Taking work now — the first look is freeSpinning disks in a machine Quicker still, give us a ring:0203 0868633
ADR Advanced Data Recovery 0203 0868633 Price my job
ADR / Evidence, claims and footage / Accreditation, and its absence

Our standing · regulation and accreditation, London

No accreditation at all. On most instructions, none is needed.

There is no accreditation by way of ISO/IEC 17025. There is no schedule down against this laboratory by UKAS, regardless of the task. We have neither a police contract nor Home Office approval, and no trade association backs us. That is our position and that is where it sits, at the top of every single report generated by this bench. The statutory Code of the Regulator was updated to its second edition on 2 October 2025. Two of the tasks regulated by this Code reach a bench like this: DIG 100, data collected and processed from digital storage, and DIG 300, footage recovered from CCTV and surveillance video. ISO/IEC 17025 is the standard set for DIG 100, and for DIG 300 unless an alternative framework is accepted. Therefore, there are some criminal justice tasks which should go elsewhere. Below we identify these tasks. The legislation behind the Code is restricted to crime investigated in this jurisdiction and evidence prepared for use in a criminal court. All other matters, i.e. civil claims, employment issues, family cases and insurance claims, are outside the scope of the Code, and between them they make up most of what we are asked to do. Our area of operation takes in the Royal Courts of Justice, two of the four Inns of Court and tens of thousands of legal jobs. This page is written for readers who verify. The first telephone enquiry is free. Instructions commence at £800 + VAT, put in writing prior to the commencement of any work.

Written to meet CPR Part 35 Chain of custody logged as the work goes Independent, and kept in confidence

Talk it over with an engineer, in confidence
0203 0868633

Where the Code reaches, and stops.

What changed in OctoberThe Regulator published the second version of its statutory Code of Practice on 5 June 2025. The second version came into force on 2 October 2025. Table 1 of this document sets out the regulated activities, and two of these activities apply to the work done here. DIG 100 refers to data acquired, processed and examined from digital storage devices. DIG 300 refers to footage recovered and processed from CCTV and surveillance video systems.
Our position on itIndependent and unaccredited. No accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025 exists. UKAS has no schedule down against us for any activity whatsoever. No police contract exists. No Home Office approval exists. No trade association supports us. These statements head each report and appear above the method section.
How far that Code reachesThe Code relies upon the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021. Section 11 of this Act restricts the application of the Code to two areas: crime investigated or detected in England and Wales, and evidence prepared for presentation in a criminal court. Tribunals operate outside this remit. Family cases also operate outside this remit. Civil claims and claims involving insurers also operate outside this remit.
And what it meansSection 4 consists of just three lines. Departing from the Code is not sufficient in law, on its own, to make anyone liable in either jurisdiction. However, despite this, the Code may be presented to a court if necessary and the court may take account of that departure. The exact wording of the declaration derives from FSR-G-200.

Five questions to put to any laboratory, this one too.

Not listed? Tell us what it does →
Your questionWhat hangs on itOur reply
Accredited for which named activities?Accreditation relates to a scope, never to a company as a whole, so the scope is the area to readNone. UKAS maintains no schedule against this laboratory for any activity
Is your matter criminal or civil?Only the criminal side of matters is subject to statutory regulation by the Code. Nothing else isWe identify which yours is, and when to have it done elsewhere
Who did the work? Who signs the report?PD35 3.2 requests that the report indicates who carried out the examination, and under whose supervisionOne named examiner, and the signature is their own
Do the limits go in the report?If you keep a limit out, the other side will put it in for youIn the report itself only, never as part of a covering letter
Which method was applied? Could it be repeated?Any examination not documented cannot be checkedDocumented method, hash values provided, notes made at the bench during the work
How it reaches us: get a straight quote first (via phone or form), then send it via tracked, insured post or drop it off at our Guildford intake lab, Monday to Friday, 9am to 5:30pm (no appointment needed); our Guildford lab takes it in, and the cost of sending it back to you is on us. Unsure what to put with it when sending it to us? Give us a ring before sealing your box and we'll put you through to an engineer who can tell you what you need to include and what needs to stay behind. All of this information is also outlined on our guide to packing and posting.

The sequence we follow.

Other jobs on the log →
01

Say what has happened, in confidence — then a figure in writing Free

Our forensic charges start at £800 + VAT. The amount charged depends upon the size of the task at hand, and that is determined in the course of our first telephone conversation: dates and events in dispute; machines and accounts involved; what needs to be demonstrated. There is no charge made for the initial telephone call. Furthermore, nothing that you would be billed for commences until a written fee quotation has been delivered to you.

That call goes no further than usA single figure, put in writingThe questions evidence must settle
02

No writes reach the exhibit

A hardware blocker is used prior to opening anything at all, and the sector-by-sector copy is made behind it, so none of the original moves. This is the first thing probed by a court, and the only claim on this page which can be demonstrated rather than merely asserted.

The blocker goes in firstNo byte written back
03

Hashes, exhibit numbers and bench notes

MD5 and SHA-256 are obtained during the write, and again from the finished file once it has closed. Each item has an exhibit reference number assigned to it. Bench notes are recorded while working, rather than being an attempted reconstruction of events two weeks later.

Two hashes, each endEvery item gets a reference
04

A method open to repetition

Steps are recorded sequentially, tools are identified with version numbers, and a second examiner may then run the sequence through from the start if necessary. Where material provides no results, or returns an answer which is qualified because caveats exist, this too goes down.

