Yes. Private investigators can gather evidence which is admissible in a court of law, subject to the discretion of the judge. For evidence to be legally admissible, investigators must follow strict practices and procedures. There are, however, exceptions and important considerations relating to the admissibility of surveillance evidence in UK courts.

Gathering evidence for use in court is a delicate matter which should only be handled by an experienced private investigator. When it comes to covert surveillance or checking on a person's activities, one mistake could alert the subject and undermine the case. Experience and discretion are crucial when gathering proof that stands up in court.
Maintaining the admissibility of evidence requires following UK law. Competent private investigators understand what counts as legal surveillance. Any evidence obtained through trespassing, hacking, intimidation, or unlawful methods will be rejected by the court and could expose the investigator to prosecution. Judges only admit surveillance evidence when it is collected fairly and lawfully.
The Investigatory Powers Act (2016) reshaped how internet data can be accessed. This legislation tightened restrictions, making careless data handling a criminal offence. For private investigators, it limits what can legally be done in online research and surveillance, further defining what is admissible digital evidence in UK courts.
Reports prepared for court must be clear and precise. A private investigator’s report needs to use neutral language and present facts in a structured way. Vague or speculative reporting undermines admissibility. Judges expect a report that shows professionalism and leaves little room for misinterpretation.
Evidence does not need to be perfect, but higher quality makes it more persuasive. Professional investigators record video and photographs in high definition, with accurate time and date stamps. Metadata can also strengthen the case. This kind of detailed surveillance evidence is often relied on in personal injury claims or insurance disputes.
In family law cases such as child custody or divorce, the quality of footage is critical. Simply filming a subject carrying a box does not necessarily show whether they are fit or unfit. Surveillance should capture clear context - what the box contained, the subject’s movements across the day, and over a longer period. Clear, legally obtained surveillance footage is far more likely to be admissible in UK courts.
In the UK, polygraph test results are not admissible in either criminal or civil courts. Other countries sometimes allow them, usually only when administered by law enforcement. UK private investigators therefore do not rely on lie detector results for legal proceedings.
Private investigators are often engaged to provide evidence in child custody disputes, divorce cases, and personal injury claims. In custody disputes, surveillance helps demonstrate day to day care arrangements. In divorce proceedings, investigators may be asked to prove infidelity or hidden assets. For corporate clients, surveillance evidence is frequently used in personal injury fraud cases. In all situations, admissibility depends on whether the surveillance was legal, proportionate, and relevant.
If a client needs to serve court paperwork, investigators can also act as impartial process servers. This helps ensure documents are delivered properly and recognised by the court.
Yes, if it is obtained lawfully and fairly. Courts consider legality, relevance, and proportionality. Unlawful methods such as trespass or hacking will usually render evidence inadmissible.
Yes. Investigators can give evidence as witnesses of fact and can be cross examined on their observations, methods, timestamps, and reports.
Covert surveillance can be lawful if carried out without trespass or harassment and in line with privacy and data protection rules. Filming in public places is generally allowed, but recording inside private property without consent is likely unlawful.
Consent is not usually required in public spaces where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. That said, recording must still be proportionate and not amount to harassment.
Yes. Family courts may consider legally obtained video, photographs, and logs. The key is relevance, clarity, and lawful collection. Context across several days often helps.
Often, yes. High quality, time stamped footage that shows capability over time can be persuasive, provided it was gathered lawfully and proportionately.
Useful phrases include legal surveillance UK, admissibility of video evidence UK, surveillance for child custody cases, surveillance in divorce proceedings, personal injury surveillance admissibility, and process serving for UK courts.
We are leading private investigators based in the UK. Visit our homepage to learn more about services including legal surveillance, process serving, background checks, and court ready reporting, or request a free, no obligation quote.
Asset tracing is the process of identifying, tracking, and recovering assets that may have been hidden, moved, or misappropriated. At Private Investigators UK, our team is frequently instructed to trace assets in complex situations such as divorce, fraud investigations, bankruptcy cases, and debt recovery. This work often supports wider asset recovery strategies in the UK and internationally.

