Brisbane Process Service, PO Box 141, Tamborine (2026)

19/05/2021

Why you should never talk to the police.
Talking to the police can be far more dangerous than not talking to the police.
We have all heard the phrase “Anything you do or say may be used in court against you”.
Never talk to the police if you are accused of committing a crime and never talk to the police during an investigation or interrogation. Simply caution the police officer that you are exercising your right to remain silent. Then shut up! You are not obligated to talk to the police, though they may ask you to answer questions. You of course are not obligated to answer them. Alternatively, you can recite the mantra “No consent, don’t understand”.
Never sign any statement for the police regardless of whether you think it is in your best interests or not. This includes after car accidents or break-ins. Never give a legal name. When you provide a legal name you are identifying yourself as an agent of the Crown or State. You are taken to be the trustee of a trust estate and therefore liable for any breaches of trust or breaches of the thousands of codes, legislation, statutes, and regulations. Blacks Law Dictionary defines ‘real name’ as ‘your Christian or given names.If you are tempted to give them a name, ask them “Do you want my real name?” then give them your real name.
You have a right not to incriminate yourself. That is the job of the police and the prosecution (or your ex-wife !).The police and prosecutors will cherry-pick information, alter police reports, lose crucial evidence, delete footage, lie under oath, bribe, threaten and extort witnesses. Police work very closely with prosecutors to the point of conspiring to convict. There can be a very fine line between what is the truth and what is an outright fabrication of the truth.
The system is already stacked against you so they can charge you (a charge is equivalent to a sale for police officers. The more people they charge, the quicker they get promoted). All police services are businesses. The High Court of Australia has ruled that if an entity has an ABN number (Australian Business Number) then it is a business.
Police exist solely to raise revenue for the Crown by charging your estate. This is disguised as law and order.
All police operate on a quota system. This may be formal or informal. They do deny its existence. Every officer knows if he falls behind in writing tickets, issuing fines, or making arrests then his or her career is limited to desk duties. If they eventually lose their employment with the police services then they will only qualify to work for a sheltered workshop at best.
When a police officer asks you “Do you understand ?”, he is asking you whether you have any understanding of the legislation he is attempting to enforce upon you. For you to be found guilty of a crime or offense, the prosecution must prove that you had an understanding that the action was a crime or offense and that you, therefore, had intent. No understanding of a code, statute, legislation, or regulation means not guilty.
Answering only one question to a police officer will give them encouragement to ask further questions. You want to stop the conversation before it is started.
Police will often tell you they have evidence or a witness that says you committed the crime. More times than not this is an outright lie to trick you into confessing.
The police may attempt to trick you into accompanying them to the police station for an interview (interrogation). They are trying to give you the impression that you are under arrest. Ask them “Am I under arrest? If so, what for ?”
Police will often tell you that if you confess to the crime then they will look after you and make sure you receive only a small fine and get off lightly or even give you immunity from prosecution. Police have no say in the sentences or penalties handed to you. This is the job of the prosecutors and the judge.
If police approach you on your private property then inform them they are trespassing and to get off your property immediately. Regardless of whether they do or don’t, ask them for their names and badge numbers. Preferably film this if possible. A lawsuit for unlawful trespass may always be a good idea.
If you are driving and pulled over by the police, exit the vehicle with your keys and your mobile phone. Many experienced lawyers have argued that police can only insist you provide them with a driver’s license when you are in the act of driving. If you are standing on the grass beside the vehicle then, at that point in time, you are not driving or operating a motor vehicle. This is why police insist that you remain in the vehicle.
If you are pulled over for a random breath test and believe you may be over the limit, exit your vehicle with the keys, and get off the road. A friend of mine, when asked to take a breath test for alcohol, pulled a hip flask of alcohol out of his pocket and had a few swigs. This removed the ability of the police to prove that he was already intoxicated whilst driving. An empty bottle of alcohol will suffice.
Police Body Cameras
Police body cameras were originally introduced not so much to make police accountable, but rather to protect them against the public making any false allegations against them. Cameras are a double-edged sword. Depending on the jurisdiction, police cameras may or may not be compulsory to wear and to have turned on during any incidents. Countless police officers have been proven wrong, convicted of excessive force, prosecuted, lost their jobs, jailed, and sued as a result.
Your Personal Camera - Should I or shouldn’t I tell the police I am filming?
There are two sides to this argument. Should you tell the police they are being filmed in an attempt to prevent them from using excessive force (which may save your life) or acting unlawfully or should you not tell them they are being recorded thus enabling you to potentially film them in the act of using excessive force or acting unlawfully and bring a claim for damages against them? There is no best answer as a police interaction could go either way.
Many police will mistakenly advise you that you are not allowed to record them. In most places around the world, this is not the case. Most police handbooks will express that the public has a right to film the interaction as police themselves are usually filming.
Just be aware that the police may attempt to delete your video at the scene or they will claim that the video is evidence thus giving them the right to seize it so they can delete it later. You should always live stream the footage and let the police officer know this. Taking your camera may qualify as an illegal/unlawful search and seizure.
Most Police Officers are completely ignorant as to what qualifies as an ‘arrest’.
The very act of stopping someone, whether it be in traffic, or walking along a footpath, is an arrest as the police officer brought the person to ‘a rest’. Simple? Many police officers will state that they have detained you hoping that you do not realise a detainment is an arrest by a different name.
Always get the names of all police officers during the arrest regardless of whether they are the ones who placed handcuffs on you. Many litigants after being arrested, have sued every police officer present during the arrest, for false arrest, including the officers who drove the paddy wagon or the officer who locked the cell door behind you.
Many litigants will sue the police for multiple offenses including trespass, unlawful arrest, assault and battery, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. You need only to claim unlawful arrest and the onus is on the police to prove they had a lawful reason.

