PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS v. PROCESS SERVERS …….
Why are California Private Investigators limited to the types of documents they can serve?
Virtually anyone can become a working California registered process server with $250. and a few free hours. State licensed private investigators either have law enforcement backgrounds or 6,000 hours of qualified experience working as a private investigator. Private investigators are trained professionals who are state-tested in “process service” and on their ”knowledge of laws that regulate process serving.“ In addition, private investigators must pass a thorough DOJ criminal background clearance BEFORE being issued a license. (Not the case for registered process servers).
FACT: ZERO experience necessary to become a “registered process server.”
P.I. FACT: 6,000 hours of qualified experience or law enforcement background is required to become a licensed California private investigator.
FACT: ZERO training required to become a “registered process server.”
FACT: ZERO education necessary to become a “registered process server.”
FACT: ZERO testing or pre-registration knowledge of ANYTHING to become a “registered process server.”
P.I. FACT: Private investigators are state tested and must pass a 150 question pre-licensing examination that includes subject matter in “process service” and “knowledge of laws that regulate process serving.”
Utah recently passed legislation that completely exempts private investigators from registration. Do you think California should follow suit?
View recent Press Releases here.
Laws for licenseing Private Investigators have been on the books long before their was any ability for a process server to become registered. The law also states that Licensed Private Investigators are exempt from registration. Due to trade associations and political influence Registered Process Servers were able to gain access to gated communities for service of process but not Licensed Private Investigators. This has been a ham string for many investigators for years. Now a change in the law has occured and it has been drafted and passed with flaws and no enforcement. This change should have no impact on the Process Servers and a substantial impact on the Licensed Investigator. I doubt it will have any financial impact on the process servers as they have all their commercial accounts with Law Firms that they service daily, unlike private investigators. It has been my experiance in over 40 years that I get called to do process service when the registered process server is unable to do the job, nothing new, nothing different. This new law was passed without thinking things thru and does not really help the private investigator. Many times I have had a problem with the guard at the gate and have had the local police called who for the most part are completely un-informed of the laws. I have usually “lucked out” because of the lack of knowledge by the police and the fact that I am licensed as a Private Investigator acting within the authority of my job while attempting to serve someone in a gated community and the police instructing the guard to allow me entrance.
I really do not understand what the Registered Process Servers have to bitch about, they are not going to suddenly loose money because of this new law.
I am concerned that my trade association CALI did not provide proper guidance in the drafting of this new law and someone will now have to come along and amend the law to properly allow employee’s of Private Investigation firms with proper I.D. to serve process and to make sure that the law has a bite to it for those who do not comply with allowing entry. It has been my experiance that People who live in gated communities and secure high rise buildings with controlled access are usually the people that are trying to avoid being served.
John,
Great insight and observations. One need only look at the qualifications of CALI’s Board of Directors, France Koehler and Jerry Desmond to understand how PI’s could be getting thrown under the bus with legislative shortsightedness, ignorance and failure.
Why was CALI 1st VP Chris Woodson convicted of False Impersonation of a Police Officer during the period he claimed to have been a decorated detective? (He changed his CALI profile on 7/26/12 to omit the obvious after it was brought to the attention of CALI President Michael Julian). Why was C.W. Sellers, District Director and INLITE Program Coordinator discharged from a law enforcement career? Anyone on the CALI Board ever had cocaine and alcohol issues? What officer has 100k in tax delinquencies? Who has a history of state and federal tax delinquencies and a bankruptcy? Which CALI board members supported their convicted felon member over a CALI member in good standing in federal court and lost? Who gained their qualifying investigative experience while a cult member in Synanon? Who was booted out of the police academy for improperly groping a female’s groin and breast areas? Who voted for a convicted criminal to receive CALI’s “Investigator of the Year” award after it brought down the career of two law enforcement officers?
The bigger question; do you know whose running CALI and attempting to run 88% of licensees who are not CALI members? If not, you should ask. As far as the remaining 88%, we have a voice and these are not the alleged leaders I want directing the future of my profession and career. Join the conversation. Get answers and make changes before it’s too late.
THIS COULD TAKE WAY OUR JOBS, AS PROCESS SERVERS IF THIS HAPPENS. OUR CLIENT’S WILL USE ONLY PI’S BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE THAN WE DO. THIS MAY COST THEM MORE MONIES, BUT THE CLIENT’S KNOW EXPERIENCE IS BETTER.
Yes, it could take away your jobs or require you to become more professional. California Registered Process Servers need ZERO experience or training to go into business. In fact, a convicted child molester or murderer can be registered and serving process in California in less than 4 hours. Yes, experience is better, so why don’t process serving associations, like CalsPro, want to conform their industry with training, state regulation and experience? You tell us?
Thanx for the hard work on this matter. Could we get a response format like the one you had for the id cards that were put to the Director and do something similiar for this matter. I have been hired over the years to serve process when the Attorney Services could not. I guess that qualifies me for something? Thousands of legal documents served over 35 years.
John,
Jeffrey Mason, (the current Director of BSIS and not at all unlike most all his predessors), seems incapable of doing much beyond talking about improvements for private investigators. It seems his resolve to the ID Card debocle is to stall improvement and give it back to the California Association of Licensed Investigators, (CALI), who are the same folks who admittedly created this (and more) short-sighted legislation. BSIS can’t even track compliance of the misguided ID Card situation because it’s beyond their capabilities. Sad, but true.
On January 11, 2012, Mr. Mason publically said he would have a “break away” group meeting to address the ID Card issue and that hasn’t happened. PI-PAC contacted him about it and his response was: “I have been instructed to hold off on doing any hearings until DCA can get its new management team on board.” See what $96,000.00 dollars-a-year buys in a Director?
Bureaucracy, cheap talk and seemingly endless back slapping are not advancing California’s PI profession. Expect a band-aid approach to another problem and more back slapping.
Please feel free to call Mr. Mason directly and ask him why BSIS is so far behind the curve. Office 916.575.7023 / Cell 916.416.8888
Thank you Tony!
I would like to thank you and (PI-PAC) for your work and keeping us all informed of the issues.
Tony Vain Investigations
650-642-4273
CAPI 25607
RPS 392
tvinvestigations.com