Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

SIA PI Training Update

G

Gabi

Guest
#21
Thanks for your reply Gavin.


I see Peter Heims has City & Guilds in Investigation Level 4, wouldn't that be better for someone to do that than doing a level 3 course?




Gabi,

Not as yet. The reason being the current perceived lack of demand to make it financially worthwhile for them.

There is still considerable and genuine doubt that the licensing of investigators in the private sector will actually happen. The prospect of a change of government to a party who have stated their intention to abolish a large number of Quangos (The SIA is a Quango) in order to save costs and reduce the national debt, has added to that uncertainty. This is why only one awarding body EDI) has so far offering a qualification for the SIA - PI Licence to practice - others (Edexcel etc) have done a lot of the groundwork but have suspended further (costly) work until the situation is officially and definitively clarified.

The SIA have publicly stated that an existing qulaification, more than 3 years old, would be considered by them to be to historical to be relevant, so it would be a waste of money for anyone to pay for training and sit the assessment now, as if licensing does come in but not for 3 years or more, then they will have to sit for the qualification all over again.

If licensing comes in and there is sufficient interest, then a university might be interested in offering a foundation degree. That said, there will be other, highly specialist courses on the market such as Covert Infiltration (Undercover), Covert Human Intelligence Source Cultivation and Handling etc, etc.

Good Luck.

Gavin Robertson
 

GRobertson

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
107
Likes
187
#22
Gabi,

The SIA have agreed that the bar is at the right height at level 3 when licensing is introduced - I suspect that they will gradually raise it by requiring some degree of re-training at the third renewal stage and possibly at each renewal therafter.

To raise it too high at commencement might debar some potentially good but very inexperienced future PIs. Cost wuld also have been taken into consideration.

My take on this is that the SIA want to get everyone in the net, as at present, nobody has anything other than a guess at how many people out there are carrying out the licensable activities of an investigator. Better to get them in at a lower level of qualification and gradulally improve it rather than frightening people off and driving them underground.

Good Luck,

Gavin Robertson
 

GRobertson

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
107
Likes
187
#23
grupomostra,

As I understand the situation, EU regulations relating to the free movement of goods and services means that a person qualified in one EU member country may provide theiservics in another - provided that they hold a qualification of equal or higher value than that which is required in the forien country. As far as Spain is concerned, I do not think that you will have the slightest problem.

You may be interested in some new legislation, which came into force in the UK at the end of December 2009, which will have a bearing on how you coduct your investigation business in the UK:

Provision of Services Regulations 2009

Article by Ian Stevens

CMS Cameron McKenna LLP

The Provision of Services Regulations 2009 came into effect on 28 December
2009, and implement the EU Services Directive (2006/123/EC) in the UK. The
aim of the Services Directive and the POS Regulations is to encourage the
provision of services between EU Member States by simplifying the process
for providing those services.

This is achieved by imposing a number of obligations on service providers in
relation to how they interact with actual and potential customers. These
obligations centre on the provision of basic information, the handling of
complaints, and the prohibition of discrimination.

Background

The Provision of Services Regulations ("POS Regulations") applies to
"service providers" - any individual or organisation providing a relevant
service for which they normally charge. It is not necessary for a service
provider to provide cross-border services in order for the POS Regulations
to apply, so a UK service provider providing services to UK customers will
also be subject to the POS Regulations.

The POS Regulations only apply to individuals resident in an EEA state, or
organisations established in an EEA state, that use or wish to use a
relevant service.

The services that are subject to the POS Regulations are broadly defined to
include any economic activity that is normally provided for remuneration. As
a result, the POS Regulations will apply to most service sectors, including:

* B2B services such as consultancy and professional services,
marketing, advertising, and commercial agents;
* B2B and B2C services such as architects, catering services, estate
agents, financial advisers and distributive trades; and
* B2C services such as tourism, restaurants, private schools and
universities, leisure services, plumbers and electricians.

Certain services are expressly excluded from the scope of the POS
Regulations, including financial services, employment contracts, transport
services, healthcare services, and gambling activities.