18/05/2021

What Is A Breach Of The Peace?
A breach of the peace may be generally defined as a violation of the public order which amounts to a disturbance of the public tranquillity, or by inching others to do so. It is clear that not every misdemeanor is a breach of the peace.
To constitute a breach of the peace there must be some violence or harm existing or threatened to occur to person, property. health or morals.
Affrays, assaults, riotous conduct, or destruction of property make up the largest part of what can be called a breach of the peace.
Thus in the majority of cases of a breach of peace, some actual violence is present. In some States there have been attempts to expand the meaning of " breach of peace" to include all indictable misdemeanors; "but this it must be confessed is doing serious violence to a simple expression, easily and well understood.
Some of the types of breaches of the peace are described as follows: A breach of peace, includes acts of public turbulence, acts of violence or tending to produce violence or tending to incite violence, disturbance of the public tranquillity by yelling, hollering, or uttering loud and vociferous language, making disturbing noises on a public street by one in a state of intoxication, ... a wanton discharge of fi****ms in a public place, engaging in an affray or an assault, ... uttering abusive, profane, indecent, or otherwise provocative language.
In discussing what constitutes a breach of the peace the Supreme Court of North Carolina held: A breach of the peace is a public offense done by violence or one causing or likely to cause an immediate disturbance of public order.
Breaches of the peace are acts that are malum in se, being wrongful or evil by their nature. Thus acts which are malum prohibita, or those acts made wrong merely by a statute. cannot be classed as a breach of the peace.
Those acts which constitute a breach of peace have been settled throughout · the course of the common law.
The legislature cannot declare any act they choose to be a breach of peace. The nature of the act determines if it fits the common law definition of a breach of the peace. The acts that are only malum prohibita include liquor prohibition laws, traffic laws, labor laws, health laws, food laws, building codes, and zoning ordinances, safety acts. game laws, and very many other "police regulations."
Without a statute, most of the acts constituting these offenses would be innocent acts. A parade on the street is not of itself a breach of the peace though it could constitute one.
The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable. and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act. of itself, tend to a breach of the peace
A mere trespass is not a breach of the peace and does not impose criminal liability upon the wrongdoer.
Driving an automobile while intoxicated constitutes a breach of peace. Indecent exposure as where one is walking in public naked or nearly naked or in indecent dress is disruptive of the morals of society and constitutes a breach of the peace. Blasphemy of Christ or Christianity in public is a breach of the peace. A mere violation of public decorum or penal law does not constitute a breach of peace. Conduct merely amounting to a nuisance is not per se a breach of peace. The sale of fifteen dynamite caps to an I5-year old boy did not constitute a breach of peace.A theft is not in its nature a breach of the peace.
A charge of "disorderly conduct" is a broader term than a breach of the peace because a person who commits a breach of the peace is necessarily guilty of disorderly conduct.
However, all acts of disorderly conduct are not necessarily a breach of the peace. Littering or yelling are such cases. Breach of the peace is a common-law offense, but it is not itself a specific offense.
Thus in a charge or indictment, the specific offense must be specified. arrests for breach of the peace.
In the struggle for government to claim and exercise greater powers of arrests, it has unlawfully attempted to apply the common law rule for a breach of peace arrest to all misdemeanors.
The general rule of law under the common law for the arrest of misdemeanor offenses amounting to a breach of the peace is stated as follows: In cases of misdemeanor, a peace officer like a private person has a common law no power of arresting without a warrant except when a breach of the peace has been committed in his presence or there is reasonable ground for supposing that a breach of the peace is about to be committed or renewed in his presence.'"
An arrest can only be made to suppress and prevent the breach of peace, and if the act ceases, there is no longer justification for the arrest without a warrant. "'A constable cannot arrest, but when he sees an actual breach of peace, and if the affray is over, he cannot arrest; and where a breach of the peace had been committed and was over, the constable must proceed in the same way as any other person, namely; by obtaining a warrant from a magistrate" !
The rule for arrest without a warrant involving misdemeanors was stated in an article in the Michigan Law Review as follows: Neither a peace officer nor a private citizen may arrest a person for a misdemeanor which is not a breach of the peace, In regards to this rule, it was stated: neither an officer nor a citizen may arrest for a misdemeanor which does not amount to a breach of the peace even though it occurs in his presence. As for an example. talking loudly in the street in the presence of the officer, who ordered the parties to be quiet, an arrest without a warrant was not justified; nor where someone in the presence of another, was "turning toward the wall for a particular purpose" of relief, in the street; or where he was disturbing a public meeting; or obstructing the free passage across a bridge; or refusing to move on, on a sidewalk, at the request of an n officer; or fraudulently substituting a smaller for a larger check; or fraudulently evading payment of a railroad fare, or maintaining a billboard on a sidewalk, or insulting the head of the house in the presence of his family, or assembling to witness a Sunday ball game, or a movie show.
It is a common rule that an officer cannot arrest for a breach of peace after it has ended.
When a breach of the peace ceases, the reason for the arrest ceases, that being to stop or prevent the breach of public order.
Mr. Bishop, in his Treatise on Criminal Procedure, speaking on the subject of arrest for breaches of the peace says: After the tumult is over. with no prospect of its renewal, it is too late to interfere without judicial process.
And other past misdemeanors are within the same rule, namely, that a private person, or even an officer, cannot without a warrant arrest one for a misdemeanor committed on an occasion already passed.( 1 Bish. Crim. Proced. §§ 166, 167.11 )
