Now put yourself in your committee members’ shoes. They open their email box, save documents to their desktop or to a folder in order to work on them, and then they realize, they don’t know which of your drafts is latest version. They have no idea which draft to edit and send back to you. The pile of confusing documents on their desktop is no better than a confusing pile of loose sheets of paper on your desk. Both waste time and money, both take up needed space, and both create big problems.

The Document Signature is message at bottom of each document that either you or your collaboration partners work on. The message includes vital information, such as what is status of latest draft of document you are looking for and where you can find it.

Groupware which Displays Version History

It may still be a little difficult to piece together all of various drafts of your document, and oftentimes it is helpful to have a visual of editorial process which document went through. A groupware which can display a draft history will make it even easier to understand where documents have been, when they were saved, who worked on them, what changes were made, and how they were sent.

Groupware with Version History will create a family tree of document if you want trace document versions. This means you will know who’s, what’s, when’s, where’s, and how’s of every budget report, sales presentation, market research results, and anything else your company collaborates on with groupware.

In reality, after weeks, months, or even years of collaborating on reports and contracts, finding right draft, even with some groupware packages, can be like finding a needle in a haystack. Keeping track of all of them is almost an unthinkable task. Groupware is a software meant to provide document management services to businesses, but business cannot afford to get an incomplete suite. Happy hunting.

The age of Uniform Commercial Code Financial Statement (they expire after five years in 48 states) would determine extent of possible equity in equipment and fixtures, which may pertain to an individual and/or his business. In case of a manufacturing facility, with depreciation schedules as they are, clearly a 4 ½-yearold UCC-1 on a piece of equipment that was purchased new at time UCC was filed would still retain equity, and thus constitute discovery of a “hidden” asset which may be liquidated.

There is also a little known side of UCC spectrum that is often ignored by examiners. This is searching for “Secured Party” status on a UCC-1. Clearly, this would be where subject is, in fact, Creditor on a UCC-1, with implications of discovery of this type of hidden asset quite obvious. Many states do not provide “Secured Party” status indexing, and thus, while it is not available in most states, it can be expected within certain state jurisdictions where asset search will be based.

Sole Proprietorship Entities

A search should be conducted of Fictitious Business Name and/or Assumed Name Index of applicable county or parish level of jurisdiction to determine if subject’s name appears as a Registrant, or Declarant of a Fictitious Business Name or Assumed Name Registration. The discovery of these items usually constitutes discovery of additional bank account search possibilities, as well as entities and/or enterprises that may be unknown to institution or client.

Other Assets In many instances, an individual could hold offshore assets in form of trusts, partnerships, and so forth. A thorough search of applicable public records within jurisdictions germane to activities of subject can often reveal information, which might lead to discovery of these offshore assets. This particular type of asset search is highly sophisticated, and should be left specifically to agencies that have demonstrated high levels of competence in international asset research. The trustworthiness of agency should be scrutinized before entering into a contract.

LIABILITIES

Litigation

A search should be conducted of applicable jurisdiction to determine extent of possible litigation involving subject from both current and prior perspectives. A standard expectation for research should be primarily an index review of cases, which are outstanding, and if required, an analysis to determine extent of “pending” lawsuits, which, as of date of report, remain unresolved. The search should be conducted on a ten-year basis, with pending actions focused within a five-year window.

Federal, State, and Local Tax Liens

A search of applicable jurisdictions should be made in Recorder’s Office to determine extent of federal, state and/or local tax liens that might impact net equity position of subject. The existence of, for example, a $150,000 federal tax lien could wipe out all equity positions enjoyed by assets discovered throughout course of research. Thus, discovery of this liability is critically important in assessment of subject’s net worth and ability to pay.

Bankruptcies

A search should be conducted through applicable jurisdictions germane to residences and/or activities of subject of U.S. District Bankruptcy Court records for a ten-year period. The purpose of this research is to determine if subject has established a pattern of filing bankruptcy, and/or possibly (in event a bankruptcy is discovered) to scrutinize assets and/or creditor’s list to determine if there was fraudulent misrepresentation of assets and/or liabilities at outset of credit relationship with institution.

Judgments

Searches for Abstracts of Judgments, or Judgments, are usually conducted in applicable jurisdiction’s Recorder’s Grantee/Grantor Indices. The searches should reflect primary judgments that were filed in applicable jurisdiction by court, and can be included in research for pending and/or previous lawsuits at court jurisdiction level. The Abstract of Judgment concept is that a particular judgment is “extracted” from court records, and “abstracted” to county jurisdiction, in order to encumber items of personal and/or real property which are identified, and are targeted for attachment and liquidation to pay off claim. Plaintiff actions can be considered potential assets, and should not be overlooked.

Miscellaneous Liabilities

Additional searches should be conducted on a wide-area basis, both at state level (Secretary of State) and county or parish jurisdictional level, to determine if additional liabilities exist from standpoint of judgments, tax liens, or county-based UCC Financing Statements. These identify specific types of assets such as crops, timber, and inventory. They are not usually found at state level UCC search, and most agencies do not provide them unless requested to do so. This search is more specifically covered in following Intelligence section.

Intelligence

In any good asset search, fraud examiner should develop intelligence throughout course of research that would refer to information as specified above concerning additional names on real estate ownership, transferee names, and so forth. Additional modules of research that should be conducted include criminal histories on individuals targeted within asset search, as well as a search for evidence of known connections with other business enterprises and/or individuals with whom regular associations are engaged.

There are multiple methods of access to this type of information, not least of which would constitute a surveillance (highly unusual in an asset search) which would identify comings and goings of subjects at hand, and would assist in identification of “intelligence” type of data. Additional information is developed with respect to assets, in order to assist in determination of market value so that a net equity figure can be derived for one asset, or a group of assets, from all levels.

To delve into methods of this type of discovery would be to get into mind of fraud examiner working case, and shall not be addressed in this article, but should be included in an overview process in Intelligence Section of any asset search report.

Some other instances where information would be helpful include areas where other tangible net worth is discovered, such as intelligence provided by developed sources close to subject regarding stamp collections, gold coin collections, cash under a mattress, and so forth. This information is highly inconsistent within context of a normal asset search, and, while hoped for, should not be expected as a matter of doing business with a particular fraud examiner. Go to www.apscreen.com for remainder of this article.