Steps another lab can repeatLimits written down, not implied
05

What the bundle holds, and who signed for it

Hand the opposite side a finding they have no way to verify, and the argument is theirs. So the bundle contains everything: each exhibit numbered, the hash values for each, dated and countersigned handovers, the images used for the conclusions reached, and the bench notes created whilst the work was ongoing. Repeat the steps and the result does not change.

Each finding tied to an exhibitHashes taken, and each handover loggedEvery step can be repeated

What the bench has learned

  • Accreditation and certification are different: whilst a certification audit reviews an organisation's management system, UKAS evaluates an organisation's competence against a specified scope. Neither ISO 9001 nor ISO 27001 addresses technical competence. A supplier who confuses these two areas of review has provided some insight.
  • Scope is everything: a schedule covering geolocation activities within DIG 200 carries nothing whatsoever into DIG 300, the recovery of CCTV footage. Ask which activities are actually listed upon it.
  • Extracting is not analysing: extracting footage off a disk and handing it over is one activity. Measuring how fast, how far or how tall, or holding one face or vehicle against another, is quite a different matter, and the latter is not our field of operation.
  • The rules the report adheres to: a civil report adheres to Civil Procedure Rules Part 35 and Practice Direction 35. A criminal report adheres to CrimPR Part 19, in the 2025 Rules; the 2025 Rules replaced the 2020 Rules, and the 2020 Rules were revoked.

The regulated field is far smaller than anybody assumes: DIG 300 is the activity code for recovering footage from CCTV and surveillance video, and there were only 33 organisations reported against it in the Regulator’s annual report for 2024–25. Of those, twenty-nine organisations were police forces and one organisation was a government department, leaving three commercial providers. Indicative compliance across the whole 33 organisations was 59%. DIG 301 is specialist analysis: speed, distance or face/vehicle identification between one video recording and another. There were 43 organisations reported against this activity, with compliance at 19%, and no organisations were accredited for the specialist analysis sub-activities. Therefore, there are only three companies in England and Wales. When a company claims they are accredited, ask them which schedule, and what is named on it.

One job, followed all the way through.

LDN · ADR-2026-3416JOB LOGGED ✓

Page one carried the declaration

This is an employment matter. The accreditation information was displayed at the top of the first page, above the methodology, rather than being buried at the end of the document requiring the person reading it to search for it. The solicitor representing our opponent read that section first, asked us two questions regarding how the image was created and did not proceed further. By the time the hearing took place, when the files had moved was not among the arguments.

The order of events never contestedThe conclusions held

What helps, and what harms.

Do this much first

  • Please provide details of which court or tribunal the case will be heard before
  • Enquire about accreditation on your first call
  • Provide details of who may lawfully authorise the examination
  • Include your deadline and any directions order

What sets us back

  • Treating any certificate as if it was conclusive evidence on all issues in the case
  • Taking a claim that has not been confirmed in writing
  • Leaving the question for resolution at the hearing
  • Using ISO 9001 or ISO 27001 instead of ISO/IEC 17025

The questions that come up first.

Are you accredited for anything?

For nothing whatever. Name an activity and UKAS still holds no schedule against this laboratory for it, and ISO/IEC 17025 is not something we have. We also do not have any contracts with the police or approval from the Home Office. We also are not members of any trade associations. Every document we issue begins with this information. The work is not closed to us because of this, and courts do read our documents. We would prefer the party opposite obtain the necessary information from us rather than have them dig through each document to find it. Thus, we provide it up front.

Does that weaken the report?

Not on that basis alone. Section 4 of the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021 provides that a departure from the Code does not, by itself, create liability in either type of proceedings. However, section 4 does permit the Code to be introduced into evidence before the court, which then determines the weight of the departure. Weight is where the debate will occur, and since weight is determined by methodology, we publish ours and set it down in detail.

Where does the Code not reach?

Section 11 of the 2021 Act ties the regime to only two things: (i) the detection or investigation of crime within England and Wales, and (ii) preparation of evidence to be used in a criminal court in England and Wales. An employment tribunal is neither, and nor is a family court, a civil claim, or a file sitting with an insurer. Most instructions received by our bench are outside the scope of the Code entirely, and the first call determines which side yours falls upon.

Is there work you will not take because of this?

Yes. First, image analysis: speed, distance, height, or a face or vehicle from one recording held against another. This is DIG 301, which is specialist work under ISO/IEC 17025, and upon what a measurement would give, we do not express a view. When a criminal court requires an accredited provider, the instruction will go somewhere else, on the first call. Never live communications while in transit. Also, nothing can be examined without having previously obtained recorded authorisation from someone legally entitled to provide such authorisation: examining a machine without prior authorisation engages Section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

Begin here if yours is doing the same thing.

The rest of our work → Shut out by BitLocker → What is left after a delete → Work that reaches court →

Off the mains first, because that is what protects the evidence.

Regardless of what contains the evidence, turn off electrical power to it before doing anything else: a recorder still operating overwrites its oldest evidence every hour. Once power is removed, secure a price quotation (either by phone or through submitting a form), then post us just the disk or drive (do not include the recorder or computer), or drop it off at our Guildford intake lab, Monday to Friday, 9am to 5:30pm (no appointment needed). Evaluation costs nothing; work on recorders costs £400 + VAT and forensic analysis starts at £800 + VAT, both prices agreed to in writing beforehand. What sits on that disk stays here.

0203 0868633

Price my job Sending it to Guildford