LogoINVESTIGATE
File No. INV-2026Claims Investigation & Fraud Intelligence

EVERY
CLAIM
HAS A
STORY.
WE FIND
THE REAL ONE.

Surveillance. Witness development. Scene reconstruction. SIU-grade evidence packages delivered within 48 hours of assignment.

View Case Files

48hrs

Max deployment window

$2.4M

Avg. fraud exposure closed per quarter

94%

Evidence-to-verdict conversion rate

Close-up of surveillance investigation report with handwritten notes and a red pen underlining a contradictory statement
DOCUMENT: SV-REPORT-4471
NOTATION: STATEMENT INCONSISTENCY
DATE FLAGGED: 02/14/2026
STATUS: COURT-READY
CONFIDENTIAL

∆ 3 inconsistencies flagged

Cases Closed1,847◆Avg. Savings / Case$34,200◆States Licensed38◆Deployment Window< 48hrs◆Evidence Packages Delivered2,310◆Fraud Exposure Neutralized$63M+◆Adjuster Satisfaction97%◆Court-Ready Rate94%◆Cases Closed1,847◆Avg. Savings / Case$34,200◆States Licensed38◆Deployment Window< 48hrs◆Evidence Packages Delivered2,310◆Fraud Exposure Neutralized$63M+◆Adjuster Satisfaction97%◆Court-Ready Rate94%◆
CASE FILE 001Workers' Compensation — Soft Tissue Exaggeration

The Claimant Who Couldn't Lift a Box — Until the Weekend

A minor injury inflated into total disability. Surveillance said otherwise.

The Claim

Marcus D., a warehouse associate in Columbus, OH, filed a workers' comp claim alleging complete inability to lift more than five pounds following a reported back strain. Treating physician documented "severe mobility limitations" and recommended 18 months of disability leave. Total projected exposure: $187,000.

Red Flags Identified

  • →Injury reported on a Friday afternoon — no witnesses, shift supervisor off-site
  • →Claimant's prior employer (different state) showed two prior soft-tissue claims
  • →Social media showed activity inconsistent with reported limitations within 72 hours of filing
  • →Treating physician flagged in ISO database as high-frequency comp claimant referral source
"The footage alone killed the claim. What I couldn't have done without Investigate was the cross-referencing — the prior claims history tied a bow on it."

— Regional SIU Director, Midwest Carrier — Columbus, OH

Resolution

Six days of surveillance produced 14 hours of footage showing claimant loading kayaks onto a roof rack, playing recreational basketball, and carrying groceries unassisted. Evidence package delivered on day 8. Claim denied at review. No litigation filed.

Documented Savings$187,000

Average response: 4 business hours from assignment.

Investigator reviewing surveillance footage on monitors in a dark operations room, multiple screens showing outdoor activity
CASE: INV-4471-WC
DATE ASSIGNED: 01/14/2026
DATE CLOSED: 01/22/2026
─────────────────────────────
SV HOURS LOGGED: 14.2hrs
FOOTAGE FLAGGED: 3 incidents
PRIOR CLAIMS FOUND: 2 (separate states)
STATEMENT INCONSISTENCIES: 7
─────────────────────────────
OUTCOME: CLAIM DENIED
SAVINGS DOCUMENTED: $187,000

Methodology Deployed

Covert Surveillance
ISO ClaimSearch
Social Media OSINT
Prior Claims Cross-Ref
Employer Interviews
Activity Log Analysis
CASE FILE 002Commercial Property — Staged Water Damage

A Burst Pipe That Never Burst

Property damage claim with a suspiciously complete inventory list — filed at 11:47 PM.

The Claim

A restaurant owner in Philadelphia filed a $340,000 commercial property claim alleging catastrophic water damage from a burst pipe, destroying kitchen equipment, inventory, and custom millwork. The claim was filed digitally at 11:47 PM on a Sunday. The inventory list was itemized to the SKU level within 36 hours.

Red Flags Identified

  • →Claim filed Sunday night — plumber never called, no emergency remediation service dispatched
  • →SKU-level inventory list produced in 36 hours suggests pre-documentation before incident
  • →Neighboring business owners reported no unusual water activity or emergency vehicles
  • →Claimant's business had shown a 38% revenue decline over the prior two quarters
"The scene reconstruction was what made it. Anyone can dispute a timeline — you can't dispute physics."

— Commercial Lines Adjuster, Philadelphia Regional Office

Resolution

Scene reconstruction revealed the pipe damage was caused by deliberate mechanical force, not pressure failure. Neighboring business owners provided signed statements confirming no water emergency. Financial records obtained via subpoena showed the business was operating at a loss. Claim denied. Matter referred to state DA. Insurer recovered investigation costs.

