Personal credit data is generally private and subject to legal restrictions in jurisdictions that regulate the distribution of credit information. A fraud examiner usually needs a lawful basis to obtain such records, and the suspect's consent is often one valid basis. Permission from a family member is not sufficient because the information belongs to the subject, not the relative. Suspicion of fraud alone does not automatically authorize a private fraud examiner to obtain protected credit data from an information broker. Option D is too absolute because credit data may be obtainable through consent, subpoena, court order, or another lawful procedure depending on the jurisdiction. Therefore, option B is the most accurate statement.

The Fraud Examiners Manual and CFE Prep Guide both state:
"In an admission-seeking interview, the interviewer should transition to the verbal confession when the accused furnishes the first detailed information about the offence. There are three approaches to obtaining the confession: chronologically, by transaction, or by event".
Thus, B is the true statement.

Before pursuing litigation, fraud examiners are advised to consider whether nonlegal remedies (e.g., restitution agreements, settlements, insurance recovery) are possible, since legal actions can be costly, slow, and uncertain. Statutes of limitation and guilt are legal issues for attorneys and courts, but examiners must weigh recovery options first.

The correct answer is A. In common law systems, authentication is the process of showing that an item of evidence is what the proponent claims it is. Federal Rule of Evidence 901 states that to satisfy the authentication requirement, the party offering the evidence must produce enough proof to support a finding that the item is what that party claims. This is the core purpose of authentication.
Option B is incorrect because records, including many digital records, can often be authenticated through testimony or certification from a person with knowledge, such as a custodian of records, depending on the applicable rule and context. Option C is wrong because authentication is not something that must be
"reviewed and voted on" by a jury as a prerequisite; it is an evidentiary foundation issue generally handled by the court. Option D is also incorrect because even properly authenticated evidence must still be relevant to be admissible. Authentication and relevance are separate requirements, and satisfying one does not eliminate the need for the other. For CFE purposes, the essential idea is that authentication establishes genuineness and identity, so A is the correct answer.