Information provision requirements

Service providers operating in the UK are required to make certain
information available to their customers, in accordance with the
requirements set out in Part 2 of the POS Regulations, regardless of where
they are based or established. In practice, this obligation is likely to
have a minimal impact on most UK service providers, as they are already
subject to information requirements under other legislation, such as the
Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations, the Distance Selling
Regulations and the E-Commerce Regulations. Some trade and professional
associations also impose specific requirements.

Information to be made available

Regulation 8(1) of the POS Regulations requires the following information be
made available to all customers:

* Contact details, including a postal or email address or fax number,
a telephone number, and the service provider's official address;
* Name;
* Legal status and form;
* Geographic address of where the service provider is established;
* Contact details for rapid and direct communication;
* Details of any registration on a public register;
* Details of any authorisation scheme to which the service provided is
subject;
* VAT number;
* Details of any professional title granted, if carrying on a
regulated profession;
* General terms and conditions;
* Any contractual terms, if any, regarding the governing law
applicable to the contract;
* The existence of any after-sales guarantee that is not legally
required;
* The price of the service;
* The main features of the service; and
* Any professional liability insurance or guarantee the service
provider is required to hold.

Information to be provided upon request

In addition to the above, if a customer so requests, service providers are
required to provide the following information: the price of the service, or
an estimate of the price, or at least details of the method to be used for
calculating the price; a reference to any professional rules applicable in
the EEA state in which the service provider is established; information
about any other activities the service provider carries out which are
directly linked to the service in question, and any steps taken to avoid a
conflict of interests; and any codes of conduct to which the service
provider is subject.

Method and timing of provision of information

The POS Regulations give service providers a choice of four methods for
making this information available to the customer: on the service provider's
own initiative; easily available where the service is provided or the
contract is concluded; easily available electronically; or in any
information document which includes a detailed description of the services.

All the above information should be considered as pre-contractual or
pre-service commencement information. The service provider should therefore
make it available, or provide it if asked, in good time before signing the
contract or, if there is no written contract, in good time before the
service is provided.

Complaints handling requirements

All service providers operating in the UK must comply with the complaints
handling requirements set out in Part 2 of the POS Regulations, irrespective
of where the service provider is based or established. Under Regulation 12,
a service provider must respond to a complaint from a customer as "quickly
as possible". Since complaints can vary in complexity and seriousness, there
is no set time limit or definition in the POS Regulations. The Department
for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) has provided guidance on this
point, saying that factors to be considered when establishing what might
constitute 'as quickly as possible' would include the means and ease by
which the customer can be contacted; the nature and complexity of the
specific case; the availability of the customer; whether information is
needed from a third party; and any language issues.

In addition to the above, service providers are subject to a requirement to
use their "best efforts" to resolve the complaint in a way in which the
customer could reasonably be expected to be satisfied. It should be noted
that this obligation does not apply to vexatious complaints - complaints
that are clearly unsubstantiated or malicious, not those that are merely
annoying or inconvenient.

Prohibition on discrimination

Under Part 5 of the POS Regulations, all service providers operating in the
UK who are based in the UK or another EEA state must comply with the
obligation not to discriminate, in their general conditions of supply,
against customers who are individuals because of their place of residence.
Discrimination in this sense would include offering the services on
different terms, providing a different service, or refusing to provide a
service.

This prohibition will not apply if the service provider can show that the
difference in general conditions is directly justified by objective
criteria. There is no definitive list of objective criteria, since these
will vary from service provider to service provider, and from service to
service, but examples of such objective criteria include: lack of adequate
IP protection; additional costs; additional risks due to different rules in
EEA states; and changing market conditions.

These objective criteria can be used as a basis for an outright refusal to
provide a service. However, such a blanket refusal will be more difficult to
justify than any refusal or adaptation on a case-by-case basis. In order to
justify an outright refusal, a service provider must be sure that providing
the service to the relevant location would put "excessive strain" on the
business.

Enforcement

When a breach of the POS Regulations by a service provider harms the
collective interests of all consumers, an enforcement body (such as the
Office of Fair Trading) will have the right to take action under the
Enterprise Act 2002. However, individual consumers cannot bring complaints
or actions under the Enterprise Act and will need to seek redress for any
breach of the POS Regulations through the court.

