4 ms·
Doing potentially illegal business verbally with no written trail is a well-known strategy. It is still concealment if those participating do not tell when inte
by airspresso 2y ago
Doing potentially illegal business verbally with no written trail is a well-known strategy. It is still concealment if those participating do not tell when interrogated.
Bottom line is that companies should assume that the government has a right to audit their practices at any time for any reason, and avoid intentionally destroying potentially valuable information.
- ameister14 2y ago>Bottom line is that companies should assume that the government has a right to audit their practices at any time for any reason, and avoid intentionally destroying potentially valuable information. No. When a company reasonably anticipates litigation, which is more than just knowing litigation is possible, that's when they need to avoid destroying information relating to the litigation. Examples of situations that fit are: 1. when they know a suit has been filed 2. when the company is contemplating litigation - i.e. when they have asked for a legal opinion, started doing some groundwork, looked into feasibility of suit etc.
- ang_cire 2y agoAnother example is when the government already told you to begin retaining evidence, which is what happened in 2019, but Google ignored that.