Investigations, disputes & due diligence
For boards, head offices and investors who need to establish the facts behind the numbers using verifiable source data.
A warning sign is a reason to look, not a finding
Evidence is preserved at the outset. Testing is defined by the agreed scope and available data. Reports distinguish verified findings from interpretations and state the limitations, so readers can assess the basis for each conclusion.
- 01 Suspected procurement or payroll fraud – vendors, pricing, approvals, payroll anomalies.
- 02 Funds or assets moved to related parties or through circular transactions.
- 03 A dispute with a partner, shareholder or supplier that turns on transactions and value flows.
- 04 An acquisition target that needs forensic due diligence.
- 05 The board or head office needs facts before taking action.
Four pieces of work, one set of facts
Fund tracing
Fund flows traced from their source to their use across bank, cash, loan and capital contribution records.
Fraud investigation
Vendor master data, pricing, approvals and payroll tested.
Dispute support
Transactions, economic interests and value flows clarified among stakeholders.
Forensic due diligence
Warning signs, related parties, unusual cash flows and evidence gaps before an investment.
From data request to a position you can defend
- 01 Preserve. Identify the relevant data and preserve it securely.
- 02 Reconstruct. Transactions and fund flows rebuilt from source data.
- 03 Test. Documents and systems tested; findings corroborated.
- 04 Quantify and report. Impact quantified; findings and limitations reported.
A forensic review does not, by itself, constitute a judicial expert opinion or a legal finding of wrongdoing.
- Forensic review report
- Fund-flow map
- Warning-sign register
- Impact quantification schedule
The form of each deliverable depends on the agreed scope, available data and supporting evidence.
Need the facts before you act?
Send a short description. We reply with the information we need and a proposed scope.
