In the movies, a private investigator is often a trench-coat wearing, chain-smoking, bush-dwelling, smooth-talking, lady-killing character with a Bogart smile.
In real life, some are smooth-talking and some are occasional bush-dwellers. But as far as the rest of the image, well, that's just Hollywood, sweetheart.And while the romantic notions about private investigators may spill from the silver screen into reality, the noble image hasn't.
For years, many local private investigators have worried their profession wasn't seen as professional. The only requirement for a license was a fee. The only way unhappy customers found recourse was by suing. The only continuing education was longevity. And as for networking, that existed mostly by accident.
Stories about bad private investigator experiences in Utah were as common as bad husband stories in a beauty salon.
It was about that time, the fall of 1994, that a group of private investigators got together and decided that change was overdue. Their profession was badly in need of a makeover.
Three years later, the laws governing private investigators are very different. For one thing, they exist. Until recently, anyone with the notion could become a private investigator. All they needed was a phone and $30 for a business license.
Seeking public redemption
Thanks to a new law, a section of the Utah State Code now deals specifically, and strictly, with private investigators. Among other things, the law establishes the following:
- Minimum experience and/or education requirements for those trying to get into the profession.
- A uniform state licensing requirement.
- An oversight board that has the authority to recommend approval or denial of license applications and recommend disciplinary action against those who break the rules.
- Requirements regarding adequate record keeping.
- Penalties for those who break the law.
- The law also forbids those with criminal records from holding a private investigator's license.
Just as Wyatt Earp brought order to the lawless West, many private investigators are hoping state regulation brings public redemption to their profession.
Brooke and Rand Karrington were among that handful of private investigators who spearheaded the effort to get a bill regulating the profession passed through the Utah Legislature in 1995.
In business since 1989, they said they were tired of hearing stories about private investigators acting illegally. They contacted other private investigators who shared their concerns. One investigator, a former federal law enforcement officer, suggested state regulation.
"We had misgivings about bringing the state into it," said Rand Karrington, who was the first president of the Private Investigators Association of Utah. "But we all agreed our profession was pretty much out of control."
Business licenses, which were the only requirement for acting as a private investigator before 1995, could be issued in 14 different jurisdictions in Salt Lake County. There were questions about whether you needed a business license to conduct investigations in another jurisdiction, and questions about whether you need to be licensed by a city or just the county, among others.
So the group approached the Department of Public Safety asking whether they would be interested in being the regulatory agency.
"There was a lot of inside support from the Department of Public Safety," Brooke Karrington said. One official told them that if they didn't take the initiative to do something about the profession's problems, it would only be a matter of time before they had something imposed upon them.
Officials also suggested they formalize their group by forming an association, which would help them lobby legislators.
That was the spring of 1994. Using the yellow pages as their guide, the ad hoc group called any and every private investigator they could find to ask them if they wanted to join an association. In 1994, they formed the nonprofit group now known as Private Investigators Association of Utah.
Some members of the newly formed group volunteered to be the lobbying team. They logged hundreds of hours on Capitol Hill steering the bill through the political process successfully. It became law in the summer of 1995.
Upsides and downsides
Two years later, reaction to the law is mixed.
Supporters of the law say its obvious upside is that the law sends a message to the public that private investigators want to be held to higher standards. Rand Karrington said the law gives the public a number of guarantees that have never existed in Utah.
"The public can be ensured that a person entrusted with a private investigator's license is not a convicted felon," he said. "There are also consequences to actions."
For the first time, customers who feel they were cheated have a place to go to complain. If that complaint is proved true, there are penalties ranging from fines to license revocation.
The absence of any standard allowed the sins of a few bad private investigators to taint the reputation of a lot of honest people, according to those who like the new regulations.
But there are others who think there are problems with the law, and even some who think it was actually an effort to rid the business of future competition.
For example, the law automatically granted licenses to those already licensed by another agency to do business as a private investigator, as long as they passed the background check. In the future, those hoping to break into the profession have to either work directly for an attorney or work as an apprentice to a licensed private investigator.
The law requires two years or 2,000 hours of experience as an investigator. That bothers people like Terry Lindquist, who supports regulation in general.
Seven years ago Lindquist decided to act on a longtime desire to be a private investigator.
"I just went out, hung a shingle, put on my best suit and went to every law firm and insurance company in town," he said. It took about two years before he could work exclusively as a private investigator.
Experience requirements
The Logan investigator believes the experience requirements are too stringent.
"We've made it very difficult for the next generation of private investigators to get involved," he said. In fact, if he were thinking about breaking into the profession today, under the new law, he wouldn't do it.
"You can't get a license without someone sponsoring you, but no one is hiring," he said. Lindquist has sponsored a number of people, but he said there isn't enough work to keep them busy full time.
Then there is the issue of liability. Who's responsible for the apprentice if he or she breaks the law?
Lindquist said because apprentices can't make enough money working for one investigator or even one agency, they work for a number of agencies and investigators in order to support themselves and their families.
"They made these laws without really thinking about them," he said.
Krista Pickens, a police detective turned private investigator, said she believes the state might get itself into trouble with the licensing law.
"Now, in a way, they're vouching for someone," she said. "If someone commits malpractice, it seems to me people could look to the state (for responsibility). . . . They're taking us on like we're police officers."
As for the experience requirement, she said, "all the training in the world doesn't make you a good investigator."
She and a number of other private investigators believe the law doesn't guarantee customers any more satisfaction than before.
The new law also gives private investigators access to information that the general public can't get. While investigators like the Karringtons believe that's a good thing that allows them to prove they can be trusted with confidential information, others believe that's not only dangerous but unfair.
Many of those who hire private investigators aren't even aware of the state regulations. They're also not relying on the state to tell them who can be trusted.
Criminal defense attorney Ken Brown said he relies on investigators in only about 20 percent of his cases, but they are his biggest ones. He said he cares about licensing only if it means his investigator will have credibility problems at trial.
"I'm going to make my own decisions," he said. "I'm not going to rely on BCI (the Bureau of Criminal Investigations) to tell me who's a good investigator."
He is supportive of the background checks and the industry's efforts to improve quality. Brown said he'll continue to use investigators based on his experience and the experiences of other lawyers.
"The word gets out," he said.
Steve McCaughey, who is also a criminal defense lawyer, said he believes imposing some sort of qualifications on the industry is a good thing.
"Anytime you have some sort of qualifications, I think it's a good thing," McCaughey said. "It sort of screens (applicants). Anybody can call themselves a private investigator."
And right now that's still true despite the law taking effect more than two years ago.
Enforcement a problem
There are a number of problems with the law that was passed, including the fact that officials can't enforce it.
The law makes it a class A misdemeanor to work as a private investigator without a state license, but a technicality makes it impossible to prosecute. The law applies the penalty to any "licensee, registrant or employee" who violates the law. Because the statute doesn't include the words "any person," those who investigate without a license can't be prosecuted.
Todd Peterson, a supervisor for Bureau of Criminal Identification, said they tried to make amendments to the law during the 1997 legislative session, but the bill never made it to the floor.
Right now, all officials can do is ask those working without a license to get one. But Peterson said they are working to enforce the other provisions of the law, which apply to licensed private investigators. That includes ensuring agencies keep adequate records and acting on complaints filed with the board.
Still, the fact that the law exists is promising to many.
"It does require a sense of professionalism throughout the industry," Lindquist said. "It does ensure the client is better protected."