The principle behind the common law rule of arrests was that to prevent harm, violence, or disturbance to the public peace, it is necessary that those perpetrating such acts be promptly stopped by arrest.
Where, however, the offense is an accomplished fact. its prevention is no longer possible. Also, if public order has been fully restored before the officer appears. the power to arrest without warrant for a misdemeanor breach of the peace no longer exists, for the end by which such authority to arrest is allowed- to maintain the public peace-is no longer attainable.
The occasions which would justify an arrest without process for "vagrancy" would indeed be very rare, inasmuch it involves no immediate danger to public or private security.
Under American common law, no one can be required to "give an account of themselves," or to show they have a "visible means of support," or that they have employment. As part of the right to life all have a right to choose how to live and how to support themselves, and no government act can interfere with this right. The majority of misdemeanor offenses would not fall in the class of a breach of the peace which allow the immediate inter-vention of authority by arrest, as they are not an offense of a grave nature, or because they do not actually disturb the public peace.
An arrest for breach of the peace in the officer's presence must be made "promptly, either "at the time of the offense" or "as soon as the circumstances permit. " If the officer "does not act immediately after the offense has been committed, he can thereafter make arrests only by procuring a warrant.
When an officer, after having seen a breach of the peace committed, departs on other business or for other purposes, and afterward returns, he cannot, without warrant, make an arrest for the offense; but where the officer finds it necessary to procure assistance, a reasonable time may be employed in the pursuit.
In such a case the officer must at once set about the arrest and follow up the effort until the arrest is effected. An unreasonable delay will make the arrest invalid. To justify a delay. there should be a continued attempt on the part of the officer to make the arrest.
It has been erroneously stated that officers are authorized to break in a house or building to prevent the commission of any crime without a warrant. This is an invalid exaggeration of the true law on the matter, which is revealed as follows: The authority of a constable to break open doors and arrest without a warrant is confined to cases where treason or felony has been committed, or if there is an affray or a breach of the peace in his presence. 2 H a le P.e. 88-96; 1 Hawkins, c. 63, § 16; 1 Russell on Crimes, 629; I Chitty's C r criminal Law, 14, 15; Bacon, Abr. "Constable," (C)21
The cases in which a breach of the peace occurs in the presence of an officer when done in a building would be very rare.
The cases of felony and treason in such a case would most often occur where the felon was pursued into a building by the officer.
Public drunkenness unaccompanied by language or conduct which creates a breach of the peace, will not justify arrest without a warrant. Impudent, abusive or offensive language addressed to a peace officer does not tend to breach the peace, even though it may provoke the officer to anger.
And it has been held that the mere refusal to give one's name and address does not justify the incarceration of a citizen.
An officer cannot arrest because he thinks or has suspicions that a breach of peace might be committed.
The cause for arresting upon such cases must be when a breach of the peace is "threatened" or its occurrence is "imminent ... In determining when officers may interfere by an arrest to prevent a threatened breach of the peace, the Supreme Court of Michigan stated: We are of opinion that a threat or other indication of a breach of the peace will not justify an officer in making an arrest, unless the facts are such as would warrant the officer in believing an arrest is necessary to prevent an immediate ex*****on thereof, as where a threat is made coupled with some overt act in attempted ex*****on thereof.
The object of permitting an arrest under such circumstances is to prevent a breach of the peace, where the facts show the danger of its being immediately committed.
Thus the interposition of the officer in a threatened breach of the peace is not for the purpose of an arrest but "to prevent a disturbance or breach of the peace under a present menace of violence. "
The courts are almost unanimous in their holdings, ...... that a threatened breach of the peace will not justify an arrest without warrant, unless the facts are such as would warrant the officer in believing an arrest necessary to prevent an immediate ex*****on thereof, as where the threat is made coupled with some overt act in attempted ex*****on thereof. In such cases the officer need not wait until the offense is actually committed.
The guideline then for making arrests on what is to be called a "threatened" breach of the peace, is when the conditions are such that the threatened breach of peace is imminent, or that it is obvious to the average person that it is going to occur.
As held by the Supreme Court of North Carolina: We think a breach of the peace is “threatened" .... if the offending person's conduct under the surrounding facts and circumstances is such as reasonably justifies a belief that the perpetration of an offense amounting to a breach of the peace is imminent.
Since the nature of most breaches of the peace are such that cause violence to person or property, the acts which constitute them are apparent, so that one can readily see or hear them occurring.
It is said a breach of peace is committed in one's presence when, by the use of his senses, he knows of its commission by the person about to be arrested. Thus an arrest for a breach of peace may be made when one's "senses afford him knowledge" that it "is being committed," whether through "sight, hearing, or other senses.
An arrest for a breach of the peace cannot be justified merely upon belief or suspicion existing in the mind of the officer; but, where the actions of the person and the surrounding circumstances are such as to indicate a threatened breach of the peace, the arrest may be lawfully made.
It is thus said that an officer can not arrest for a misdemeanor or a breach of the peace based solely upon information from another or suspicion without a warrant. In no case could advise or information given after the arrest was made justify the arrest.
Likewise, an arrest cannot be made for one purpose and justified for another.
(A Treatise on Arrest and False Imprisonment by Charles A. Weisman)

