Home / Local News / Public Hearing in Oly – Public Disclosure

Public Hearing in Oly – Public Disclosure

Fellow investigators,
After reviewing the proposed changes to WAC 308-10 it appears that there is no change planned (yet) to amend the clause that requires that the subject be notified by mail that a search had been run on them or their vehicles, when the search is performed by a PI or a PI Agency.
But we can change that. This is our golden opportunity to take action against this discriminatory, unnecessary and counter-productive requirement.
I’m urging all PI’s to write to Mr. Shomshor with their concerns now, and to join me at the hearing in Olympia November 13, at 13:00.  I’ve found Mr. Shomshor to be very responsive and genuinely interested in our input.
Please detail the problems you have encountered because of the notification letter and especially describe any incidents where the letter made using IVIPS impossible.
Frankly I don’t care if an attorney’s search generates a letter. From what I hear, attorney misuse caused this situation in the first place. If you do care, then this is your opportunity to raise that concern.
You may submit your written comments as an attachment to an email to:
Or by snail mail so the letter arrives before close of business November 10, to:
MS 48026
PO BOX 2957
OLYMPIA WA  98507-2957
The Thursday November 13, 13:00 hearing will be held:
Department Of Licensing
Conference Room 413
1125 Washington Street SE
Olympia, WA, 98507
Hope to see you there,

Dave Liston
David Liston investigative Services
(253) 212-0544

About Greg Glassock

Check Also

Useful Links

Sorry, but you do not have permission to view this content. You must be a member and logged in.


  1. I’ve requested to live stream this event but have yet to hear back from the state on whether it will be allowed or not.

  2. There were a number of PI’s present at the hearing, including Donielle Grewell from Belfair, some retail management people from Safeway and the National Retail Association, an apartment manager, as well as several DOL personnel. No Protective Services section people attended, however.

    The meeting was chaired by Ben Shomshor, who appeared to be very interested in our testimony.

    Martha Modine, John Hays and I came up as a group and took turns at the issue of the vulnerabilities inherent with this notification that IVIPS generates when PI’s run a plate or VIN.

    I also had a go at the proposal for a 50-search per year minimum to retain IVIPS access. Frankly I wasn’t aware of this as being a new proposal before I arrived or I think I could have made a more compelling case against the idea.

    As it was, I advised that if this minimum is revenue-driven, how about creating a subscription plan where those with fewer than 50/year can pay $10 per month to retain access? Mr. Shomshor seemed to make notes quite enthusiastically at that point.

    Up next we have a one-on-one meeting scheduled with Senator Mike Carrell on Friday December 5th to discuss drafting a bill to amend RCW 46.12.380 (4).

    If anyone would like to add their input for this meeting please contact me and I’ll be glad to discuss them. 253-212-0544—


  3. John Hayes, Martha Modeen and I did meet with Lakewood Senator Carrell on Friday 12/5 as planned.

    He gave us his undivided attention for about 40 minutes and best of all, had his administrative assistant there to take notes while we discussed the two biggest problems with the current IVIPS setup as we saw it: 1) the automatic notification letter that is generated every time a search is done, and 2) the proposed 50-searches-per-year quota that DOL has on the table.

    We related our stories about how the letters place us in jeopardy or produce problems so serious as to cause the system to be useless in certain instances such as prospective surveillance, alerting suspects likely to flee, and stalkers/violent subjects.

    I added my observation that smaller agencies that do not run 50+ per year are in danger of losing their competitive footing unless they run a bunch of searches just to keep their numbers up or face going to a snail-mail system if they don’t.

    We concluded that the two situations work to diminish commerce and expose the public to more records checks, just the opposite of the intents stated in the law itself.

    The next phase will be a meeting between the PI’s and DOL with the Senator’s staff, we expect it will happen in the first week of the new year, before the next session gets into full swing. The Senator sounded like he saw several ways we could accommodate our concerns while making DOL feel comfortable with the changes.

    Best regards,

    Dave Liston
    David Liston Investigative Services
    University Place, WA
    (253) 212-0544
    PI 2908