Hm, I've been reading through all the laws about licensure in Arizona and have found myself intrigued and enthusiastic about what I have found. I would love to hear other members' feedback on this as well.
This is going to be fairly long and mildly complex post, so be prepared to re-read if need be. Check it out:
According to the current Arizona statutes regulating private investigators, there are several exemptions listed here:
http://azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?...32&DocType=ARS
Now, while I do not fit into most of them, one does stand out to me as potentially quite useful:
First a few caveats before I get to why this is important:2. A person, firm or corporation, or an employee of a person, firm or corporation, engaged in the business of obtaining and furnishing financial and related personal information for others, including a consumer reporting agency as defined in the fair credit reporting act (15 United States Code section 1681a), if the person, firm or corporation does not engage in other investigative research that is an investigative consumer report as defined in the fair credit reporting act (15 United States Code section 1681a) and if the employee is not employed or connected with any private investigator or private investigator's business.
1) A "consumer reporting agency" as defined in the cited federal statute ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15...1---a000-.html ) is defined as follows:
This does not apply to either my desired or real operations.(f) The term “consumer reporting agency” means any person which, for monetary fees, dues, or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages in whole or in part in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties, and which uses any means or facility of interstate commerce for the purpose of preparing or furnishing consumer reports.
2) An "investigative consumer report" is defined as the following from the federal statute:
Essentially, it would appear as if a report of this nature consists SOLELY of interviewing people to gain more information about an individual. This being the case, it would seem that I would simply not be allowed to perform this manner of inquiry, but that all others are quite fine.(e) The term “investigative consumer report” means a consumer report or portion thereof in which information on a consumer’s character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living is obtained through personal interviews with neighbors, friends, or associates of the consumer reported on or with others with whom he is acquainted or who may have knowledge concerning any such items of information. However, such information shall not include specific factual information on a consumer’s credit record obtained directly from a creditor of the consumer or from a consumer reporting agency when such information was obtained directly from a creditor of the consumer or from the consumer.
3) Finally, the state regulation at the very beginning states that the unregulated nature of the work entails obtaining and furnishing financial and other related personal information for others.
Now onto why this is important: This is important for me because I already own a corporation under which I may do all my business. According to this statute, it would appear that so long as I do not directly interview people to produce an "investigative consumer report", I may in fact perform private investigation in all other realms inasmuch as I also obtain and furnish information concerning the financial status/practices of the individual as well. As long as I furnish the one, I may as well investigate all other "related personal information".
Some may call this a loophole, but I actually wouldn't.
Laws mean what they say; if a legislature explicitly wished for certain activities to be regulated, they would have stated so explicitly.
Additionally, I feel fairly certain that there will always be nay-sayers (as is appropriate with any discussion), however I do feel that my argument is solid and that I can make a case for getting into the field this way.
Let's hear it