18/05/2021

What constitutes false imprisonment?
False imprisonment consists of any type of unlawful restraint or interference with the personal liberty of an individual. It involves any unlawful violation of the liberty of another. The ancient English legal scholar, Henry De Bracton (1200-1268) tells us that false imprisonment is one of the oldest violations known:
“Forcefully to deprive a man of the freedom to go wheresoever he may is clearly trespass. False imprisonment was one of the first trespasses recognized by the common law”
False imprisonment is classified as a tort under common law, and also a crime. It has been labelled as a tort, a trespass, an assault, a wrong, a damage, and an injury, giving one cause to bring suit against another as an injury. Depriving a person of their liberty is no different than depriving a person of their property – a theft of liberty is a wrong by which remedy can be had, just as is the case with theft of property.
False imprisonment is a great offense due to the high regard the law has for liberty. In Chitty’s Practice of the Law, it states:
“The infraction of personal liberty has ever been regarded as one of the greatest injuries. The injuries to liberty are principally termed “False imprisonments, or malicious prosecutions”
Unlawful detention or deprivation of liberty is the basis for an action for the tort of False imprisonment. Actual seizure or the laying on of hands is not necessary to constitute an unlawful detention. Thus the only elements of the action are: (1) Detention or restraint against one’s will. (2) The unlawfulness of such detention or restraint.
In his Treatise on the Law of Torts, Judge Cooley states:
“False imprisonment is akin to the wrongs of assault and battery, and consists in imposing, by force or threats, an unlawful restraint upon a man’s freedom of locomotion”
Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Law, (3Bl.comm.127) states on this matter:
“Every confinement of the person is an imprisonment, whether it be in a common prison, or is a private house, or in the stocks, or even by forcefully detaining one in the public streets”
Thus any type of detainment of a person, or restriction or deprivation of their liberty or freedom of locomotion, where he is compelled to remain where he does not wish to remain, is an “imprisonment”. The only question thereafter is whether or not the imprisonment is “false”. The word ”false” comes from the common law and is synonymous with “unlawful”.
A false arrest is one means of committing a false imprisonment…..
A rather complete description of what does and does not constitute as false imprisonment was given by the Supreme Court of Kansas as follows:
False imprisonment is necessarily a wrongful interference with the personal liberty of an individual. The wrong may be committed by words alone or by acts alone, or by both, and by merely operating on the will of the individual, or by personal violence or both. It is not necessary that the individual be confined within a prison or within walls, or that he be assaulted or even touched. It is not necessary that there be any injury done to the individual’s person or to his character or reputation; nor is it necessary that the wrongful act be committed with malice or ill will, or even with the slightest wrongful intention, nor that the act be committed under the colour of any legal or judicial proceeding. All that is necessary is that the individual be restrained of his liberty without any sufficient legal cause therefore , and by any words, or acts which he fears to disregard”.
…..If someone causes a situation that makes it impossible for another to exercise their liberty or locomotion, it is false imprisonment.
