When in doubt, you need evidence — not assumptions.
An internal suspicion, a business-partner risk, an unverified claim, or a pending case: every matter is handled at founder level and built on evidence.
The initial consultation is confidential and without obligation.
No critical situation ever starts suddenly.
A suspicion, inconsistency, or unverified piece of information is often the first sign of a larger problem; 84% of perpetrators show at least one red flag beforehand (ACFE, Occupational Fraud 2026). Here are six common situations faced by companies, law firms, and executives:
You suspect internal fraud
Establish what lies behind a tip, a suspicious transaction, or questionable conduct — with independent findings.
Fraud Investigation →
Partnership risks are unclear before you commit
Verify the risks around companies, partners, and key individuals before you decide.
Third-Party Risk Management →
Candidate documents unverified
Confirm identity, education, work history, and references before hiring.
Background Verification →
You suspect assets are being concealed
Investigate assets, connections, and concealment structures for collection and pre-suit planning.
Asset Tracing →
Information needed to strengthen your case
Defensible findings with relationship mapping, event chronology, and source matrix for disputes, arbitration, and litigation.
Litigation Support →
Risk identified for executives
Assess threats, visibility, and operational vulnerabilities to create a risk-appropriate mitigation plan.
Executive Protection →Not every suspicion leads to the same outcome.
The purpose of an independent examination is not to confirm an allegation, but to uncover the truth. Sometimes the findings confirm the allegation; sometimes they save an executive from an unfair accusation.
- Legal teams
- Human resources
- Management
- Board of directors
- Internal audit
- Fraud examination directorate
Payment and supply network in foreign operation uncovered
Document review, data analysis, and employee interviews were conducted concurrently. Involved parties, methods, and financial impact were revealed with verifiable findings.
Review the case → Allegation not confirmedSerious allegation determined to be false
Financial records, market conditions, and management decisions were examined together. The findings did not support the allegations, preventing an unwarranted disciplinary action.
Review the case → Operational reasonRecord inconsistency confirmed not to be fraud-related
Record discrepancies and field conditions were examined. Findings determined to be based on operational and seasonal factors, not fraud.
Review the case →Due to confidentiality, company, individual, amount, and country information has not been shared; sectors are generalized and events are anonymized and summarized.
Every case is run by one person, from start to finish.
“Organizations are often affected not by the risks they see, but by the risks they don’t. Accurately assessing risks is the first step to making sound decisions.”
Hasan Alsancak
Founder & Managing Director
- Head of the Financial Crimes, AML, and Aggravated Fraud Units Turkish National Police, 1992–2003
- Police Intelligence Academy first in class
- FBI National Academy 205th Session
- 30+ years career
Financial-crime and aggravated-fraud casework at the Turkish National Police Intelligence and Organized Crime Departments; intelligence and risk analysis with the United Nations; operational risk management at group-director level at BP and SOCAR. Every case is handled with the founder's direct involvement.
Meet the founder →Case-specific team
Engaged only after a confidentiality agreement and a conflict-of-interest check.
Investigative by origin. Evidence-based. Decision-focused.
The question is not only “who did it” but “how was it possible in this company.”
Defensible findings in five steps: each engagement is planned according to the nature of the allegation, the company's structure, and existing risks; results are reported in a manner suitable for presentation to management, legal teams, or courts.
01Preliminary assessment
The nature of the allegation, ongoing damage, and risk of evidence loss are evaluated.
OutputPreliminary assessment note
02Scope and plan
Purpose, authority, information sources, and reporting line are determined.
OutputScope and confidentiality protocol
03Evidence preservation and analysis
Document, data, and device integrity are protected; connections are examined.
OutputChain of custody record
04Information gathering and verification
Planned interviews; statements, documents, and transactions are cross-checked.
OutputInterview and verification records
05Report and action plan
Verified findings, risks, and actionable recommendations are presented.
OutputManagement report and action plan
How prepared is your company for these risks?
“It could not happen here” is not a control; it is a blind spot. Fraud is no longer the exception; it is a risk companies face routinely. Figures from Türkiye:
85%
Approximately 85% of companies detected at least one fraud case in the last two years.
50%
Only 50% of cases are detected within the first year.
Source: PwC Türkiye & TEİD, Türkiye Fraud Survey 2026
Is there a lack of segregation of duties, or is payment approval concentrated in a single person?
These three questions are taken from the 21-question Fraud Risk Simulator; your answers carry over, so you continue where you left off. Full assessment: 6 risk areas based on the ACFE fraud triangle, ~5 minutes, 0–100 score, key findings, and downloadable PDF report.
Personelini Tanı™
Hiring right is the first step to preventing fraud.