Whether someone is trying to hide money offshore or transfer property to avoid creditors, tracing these assets calls for a mix of financial analysis, investigative skill, and legal support. Here is how it works, step by step.
The first stage is to define the target. We build a picture of the subject’s financial footprint - bank accounts, business interests, property ownership, vehicles, luxury goods, investments, and cryptocurrency wallets.
We use public records and lawful sources such as Companies House, Land Registry, court filings, open source intelligence, and interviews. In corporate cases we also look for shell companies, nominee directors, and links to ultimate beneficial owners (UBOs). The aim is to map the assets, spot gaps, and flag red flags that point to hidden or transferred wealth.
Once assets are identified, the priority is to secure value before it moves. Legal teams may seek a freezing injunction (also called a Mareva injunction) or a worldwide freezing order to stop dissipation. Timing matters - a short delay can give the subject room to shift funds or sell property.
Our role is to supply clear, court-ready evidence that supports these applications and to work with solicitors and counsel so orders are obtained and served correctly.
With the position stabilised, we follow the trail. Funds may pass through layers of companies, third parties, and accounts in other jurisdictions. We combine document review, data analysis, digital forensics, and manual cross checks to simplify the chain of ownership. The goal is a clear route to enforcement that stands up to scrutiny.
This stage often uncovers additional value - trusts, informal loans, or side agreements that disguise control.
Recovery depends on the assets and jurisdiction. Routes can include negotiated settlement, court enforcement, garnishee orders over bank funds, forced sale of property, charging orders over shares, or recognition and enforcement of a judgment abroad. Breach of a freezing order can lead to contempt of court, which is a serious matter.
These orders are applied for by solicitors through the courts. Our investigations provide the factual basis and evidence needed to support them.
We work on cryptocurrency tracing where funds have moved through exchanges or mixers. Blockchain analysis can link wallets to services and help tie activity to named users once platform data is disclosed. Recovery typically involves disclosure orders, freezing orders against known exchange accounts, and cooperation with platforms to restrict transfers.
Hidden assets are often offshore. We coordinate with trusted contacts to access foreign records, interpret filings, and liaise with local lawyers so UK orders can be recognised or mirrored. Cross border enforcement of judgments is a specialist area and usually requires a local law firm; our role is to keep the evidence flow clear and complete.
We also support solicitors in preparing applications for injunctions and disclosure orders.
Time and cost vary with scope, jurisdictions, and how well the subject has hidden assets. A straightforward UK only matter can move quickly. Complex cross border cases with crypto, shell entities, and nominees take longer. Early scoping helps set a realistic plan and budget.
If you are struggling to locate assets that you believe you are owed, get in touch with us. We can assess your case in confidence and advise on next steps - from early intelligence to full asset recovery.
A freezing injunction stops a defendant from moving or selling assets before judgment. It is used where there is a real risk of dissipation. In wider cases courts may grant a worldwide freezing order.
They are disclosure orders. The first compels an innocent third party to provide information that identifies wrongdoers or the asset trail. The second allows access to bank or platform records to trace and preserve misappropriated funds.
Often, yes. On chain analysis can locate wallets and link activity to exchanges. With disclosure orders and cooperation from platforms, funds can be frozen and claims brought.
Recognition depends on the country. Many cases need local lawyers to mirror or enforce the order. We coordinate evidence so recognition and enforcement can move faster.
Anything from days to months. It depends on jurisdictions, cooperation from third parties, and how complex the structures are.
No. This page is general information. Always speak to a solicitor for legal advice on your case.
Most people are open and honest about their living situations. Sometimes, though, the truth gets bent for personal or financial gain. Typical problem areas include unlawful subletting, tenancy fraud, or someone misrepresenting where they live to affect maintenance, benefits, or council support.

False claims can harm private landlords, small businesses, and local authorities. If you need proof of cohabitation in the UK, the key is lawful, clear evidence collected over time so a court or decision maker can rely on it.
People seek cohabitation evidence for different reasons. Common scenarios include:
Misrepresentation of cohabitation is common in fraud cases. Government figures suggest benefit fraud costs taxpayers around £2 billion a year, and unlawful subletting of social housing is also treated as a criminal offence.
