Question

A man in San Rafael County was discovered committing workers' compensation fraud. He had been observed working while at the same time receiving disability benefits. Surveillance showed the man working at an automobile auction. The investigator interviewed the owner of the auction and found that the claimant was being paid $200 per week in cash for washing vehicles and performing other shop tasks. Surveillance video showed the man carrying 25-pound bags of pet food, loading boxes, and rummaging through a trash dumpster. Obviously, he was not hurt very badly. 1. Was surveillance the proper method to use in this case? Why? 2. What are some restrictions to be careful about in conducting surveillance?

Answer 1

Answer:

1. Yes

2. - privacy concerns

- may lack full details.

Explanation:

1. In this scenario the automobile auction house would need to show video evidence of his (San Rafael's) fraud activities to the investigator.

2. Privacy concerns such as how the information gotten from video surveillance is used may pose a challenge.

There's also the reality of a lack of full details. For instance, San Rafael may be deaf a disability that cannot be reflected well on a surveillance video that shows him working.