64% of fraud in Türkiye is committed by employees.*
A platform that verifies candidate documents — diploma, ID, criminal record, social security (SGK) — against official sources. The candidate uploads the document from e-Devlet, the system queries the source, an expert approves; the sealed report can be checked on a public verification page.
* PwC Türkiye & TEİD, Türkiye Fraud Survey 2026
How we work with corporate clients, law firms, and international peers
Direct engagement; scope, reporting line, and confidentiality are defined in the first consultation. Where management itself is the subject of the examination, the engagement and reporting run through the board of directors or the audit committee.
Engagement through counsel; chain of custody, court-ready reporting, and expert-witness support are structured with the legal team from the start.
Your local partner in Türkiye: public-records and title searches, ultimate beneficial owner (UBO) identification, field verification; reporting in English.
Fraud progresses unseen for months.
Trust is not a control mechanism. A case goes undetected for a median of twelve months; one caught within six months costs around $40,000, one that runs past five years more than $1.1 million. If you have suspicions, do not wait; the initial consultation is without obligation.
Our articles and news.
Our writings on corporate investigations and risks, current developments, and news from Prosecure.
17.05.2026 · Article
Why doesn’t the “we are a family” rhetoric work in companies?
Read →
14.01.2026 · Article
Why is trust not a control mechanism?
Read →
30.12.2025 · Article
Artificial intelligence: the new perpetrator of fraud?
Read →Let's evaluate your situation together.
The initial consultation is confidential and without obligation. If there is an ongoing loss or risk of evidence loss, skip the form and call.
- 1 · Confidential first conversation — We listen to the situation and its urgency.
- 2 · Preliminary assessment note — The nature of the allegation, available information, and risks are assessed; a scope proposal is presented.
- 3 · Scope and start — Purpose, authority, information sources, and reporting line are agreed together.
Commitment begins only when the scope is approved.
Weekdays 09:00–18:00
info@prosecure.com.tr →Harbiye Mah. Abdi İpekçi Cad.
Bostan Sk. Orjin Apt. No: 15/5
34367 Şişli, İstanbul
=84?tx('l1'):pct>=50?tx('l2'):pct>=17?tx('l3'):tx('l4'); var msg=pct>=84?tx('m1'):pct>=50?tx('m2'):tx('m3'); document.getElementById('qscore').textContent=lvl; var qs='?'+ans.join('&')+'&band='+encodeURIComponent(lvl)+'&src=homepage-en'; [].forEach.call(document.querySelectorAll('a[data-sim]'),function(a){a.href='/en/fraud-risk-simulator/'+qs;}); var c=document.getElementById('qcta'); if(c){c.href='#iletisim'; c.onclick=function(){var m=document.querySelector('#pz-form-slot textarea')||document.getElementById('f-msg'); if(m&&!m.value) m.value=tx('form').replace('{lvl}',lvl);};} document.getElementById('qtext2').textContent=msg; q.classList.add('pz-done'); } render(); })(); (function(){ if(window.matchMedia('(prefers-reduced-motion: reduce)').matches) return; var sel='.pz-head,.pz-card,.pz-r,.pz-stats,.pz-steps .pz-s,.pz-seg .pz-b,.pz-founder,.pz-teamrow,.pz-quiz,.pz-memb .pz-in,.pz-proof,.pz-prod > *'; var els=[].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll(sel)); els.forEach(function(e){e.classList.add('pz-rv')}); if(!('IntersectionObserver' in window)){els.forEach(function(e){e.classList.add('pz-in')});return;} var io=new IntersectionObserver(function(en){ en.forEach(function(x,k){ if(x.isIntersecting){ var e=x.target; setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add('pz-in')}, Math.min(k*60,240)); io.unobserve(e);} }); },{rootMargin:'0px 0px -8% 0px',threshold:.12}); els.forEach(function(e){io.observe(e)}); var nums=[].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('.pz-cell .pz-big')); var io2=new IntersectionObserver(function(en){ en.forEach(function(x){ if(!x.isIntersecting) return; var el=x.target; io2.unobserve(el); var raw=el.textContent.trim(), pre=raw.startsWith('%')?'%':'', suf=raw.endsWith('+')?'+':(raw.endsWith('%')?'%':''); var end=parseInt(raw.replace(/[^0-9]/g,''),10); if(isNaN(end)) return; var t0=null,dur=900; function s(t){ if(!t0)t0=t; var p=Math.min((t-t0)/dur,1); el.textContent=pre+Math.round(end*(1-Math.pow(1-p,3)))+suf; if(p<1) requestAnimationFrame(s); } requestAnimationFrame(s); }); },{threshold:.5}); nums.forEach(function(e){io2.observe(e)}); })();