Summary

Many service providers will already fulfil all or most of the information
provision obligations imposed by the POS Regulations, as they will be
subject to similar requirements under other legislation. Where a conflict
arises between the POS Regulations and any other EU legislation, the other
legislation will take precedence. It is therefore unlikely that the POS
Regulations will cause any major changes or problems for UK service
providers, but it is nonetheless advisable for businesses to undertake a
review of their processes to ensure compliance with the information
provision, complaints handling and non-discrimination requirements of this
new legislation.


Good Luck,

Gavin Robertson
 

Jannerlad1273

Full Registered User
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
96
Likes
72
#25
Firstly I'm not looking to start a cat fight with my question and I may have missed a trick as I've only skimmed through this however, can one of the training providers advise me of how and if a course of what ever description is going to enhance the ability of people that have been PI's for some time, ex police civi/mil or is it just another money making exercise for the training providers and the SIA much the same as many may feel the CP license was for guy's like RMP (Longmore) DPG, SF or people who had generally been in the industry for some time.

Does any of the above credentials of ex civ/mil police go anyway to getting a SIA license as a PI.

Many thanks.

Jannerlad.
 

romark

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
265
Likes
184
#26
Money making exercise just about sums it up for me.

I only do surveillance, which wont be taught on this course, and I will still need a PI licence. Anything that will be taught on the course I can research it on the net.

For anyone that is new to the industry then maybe it will be of some use but from what I have read about CP on here, bringing in licencing hasn't improved the industry in any way.

Hopefully a change of government will mean it wont come into force till I can retire and buy my boat.
 

GRobertson

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
107
Likes
187
#27
The accredited, licence to practice, private investigation qualification is now available from Edexcel and IQ in addition to EDI.

Good Luck,

Gavin Robertson
 

davew877

New Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
171
Likes
100
#30
Marcus,

This is slightly out of date:

The Immediate Future

To cut a long story short – the panel must agree the NOS by August 2005 and publish it to the industry for consultation by October, so that the SIA can publish its licensing criteria by November and therefore start the issue of licensing within 12 months thereafter, probably within 6-8 months.
 

Phillips

Full Registered User
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
37
Likes
22
#31
As someone who employes investigators, i am soory, but i would never employ someone who that taken this type of course as a route in to the industry. What i look for is Police/Customs or intelligence service background.

Lets start thinking a little more about standards and a little less about trying to make a fast buck![/QUOTE]


Nice to see some honesty!!!
 

Summer

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
344
Likes
245
#32
Lets be honest thou, are we really saying that this is the standard that we sould set for base Investigator qualifications?

I really do hope not or we will have every man and his dog becomming an "investigator".

As per the SIA CP qualification or NOT, we need standards. real standards, not just people trying to make money out of running courses that any mupet could pass.

As someone who employes investigators, i am soory, but i would never employ someone who that taken this type of course as a route in to the industry. What i look for is Police/Customs or intelligence service background.

Someone is not going to get a job because they have passed this course - not with my company anyway!

Lets start thinking a little more about standards and a little less about trying to make a fast buck!
I don't think I will ever be applying for a job with you then, bugger, I was banking on it too :D
 
Last edited:

Summer

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
344
Likes
245
#34
Were you wanting to add some useful comments or just wanting to gob off?

Well gobbing off is a speciality of mine, seems a shame to stop now. Ok to explain the gobbing off statement, it was an off the cuff, good natured, spur of the moment kind of thing. At no point was it intended to offend or provoke a reaction. I do however not appreciate the condescending tone, I am neither A child nor your child.

Moving on......ok then here is my input and I am not interested in a slanging match so I will endeavour to keep things as unbiased as possible. I respect your opinion that the level of training out there is sub standard and couldn't agree more. However that level of training afforded me my start in this industry and quite frankly I haven't done too badly I don't think, not being military, ex police, special forces or having any of the other bells and whistles, it allowed me a foot in the door to gain experience.

Now you state that 60 hours of training will afford any muppet the chance to call themselves an investigator and insinuating that some TP's are after making a fast buck and I have no doubt that in some cases you are right, CTR not being one of them, however you offer or offered an investigation course that spans 7 days (admittedly your course dates haven't been updated since 2009 but the defensive driving ones haven’t been updated since May 2010 either), stating that it could benefit ‘those who are new to the security sector and are seeking to enhance their career or earning potential’. You have no prerequisite for the specific brand of operator that you hold in such high regard and would only consider employing.

