Sea Front, but also in all PCs, even in the Code of Administrative Offenses. (By the way, no one was considering the possibility of involving detectives in the analysis of road accidents ?, violations of tax and customs legislation ....). If we change, then a whole block of laws.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Regarding the “scouts” ... especially for Robert I just have my own opinion too .... and I don’t like it when people lie .... about myself ... about the work that they talk about, in fact not knowing anything about this .... "cheeks are blowing" and so on .... therefore, this attitude and this applies only to individual "subjects" and with regards to specific evidence in the processes ... question interesting .... about their records ... just a few days ago I participated in the civil process for the allocation of the marital share in the inherited property ... during the process, the judge raised the question of the need to establish the location of the car (inherited property) which the sports side hid .... under an agreement with the plaintiff, a search was carried out for the car that was found ... the location was recorded ... but without mentioning our agreement with the customer ... the fixation was made not in the form of a report, but in a different way .... how to count this when "counting" participation in the courts (in response to Alexander’s proposal) ... by the way, the court’s decision our benefit ... I can provide for those interested ... and no problems with participation in the processes .... what Robert hinted at (about the problems) ....

 

[Роберт]

Problems with participation in the processes somewhere, maybe not, but in St. Petersburg every judge has his own cockroaches, he can even drive them out.

 

[Группа К]

Andrey, now I really don’t understand. How to establish the “location of the car” —that is, to search for property — without an agreement with the plaintiff (or his lawyer). I really wonder. This is a whole substantive conversation on which you can write a technique. I am not ironic if that:?
respectfully
Alexander