….The law sets such a high value on the liberty of the citizen that even an attempt to unlawfully arrest is esteemed a great provocation. All the authorities agree that an arrest may be made with or without any physical force or actual touching by the officer. Thus any illegal restraint of one’s personal liberty by the act of another gives that person a cause of action for False imprisonment against one causing the illegal restraint. Prima facie any restraint put by fear or force is unlawful……So if an officer tells a person that he is under arrest, and he thereupon submits himself to the officer, going with him and obeying his orders, such a person is deprived of his liberty, and if the act of the officer is unlawful, it is false imprisonment. In all cases where there is no physical touching or seizure, nor any resistance, the intentions of the parties to the transaction are to be considered. In such a case there must have been intent on the part of one of them to arrest or restrain the other, and intent on part of the other to submit under the belief and impression that submission was necessary.
….Where two people are travelling in a car and stopped by police, and the party not driving is put in the police car and told to wait, the officer doing so is guilty of False imprisonment. Even though the person in the police car was there for less than a minute, it was an arrest, as the officer had no authority for confining him in a car. Even where police officers stop a moving vehicle for a brief detention, it is sufficient to constitute an arrest. Where one is told to stay in their car by an officer, though it only be for ten seconds, it is an arrest. Time duration is not a factor in making an arrest.
…Where on is approached by an officer and questioned about his identity and actions, this is only an accosting, not an arrest.
Damages and Liability
One who interferes with another’s liberty of locomotion does so at his own peril. All who do so without lawful authority can be sued for the trespass upon liberty and loss of time. It is thus a very serious thing to deprive a person of their liberty.
Since false imprisonment is a wrong suffered by a person, that person is entitled to receive a remedy for damages. Not only is a person entitled to receive a remedy for the deprivation of his liberty, but also for any other damages that are a result of that deprivation.
False imprisonment was a indictable offense at common law, and relief by the part aggrieved was obtained by an action for trespass vi et armis (with force and arms).
The illegal arrest of a person without a warrant, or under a invalids warrant, entitles him to compensation for the damages sustained by reason of the false or unlawful imprisonment.
…..Unlawful interference with or injuries to the liberty of a citizen is a violation of his natural, inherent and absolute rights, which damage results as a legal consequence.
A false imprisonment generally includes an assault and battery , and always , at least, a technical assault. An unlawful arrest, imprisonment and prosecution of a person can cause that person many damages, including bodily pain, great physical inconvenience and discomfort, loss of time, mental suffering, injury to reputation, distress or anguish, humiliation of mind, shame, public ridicule, invidious publicity, and public disgrace. Some of these damages overlap to some degree but all can and have been claimed in false imprisonment suits.
Upon the subject of damages, the law specifies two kinds of damages or divides them into two classes. There what is called “actual damages”, then there are what are called “punitive damages”.
Actual damages are such compensation for the injury as would follow from the nature and character of the act. They a re the damages for wrongs received and injuries done when none were intended….
Punitive damages are those that grow out of wantonness or atrocity, or aggravated by the act. They are injuries and sufferings that were intended or occurred through malice, carelessness or negligence amounting to a wrong so reckless and wanton as to be without cause….
Anyone who assists or participates in an unlawful arrest or imprisonment is equally liable for the damage caused. Thus where a man was illegally arrested by a police officer and was placed in a patrol wagon in which he was taken to the central station, it was held that the two officers in charge of the patrol wagon were liable, along with the arresting officer, for false imprisonment.
(A Treatise on Arrest and False Imprisonment by Charles A. Weisman)