The same applies to the 5 day surveillance course that you advertise on your website, (again admittedly no course dates since 2009), that also states that it would benefit ‘anyone who wishes to work in the area of surveillance or investigations’. None of these courses costs less than £2000.00 incl VAT. I am sure that anyone you have trained in surveillance or in investigations came off your course calling themselves a surveillance operator or an investigator. BTW yes I have noticed that you do not run any SIA or BTEC courses, however I believe the principle remains the same.

Now whether or not you still run these course I cannot comment on because I do not know and I would not like to presume. I am also not commenting on the quality, I have no doubt an individual of your experience and knowledge provides well above and beyond any standards of education set by the likes of the SIA as I know CTR do. However I would think that with such a vehement dislike for anything non 'super-duper' (yes that is the technical term) I find it difficult to digest the fact that you are or were willing to train 'anyone, and the key word here being anyone, new to the sector or wishing to further their career or earning opportunities' and put these individuals down as potential muppets in the next breath
 
Last edited:

Jannerlad1273

Full Registered User
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
96
Likes
72
#35
The last thing that the investigation industry needs is the same that the SIA did to the Close Protection industry.

I dont want to see courses that make peole think that they can pass and get work in this industry. I want to see courses for those who have police/customs/intelligence experince. CPD type courses, thats all that are required, that and a police check.

60 hourse to become an investigator? are you having a laugh? Try 6-10 years government service as a baseline, topped up with specialised courses - this gives standards.

By not setting standards and drawing a line in the sand - oh fcuk it. look at the CP industry!!!!
Well said chap,

I think this guy needs listening to, some real value here for my money.

It's people with sense & experience we need on panels policing the industry not half wit idiots who have no cred what so ever. The ones that do have cred must be being blinded by financial intensives, with that said there could be room for an investigation there. lol.
 

Scab

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
3,062
Likes
1,249
#37
Is Summer employed by CTR? only she blows smoke up there arrses in a lot of posts.
Nice! A spectacular dodge of all of her points highlighting the extensively hypocritical nature of what was otherwise a damned good post you made earlier.

60 hours to become an investigator is not enough when your company provides what on the face of it are shorter courses. Ouch.
 

Summer

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
344
Likes
245
#38
Is Summer employed by CTR? only she blows smoke up there arrses in a lot of posts.
Did you have a useful comment or were you just wanting to gob off?

To answer your question....

No I am not employed by CTR, I did however train with them and while I have no other point of reference as I have only done one CP course, as Scab very fairly points out on so many other posts, what I can say about CTR is that I feel they delivered much much more than the core competencies required by the SIA, their after care service is second to none, and I have been in solid contact, I don't mean weekly or even monthly or anything like that, with them since training with them, and thank them and the instructors, one in particular, you know who you are, for several opportunities they have put my way. I do not believe in blowing smoke up peoples arses, I do however believe in giving credit where credit is due.

PS, please excuse the rather over enthusiastic use of comma punctuation, I'm on my lunch break and my grammar skills appear to have left me!!!!!!
 
Last edited:

Summer

Longterm Registered User
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
344
Likes
245
#39
Fair point :) Summer, i was only pulling your pisser as it were.

Our courses (apart from the driving courses) are all getting replaced in the New Year with Intermidiate and Advanced courses - and yes, there will be pre-requsites to attending these courses.

As for the SIA, i personally could not give a shite what they require - they are dead in the water and not fit to draw a wage.

Our new courses will be based on police & intelligence service courses and will differ greatly from what is on offer with other providers.
Fair play, good luck with that :)....oh well, looks like I won't be allowed on any of your courses either then, can't work for you, can't train with you, whats left for me now, tescos it is then !!!!!!! :rolleyes:
 

CTR Services Ltd

Security Directors
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
129
Likes
122
#40
Summer, thank you for your supportive words of our training and company, appreciated...

Int Int, would you be kind enough to post a name for who is posting your statements so people know who they are talking to? Also you've probably learnt now to think before you post and not slag ordinary paying students off whilst at the same taking their money for courses that you admit are far too short?

In addition to that you will now be offering future courses that are no use to anyone who isn't ex this or ex that? How are these courses going to benefit members of CPW?

Kind Regards

Ade
CTR Services Ltd
 
Top Bottom