Contractor Misconduct & Undercover Investigations | SSC Legacy
21170
wp-singular,post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-21170,single-format-standard,wp-theme-bridge,theme-bridge,bridge-core-2.7.2,woocommerce-no-js,qode-page-transition-enabled,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,qode_grid_1300,columns-3,qode-theme-ver-25.7,qode-theme-bridge,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-8.7.2,vc_responsive
Contractor Misconduct & Undercover Investigations | SSC Legacy

Contractor misconduct: When should your business consider an undercover operative?

Contractors may work alongside employees, enter restricted areas and handle valuable equipment. Their access deserves attention when a business investigates unexplained losses or repeated operational incidents.

In January 2026, Eskom announced that a former contractor employee had been sentenced for infrastructure tampering and theft at Camden Power Station. The offences occurred in November 2022, caused damage exceeding R22 million and disrupted operations. The concurrent sentences mean he will serve 20 years in prison.

Should you use an undercover operative to investigate contractors?

An undercover operative may be appropriate where there are specific, unresolved concerns about conduct during daily operations. Contractor status alone is not a reason for covert investigation.

The first step is to establish what happened. Depending on the concern, this may involve reviewing access records, maintenance reports, work instructions, equipment movements and available footage.

Repeated breakdowns or missing equipment can have several causes. An investigation should test those explanations objectively.

When might undercover support add value?

Undercover support may be useful where the investigation needs to understand suspected coordination between contractors, employees or other parties.

Relevant concerns could include:

  • Repeated unauthorised access or equipment movements.
  • Suspected exchanges of company property.
  • Deliberate bypassing of site procedures.
  • Accounts of events that conflict with documented activity.
  • Recurring incidents that remain unexplained after technical checks.

These are reasons to investigate further, not proof of criminal conduct.

Can due diligence answer the question instead?

If the concern relates to a contractor’s identity, qualifications, ownership or undisclosed business relationships, verification and due diligence may be more suitable.

If the concern is what people are doing on site, an operational investigation may be required. Some matters need both approaches.

The method should follow the unanswered question.

Investigate access and conduct objectively

Businesses need to understand who has access to their operations, what that access permits and whether incidents point to mistakes, weak controls or deliberate misconduct.

SSC Legacy can assist with corporate investigations, due diligence and undercover services where appropriate to the circumstances.

Contact SSC Legacy to discuss suspected contractor misconduct and the investigative options available.

    Enter your full name

    Enter a valid email

    the topic of your message

    Enter a brief message