Investigation services
Commercial litigation support
Witness enquiries, evidence reviews and clear chronologies for legal teams handling contested matters.
Evidence schedules and chronologies structured for your legal team.
Begin with the legal team’s factual questions.
Everguard supports solicitors, in-house counsel, litigation teams and insolvency practitioners with defined investigative tasks. The instruction may address one missing account or organise a substantial file into a coherent factual record. The required output, authorised sources and intended recipient should be clear before work begins.
A chronology, witness statement, entity review and full factual report are different deliverables. A contained assignment can identify where additional evidence would be useful before further witness, desktop or field enquiries are commissioned.
Select the tasks that address the gap.
Work can be scoped around a particular event, transaction, person or documentary inconsistency. Relevant tasks may include:
- Witness identification and lawful location enquiries, followed by separately agreed contact.
- Issue-led interviews and statement preparation with relevant annexures.
- Document-led factual enquiries and source-linked chronologies.
- Corporate or entity research relevant to the dispute.
- Evidence-gap assessment and targeted further-enquiry options.
Witness statements with a clear source and status.
An interview plan starts with the material questions, known chronology and records likely to assist. It explores the witness’s role, direct knowledge and opportunity to observe. Personal recollection remains distinct from information received from others, assumptions and a document used to assist memory. Uncertain dates or words are not converted into unwarranted precision.
The prepared statement is returned for witness review and correction. Relevant records are identified and linked as annexures where appropriate. Review, correction, signing or attestation status is recorded, so a draft, reviewed account and executed statement remain distinguishable. Interpreter, accessibility and recording arrangements are discussed when required by the proposed interview.
The detail behind the enquiry.
Explore the scope, evidence requirements and practical considerations.
Create a source trail the reader can follow.
Material events are linked to the supporting record or account. The chronology preserves competing sequences, approximate dates and differences between contemporaneous documents and later recollections. An evidence schedule identifies the material and its role in the report.
A supplied screenshot, selected extract or incomplete message chain can leave contextual questions. The review records those limits and identifies the further material that may assist. Organising another team’s file does not certify the authenticity or completeness of every item in it.
Factual support for insurance disputes.
A legal instruction involving a CTP or public liability matter can require witness accounts, incident chronology, scene circumstances or clarification of supplied records. The scope can be limited to those factual tasks. A later scene visit records the conditions observed at that visit. It does not establish every condition at the reported event.
Medical assessment, specialist collision reconstruction, engineering opinion, policy interpretation and liability decisions remain separate from this factual support. Broader claim enquiries can be discussed through the insurance and claims pathway with their own questions, authority and reporting requirements.
Separate investigation from legal judgement.
The handover explains supported facts, allegations, competing accounts and investigator analysis, together with material gaps and limitations. Where requested, a briefing can help the instructing team examine the source trail and consider further work.
Litigation strategy, legal characterisation, privilege arrangements and court requirements remain with the instructing lawyers. The appointment does not guarantee admissibility, privilege or a particular dispute outcome.
Before we begin
Practical questions.
Practical questions.
Can we commission one statement without a full investigation?
Yes. A single statement or defined group of interviews can be scoped around the factual questions, relevant records, witness arrangements and required output.
Will a witness be able to correct the prepared account?
The statement is provided for review and correction, with its review and signing status recorded. Draft and executed versions retain their distinct status in the handover.
Can you review a file prepared by another team?
A review can organise authorised supplied material, develop a chronology and identify gaps. The output states the verification undertaken and does not certify material that was not independently checked.
Can the engagement cover only a chronology?
Yes. Agree the questions, source material, date range, level of detail and output format. Additional interviews or field enquiries can be considered separately.
Related services
Begin with a clear brief
Identify the evidence your matter needs.
Outline the factual gap, the material already available and the deliverable required by your legal team.