Regulatory crime and the missing victim: five practical steps for investigators
Updated: Sep 2
Too many regulatory case files explain the technical breach but not the harm experienced by the people exposed to it. This article considers how investigators can identify victims earlier, obtain better witness evidence, use Victim Personal Statements, and plan for special measures where needed.
Why witnesses of fact are missing in regulatory investigations
Witness statements in regulatory investigations are still dominated by professional voices. This article draws on experience of directing and managing criminal investigations in the regulatory sphere, particularly in fire safety and housing.
In many regulatory case files, the evidence is built largely around inspectors, surveyors and other professional witnesses. Their technical and documentary evidence is essential, but they are not the only people who can speak to the alleged offending. Tenants living with serious hazards, residents affected by unsafe common parts, workers exposed to unmanaged risks, and neighbours affected by continuing nuisance may all have important evidence about what actually happened.
Yet in practice those statements are often missing. Files progress with schedules, photographs, inspection findings, enforcement records and, where technical issues are disputed, expert opinion, but without direct accounts of what it was like to live in the building, work in the premises, or report concerns that were ignored. The formal system is documented in detail, while the lived experience of those exposed to the risk is often left at the margins.
