header-logo header-logo

08 October 2021
Issue: 7951 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Matrix Intelligence: A trusted intelligence agency with a reputation for delivering results

60029
A Q&A special with founders Dominika Jaskiewicz and Stuart McDonald MC

Q: Who are you and why did you decide to establish Matrix?

Dominika: I started my professional career in complex and white-collar crime, however; I realised after a couple of years that my calling within the corporate world lay elsewhere and joined a corporate intelligence and investigations firm in the city. After several years of working in this fascinating sector, where my legal skills and experience are an invaluable bedrock, I decided to launch Matrix Intelligence. There was a definite gap in the market for a professional firm that clients could rely upon to help them manage risk in challenging markets, feel better prepared for bold decisions, and importantly, deliver high quality and affordable results.

Stuart: I served as an officer in the British Army on operations and in staff appointments, including within Army HQ and the MoD, prior to moving into the banking sector and then private equity as a Chief of Staff. During my time in the latter, I had oversight of numerous due diligence investigations and I quickly realised that there was a plethora of firms providing mediocre, yet overpriced services. I’ve always believed that fortune favours the brave and when Dom first floated the idea of launching our own company, I was keen to embrace the challenge.

Q: Where are you based and who engages you?

Dominika: We have offices in Edinburgh and London and our client base predominantly comprises law firms, insolvency practitioners and litigation funders. Most of our work is focussed on asset tracing to support litigation or insolvency proceedings, however; we also conduct a lot of due diligence, fraud investigations, surveillance and people tracing.

Q: What differentiates you from other firms in your sector?

Stuart: We always conduct a preliminary investigation at no cost to the client before accepting an instruction. The results enable us to honestly manage our client’s expectations of an investigation delivering their desired outcome. Importantly, this also allows us to prepare a properly phased and costed proposal, so that the client can understand our methodology and see how their funds will be spent. We have never believed in the ‘lump-sum’ approach, as this lacks transparency and accountability.

Additionally, the key to finding a reliable intelligence partner is to first establish who is actually doing the work. As a boutique firm, we only work with experienced researchers and investigators, which enables us to provide a greater depth of intelligence and analysis.

Dominika: We specialise in Human Intelligence (HUMINT). Over the past decade we have built a highly dedicated and trusted global network of sources that includes: local investigators, lawyers, investigative journalists, former law enforcement and military personnel; each specifically selected for their exceptional skill set and integrity. We work hard at constantly evolving our network which empowers us to surpass the limitations of Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT), blend the results with a mature knowledge of local cultures and business environments, and deliver results in jurisdictions which some companies find difficult to operate in.

Q: Which jurisdictions are you especially strong in?

Stuart: We specialise in the UK, Europe (especially Eastern Europe), the Middle East, North, East and West Africa, Asia, North America and most well-known offshore jurisdictions.

Q: Why should lawyers engage Matrix?

Dominika: Reputation and experience. In the 13 years that I have been conducting investigations, there is very little I have not encountered before and I have amassed significant experience and an expansive network of highly coveted source intelligence specialists, which means that we are able to provide expert advice from the point of enquiry. We approach every case individually and we have an excellent reputation for delivering results.

Stuart: Some clients have never engaged a firm like ours before and they often have misconceptions as to what can and cannot be achieved in a given jurisdiction. We take care to manage our client’s expectations up front and talk them through the art of the possible. This ensures that at the end of the process, we can provide them with a court-ready report that meets their requirements. My final comment would be that our reports are factual, concise, and very competitively priced.

Q: Any final advice for someone seeking to engage a firm such as yours?

Stuart: Caveat Emptor. Many firms will promise the world and under deliver. Be wary of any firm which does not provide a phased proposal with a detailed breakdown as to where costs will be incurred up front. At Matrix, we provide our clients with the peace of mind of knowing that they have a detailed, affordable, and workable strategy.

I’d also be mindful that there are no regulatory requirements for private investigators in the UK and it is therefore vitally important that you only engage a professional and ethical firm that follows the rule of law. Failure to do so may render any intelligence gained unusable and be the difference between losing and winning in court.

 

Founded in 2016 by a business intelligence expert and a highly decorated Army Officer, the team also includes the former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army’s Cyber Command. Their investigative capabilities and international reach, fused with exceptional service levels, has made them a go to investigative firm for litigation lawyers, insolvency practitioners and family lawyers throughout the UK and overseas.
Matrix Intelligence Ltd
71-75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll