Our position · standards and regulation, Nottingham
Since the Forensic Science Regulator's statutory Code came into operation in October 2023, two activities have been in it, and version 2 of the Code, in force from October 2025, keeps them: device forensics (DIG 100) and the recovery of CCTV (DIG 300). Both name ISO/IEC 17025 as the standard. This laboratory does not hold it, and UKAS lists no schedule against us. Most suppliers give little information on the extent to which the Code applies. The Act gives the Code three limbs: crime detected or investigated in England and Wales, evidence intended for use in a criminal court there, and any other purpose a Secretary of State adds by regulation (no regulations have yet been made). All other types of work fall outside it, such as insurance work, employment matters, family cases and civil claims. That makes up the majority of the work seen in this room. Nottingham Trent University was ranked top in the UK for forensic science in the Guardian University Guide 2026. So many of the readers most likely to go through this page line by line are in Nottingham, and it is written for them. The first call is free and settles which side of the line you are on. Instructions start at £800 + VAT, and the amount is fixed in writing before any work begins.
An engineer will talk it through with you, in confidence
0115 8220606
| What to ask | What turns on it | What we say |
|---|---|---|
| Accredited for which activities, exactly? | The declared scope is what accreditation relates to, so the scope is what is important, not the word itself | No. There is no UKAS schedule in existence for any activity undertaken by this laboratory |
| Is this a criminal case or a civil one? | The criminal side is what falls within the statutory Code. Nothing else does | We say which side your case is on, and when to instruct someone else |
| Who performs the examination, and who signs the report? | Identifying whoever performed the examination is required under the civil rules | A single named examiner, whose signature it also is |
| Do the limits go in the report? | Leave a limit out of the report and the opposing party will find it for you | They go into the body of the report, not into a covering email |
| What method was used, and could it be repeated? | Nobody can check an examination that nobody wrote down | The method described, hash values provided, and notes made during the bench work |
Forensic costs start at £800 + VAT depending on the scope of the job, as identified on your first call to us: what time frame and specific dates are in dispute? What equipment or accounts are involved? What evidence is needed? Your first call to us is free. Nothing is charged until you have our quote in writing.
Before the evidence is opened, a hardware blocker is put in front of it and the sector-by-sector image is taken behind the blocker. The original bytes stay put while the image is acquired. This is the first thing a court will verify, and the one claim on this page that can be supported by evidence instead of merely claimed.
Both hash values are taken upon creation of the image, and again from the closed file once imaging is complete. Every item has its own unique exhibit number. Notes are made at the bench by the person doing the work, while the job is running, rather than pieced together two weeks later.
The steps taken follow a specific order, documenting each tool used along with its version number, so another person can replicate the same procedure. If the evidence gives no definitive answer, or gives an answer that only holds under specific circumstances, that is documented too.
If you give another party a result they can't verify themselves, then you have given them grounds for argument. So the bundle contains all the information: exhibit numbers, hash values, dated handovers (signed at both ends), the image each conclusion came from, and the notes taken while working at the bench. Run it again and you get the same answer.
The regulated field is smaller than anybody expects: recovery of footage from CCTV and video systems is DIG 300, and the Regulator's numbers for 2024–25 put 33 organisations against it. Twenty-nine of them were police forces and one was a government body, which leaves three commercial providers, with indicative compliance across the group at 59%. Specialist analysis, such as speed, distance or identification, is DIG 301: 43 organisations, compliance at 19%, and no one holding accreditation for the specialist analysis sub-activities. So: three companies in England and Wales. When a competitor claims accreditation, ask which schedule, and covering what.
An employment matter. At the very top, above our method, sat the accreditation position, not buried underneath. The solicitor opposite read it, put two questions about the imaging, and then let the topic drop. When the hearing came, the argument was not about when files had moved.
None whatsoever. UKAS holds no schedule against us for any activity, and this laboratory does not hold ISO/IEC 17025, a statement that opens every document we produce. We are not barred from the work because of this, and courts still read what we write; however, the opposing party has a right to know, so it is provided before anyone asks.
Not on that ground alone. Under the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021, departing from the Code does not, in itself, make anybody liable in proceedings of either kind. Instead, the Code can be put into evidence, and the weight attached to it is for the court. Weight is therefore the battlefield, and method is how weight is earned, which is why our method is published.
Section 11 of the 2021 Act anchors the whole regime, on two points in force today, with a third limb for any purpose a Secretary of State adds by regulation, and none has been. The two limbs in force are crime detected or investigated in England and Wales, and evidence intended for criminal proceedings. Employment tribunals fall outside both, as do family cases, civil claims and insurance matters. Most instructions reaching this bench sit outside the Code, and the first call establishes where yours falls.
No. In the policing framework for video evidence there is a line. Video viewed during an investigation sits on one side. Image analysis (speed, distance, height, comparing one face or one vehicle against another) sits on the other, and belongs to specialists with ISO/IEC 17025. We do recovery, conversion, and handover under a continuity record. We express no opinion about what a measurement would show.
Remove power from the DVR before you do anything else: as long as it is powered, it keeps writing, and the oldest footage goes first. Then get a quote and post the disk in. The first look is free. CCTV and DVR work is £400 + VAT, quoted in writing before any work starts, and anything recovered from the disk goes no further than our bench.