18/05/2021

Guide - 10 Tools to Find Missing Persons 2021
For any court matter to proceed, all parties and witnesses need to be served with documents. If they cannot be located then this has serious repercussions on the speed and outcome of the court action. Of course, there are other reasons why you may wish to find people apart from court matters, such as debt or asset recovery, to assist in background searches, curiosity, old lovers wanting to re-unite, parents monitoring their children’s whereabouts, witness testimonies, and probate – heirs and beneficiaries of wills.
Most process servers / private investigators/mercantile/commercial agents provide skip tracing services on a sliding fee schedule. Clients can stipulate to what extent they wish searches to continue. The skip tracer may have luck and locate the person on the first search, but in the worst-case scenario, they may have to exhaust all searches including pay-per-view searches on private, corporate, and government databases.
Thirty years ago most skip tracers or private investigators would simply rely on the nearest telephone book and start calling possible friends and relatives. Times have changed. Now there is a vast array of information available, both public and private, free and pay per view, for locating persons of interest, most of it available at your fingertips on the internet.
Lets examine a few of these.
The Australian Federal Police provide the following guide for finding missing persons.https://www.missingpersons.gov.au/sites/default/files/PDF%20-%20Publications/NMPCC/The%20SOS%20Guide%20Missing%20Persons.pdf
Search engines
These are some of the best resources to gather information on persons of interest. Most people enjoy self-promoting themselves and their successes on the internet by plastering their private information particularly if they are business owners. There are many search engines available such as Google, Yahoo, Bing, Yandex, Baidu, DuckDuckgo, Ask.com, and AOl.com to name a few. When searching, it is advised that you use variations of the person's name/s as including maiden names, aliases, nicknames, titles, and police/military ranks. Be sure to search on other information such as their last known addresses, past and current employers, social groups, and other key information you have.
Social Media / Social clubs
Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, Instagram and Pinterest. Depending on the person you are looking for and whether they use social media and if so, then what type of privacy settings they may use, you may be able to ascertain information such as their phone number, home address, school addresses, place of work, date of birth, friends, interests, movements and group/club memberships. You may need to become a friend to get them to drop their guard and re4lease information. Be also wary that many professional skips you misinformation/disinformation to make it difficult for skip tracers to locate them.Members of social clubs such as bowling clubs, Fishing clubs, Scouts, church groups, charities may be quite happy to share information with you if you ask the correct questions to the right people without being too obvious.
Government Departments
Electoral roles and public record The Electoral Roll in Australia plays a vital role in many types of research including the study of genealogy. Historical rolls provide an insight and a certainty as to where an ancestor was located at a given point in time. Whilst many of these records are visible within libraries in Microfiche formats, a number have also been transcribed and are available via an online database search.
Current records are also available and can be useful for skip tracing and finding people. As voting is mandatory and there is a requirement to be registered, the vast majority of Australians are on the electoral roll and these are available for public viewing.
Corrective Services
All States have their own Corrective Services Department.
Corrective Services NSW runs the state’s correctional centers, supervises offenders in the community, and delivers programs to reduce reoffending, support reintegration, and build safer communities.
Department of Fair Trading
DFT holds a license register that includes the following information on licensed contractors which may be useful :
(a) the name, date of birth, and business address of the contractor license holder,
(b) the contractor license number and the category of residential building work or specialist work that the contractor license authorizes the holder to contract to do,