Documented Savings$340,000
Close-up of a damaged commercial property interior with water stains on walls and ceiling, evidence markers on the floor
CASE: INV-5102-CP
DATE ASSIGNED: 02/03/2026
DATE CLOSED: 02/17/2026
─────────────────────────────
SCENE VISITS: 3
WITNESS STATEMENTS: 5 (signed)
EXPERT CONSULTATIONS: 1
FINANCIAL RECORDS REVIEWED: 14mo
─────────────────────────────
OUTCOME: CLAIM DENIED + REFERRAL
SAVINGS DOCUMENTED: $340,000

Methodology Deployed

Scene Reconstruction
Witness Development
Financial Record Review
Vendor Cross-Reference
Timeline Analysis
Expert Consultation
CASE FILE 003Multi-Carrier — Organized Liability Fraud Ring

Eleven Claimants. Four Carriers. One Intersection.

What looked like a routine slip-and-fall cluster was a coordinated fraud operation spanning three states.

The Claim

Over 14 months, four regional carriers independently processed a combined 11 liability claims — all involving slip-and-falls at commercial properties, all represented by the same law firm, and all citing the same independent medical examiner. No single carrier had visibility into the pattern. Total exposure across all carriers: $2.1 million.

Red Flags Identified

  • →Same plaintiff attorney across all 11 claims — three different carrier portals
  • →Single IME physician generating identical diagnostic language across unrelated incidents
  • →Claim locations clustered within a 12-mile radius; incidents all occurred during low-traffic hours
  • →Five of eleven claimants had prior relationships with each other (social media cross-reference)
  • →Property managers at three sites reported incidents they had no record of
"We had no idea we were looking at a ring. Investigate found the thread and pulled it — the whole thing unraveled in three weeks."

— VP of Claims, Multi-Line Regional Carrier — Northeast Division

Resolution

Investigation produced a 340-page evidence package linking all 11 claimants through a coordinated network. Findings shared with all four carriers simultaneously. Nine claims denied. Two settled at significantly reduced value. Matter referred to state insurance fraud bureau. Eight individuals charged. The plaintiff attorney is under bar investigation.

Documented Savings$2.1M

Average response: 4 business hours from assignment.

Multiple surveillance monitors in an operations center showing different outdoor locations and timestamps, investigator reviewing footage
CASE: INV-6800-RING
DATE ASSIGNED: 10/15/2025
DATE CLOSED: 11/04/2025
─────────────────────────────
CARRIERS INVOLVED: 4
CLAIMANTS IDENTIFIED: 11
STATES INVESTIGATED: 3
EVIDENCE PACKAGE: 340 pages
CHARGES FILED: 8 individuals
─────────────────────────────
OUTCOME: 9 DENIED / 2 REDUCED
EXPOSURE NEUTRALIZED: $2.1M

Methodology Deployed

Multi-Carrier Coordination
Attorney Pattern Analysis
IME Database Cross-Ref
Social Network Mapping
Covert Surveillance (×7)
Location Intelligence
ISO Multi-State Search
DA Liaison Protocol
Standard Operating Procedure

What Every Case
Package Includes

Every assignment produces a court-formatted evidence package. No ambiguity. No missing chain-of-custody. No surprises in discovery.

SV-01

Surveillance Package

HD video + timestamped still frames, GPS-verified location logs, activity contradiction matrix

WD-02

Witness Development

Signed statements, credibility scoring, prior-contact documentation

SC-03

Scene Reconstruction

Photogrammetric mapping, engineering consultation, physical evidence catalog

SR-04

Social Media Forensics

OSINT sweeps across 14 platforms, archived post recovery, timeline correlation

CR-05

Claims History Analysis

ISO ClaimSearch, multi-state cross-reference, pattern recognition report

ER-06

Evidence Package

Court-formatted binder, chain-of-custody log, expert witness referral ready

NOTE: ALL PACKAGES INCLUDE CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION
FORMAT: COURT-ADMISSIBLE — FEDERAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS
RETENTION: 7-YEAR SECURE ARCHIVE — AVAILABLE FOR REOPENED CLAIMS
EXPERT WITNESS: AVAILABLE ON REQUEST — 48-HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED

Not ready to assign?

Request a Capability Brief

Receive a redacted sample investigation report — the actual deliverable format, methodology notes, and chain-of-custody documentation your legal team will receive. No pitch deck. No sales call required.

Unsubscribe at any time. No automated sequences.

Why Investigate
01

48-Hour Deployment

From assignment to boots on the ground. Every case, every state, no exceptions.

02

SIU-Grade Evidence Standards

Every package built to federal rules of evidence. Chain-of-custody from day one.

03

Multi-Carrier Intelligence

We operate across carrier lines. Pattern recognition that single-carrier SIUs can't replicate.

04

Licensed in 38 States

No subcontracting. Our investigators, our standards, your jurisdiction.