Citizens Advice defines cohabitation as two people living together as a couple in a relationship equivalent to marriage. Cohabiting families in the UK have grown from 1.5 million in the mid-1990s to more than 3.3 million today, making it the fastest growing family type.
Not all cohabitation is fraudulent, but people may hide or misstate living arrangements to gain financially. Landlords also face cohabitation issues where tenants sublet without consent.
If you intend to rely on cohabitation evidence in court, you need credible proof. This usually means a detailed cohabitation report supported by photographic and video surveillance, ideally collected over two to three weeks. Courts prefer continuous monitoring rather than isolated snapshots.
Useful evidence can include:
Courts expect clarity. Smartphone images can be acceptable but high-resolution cameras and telephoto lenses provide stronger, more reliable evidence.
Alongside surveillance, checks such as electoral roll searches, Land Registry entries, Companies House records, or OSINT research may support your claim. These help establish whether someone is genuinely living where they say they are.
Hiring a private investigator for cohabitation surveillance gives you:
Private investigators can save you time, provide impartial evidence, and raise the chance your case is taken seriously.
Proof can include surveillance logs, photographs, video, and supporting records like utility bills or mail. The evidence should show consistent, ongoing residence.
Usually two to three weeks, to show an ongoing living arrangement rather than isolated visits.
Yes, if it is clear, continuous, and collected lawfully. Courts often rely on professional cohabitation reports from investigators.
Yes. In both social housing and private tenancies, unlawful subletting can amount to tenancy fraud and can be prosecuted.
In today’s economy, it’s increasingly common for employees to take on second jobs - weekend shifts, freelance gigs, or online side hustles. While moonlighting can help workers manage the cost of living, it can also create real risks for employers.

If a second job affects performance, creates a conflict of interest, or breaches your company policies, you need to address it carefully. This guide explains what moonlighting is, how to spot the warning signs, and practical steps you can take - including when to bring in a private investigator.
Moonlighting means holding a second job outside someone’s main employment. It is not automatically unlawful, but it becomes a problem when any of the following apply:
Some employees manage extra work without issues. Problems arise when it is hidden, unmanaged, or begins to impact your business.
Moonlighting can be subtle. Typical red flags include:
These patterns do not prove moonlighting on their own - personal issues or burnout may also be in play. Treat them as prompts to look closer.
Left alone, these issues can harm customer experience, increase turnover, and damage your reputation.
A clear, written policy helps you manage secondary employment fairly. Useful points to include:
Share the policy, obtain acknowledgement, and apply it consistently to avoid claims of unfair treatment.
If you suspect moonlighting, follow a fair and proportionate process:
If you need external fact-finding, consider discreet help rather than confronting without evidence.
Confronting an employee without evidence is risky. A discreet investigation can confirm facts while protecting the working relationship. At Private Investigators UK we support HR and legal teams with:
Our goal is to provide clear, tribunal-ready evidence so you can act confidently. If nothing is found, the matter stays confidential.
Not by itself. Issues arise if it breaches contract terms, company policy, working time limits, or confidentiality duties, or if it creates a conflict of interest.
You can set rules and require disclosure and approval. A blanket ban may be hard to justify. Clear criteria and a fair approval process are safer.
Potentially, if there is serious misconduct such as dishonesty, conflict of interest, or misuse of company time or data. Follow a fair process and take advice before disciplinary action.
Public posts can be reviewed. For workplace devices or personal data, follow your policies and data protection rules and be proportionate.
When you need discreet, lawful fact finding to verify patterns, confirm conflicts, or gather evidence without escalating tensions.
Moonlighting is not always a problem, but if it affects performance, creates a conflict, or breaches trust, it is worth addressing. Do not let suspicion linger or jump to conclusions without facts.
To speak in confidence and get a free, no obligation quote, visit our contact page. We will help you assess the situation and plan next steps with discretion and professionalism.
You are reading the PrivateInvestigators-UK blog — home to the UK's leading detective agency. Learn more about us by visiting our homepage PrivateInvestigators-UK.com.