(e) whether the contractor license, if held by an individual, is endorsed,
(g) if the holder is a partnership, the names, dates of birth, and addresses of the members of the partnership,
(h) if the holder is a corporation, the names, dates of birth, and addresses of the directors of the corporation,
The above information may be useful in running searches on the subject's date of birth, business name, and fellow officeholders.
ABN Lookup
This database can give you an idea as to which suburb the subject may be based in according to the registered postcode of the ABN. It will also tell you what business names they are trading under and the possible location by postcode. The history tab will also supply further information.
ASIC
ASIC offers a vast range of searches including Names of companies and organizations, both in Australia and New Zealand, which will include dates of birth of officeholders, residential and registered office of directors and other officeholders, the status of the company, banned directors, financial advisors details, AFS licensees, credit licensees, auditors, liquidators, and other financial professionals.
Authorized Government database/information resellers – e.g. Cleardocs, Comdeeds, Docscentre, eCompanies, and CITEC.
CITEC provides a Personal Name Extract search which will include information on an individual such as their date and place of birth, companies in which they have a recorded role, the role(s) held the date(s) of appointment, and cessation and their address.
Private databases
Trading Reference Australia (TRA) – This is a pay per view or subscriber database that allows you to search a subject according to various identifiers such as date of birth, names, past addresses, current address, next of kin, drivers license, telenumbers, vehicle registrations and drivers licenses etc
RP Data – is a subscription database that can allow you to pinpoint properties owned by the subject, who the new owners are, which realtors were managing them, and photos and interior floor plans of properties.
Yellow pages -provides potential alternative addresses and telebnumbers for your subjects' businesses.
White pages – has become quite outdated over the years but still has a current list of landlines and mobiles for surnames across Australia. Can be useful for calling potential close relatives particularly if the subjects name is unusual.
Reverse Australia – This is a useful database if you have only a telenumber on the subject.
Australia Lookup – useful only if you have the subject's last name and initial. Provides results Australia
Doorknocks
Be sure to conduct a through door knock of last known addresses for subject residential and work addresses, clubs, pubs, churches, and sporting and trade organizations. A polite demeanor always works best. A door knock may tip off the subject that you are looking for him/her. Use caution. Ask the right questions to the right people and you may have quick success
Next of Kin/Colleagues and Associates – ex-wives and ex-husbands are a specialty. If your subject has gone through a bitter divorce, the Ex more than likely will be very willing to tell you where the subject is currently residing or working. Disgruntled friends/work colleagues may be similarly helpful. Children are likely to give up information relatively easily but tread with caution. It is not in your interest for an adult to call the police.Court records
All courts have a daily court list. If you suspect your subject may be appearing for a hearing then you should monitor these.
Red Cross
International Red Cross If you are unable to locate a loved one or friend who has been impacted by a current disaster event, the American Red Cross can help you locate them if they meet certain criteria.
Public advertisements/notices seeking information
Advertisements/notices have a minimal chance of success and are generally used so you can show courts that you have been exhaustive in your search.

Proudly written by the team at Citiserv Process Servers

Address

PO Box 141
Tamborine, QLD
4270

Telephone

+61488932528

Website

https://brisbaneprocessservice.com.au/

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Brisbane Process Service posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Brisbane Process Service:

Brisbane Process Service

19/05/2021

18/05/2021

18/05/2021

18/05/2021

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category