The Client Who Wants the Report Changed
A PI completes a surveillance report for an attorney client. The report states that on Day 2 the subject was observed for only 45 minutes before the PI lost him in traffic; on Day 3 the subject was observed mowing his lawn for 20 minutes. The attorney asks the PI to 'tighten up' the report by removing the Day 2 gap and describing Day 3 as 'sustained physical activity inconsistent with claimed disability.' The PI's invoice is unpaid, and the attorney hints payment depends on a 'usable' report. The PI also has a retainer agreement that says reports are prepared for the client's use in litigation.
1. How should the PI respond to the request to remove the Day 2 gap? Explain the ethical and practical stakes.
Read the worked answer
The PI must refuse to remove the gap. Omitting a known limitation on the observation is a material misrepresentation - it makes the report imply continuous coverage that did not occur. If the report is used in litigation or discovery, the omission can be exposed, destroying the PI's credibility and exposing the PI (and possibly counsel) to sanctions. The PI's duty of accuracy runs to the record, not to the client's litigation preference.
The PI can offer a legitimate alternative: keep the gap and add clarifying context (e.g., traffic conditions, resumption of surveillance), which is truthful. What cannot happen is deletion of adverse detail.
2. Evaluate the 'sustained physical activity' characterization and the payment pressure.
Read the worked answer
'Sustained physical activity inconsistent with claimed disability' overstates 20 minutes of mowing. The PI may report the objective facts (duration, activity) and may offer an opinion within his competence clearly labeled as opinion, but should not adopt the attorney's conclusory phrasing as if it were observation. Better: 'Subject observed pushing a walk-behind mower for approximately 20 minutes.' Let the fact finder draw the inference.
On payment: conditioning payment on a 'usable' (i.e., altered) report is improper pressure. The PI should document the request, decline the alteration, and pursue the fee through the retainer agreement's terms. Capitulating to get paid converts a billing dispute into an integrity failure.