The questions we get asked, in plain English.

The exports themselves are documents, admissibility in family proceedings is governed by the Family Procedure Rules and the discretion of the court. What we provide is verifiability: SHA-256 integrity hashes recorded when material is taken in, which help the document satisfy authenticity challenges. Whether a particular document is admitted in a particular hearing is for the court.

Hearsay rules apply differently in family proceedings (especially in children matters) than in civil. We don't determine the hearsay status of evidence, that's a matter for counsel. We do preserve the original form of the communication and its metadata so the court can assess for itself.

Every evidence file is given a SHA-256 integrity hash when it is taken in, and the hash is recorded in the report's exhibit index. Any party, either side or the court, can independently verify that a supplied copy is bit-for-bit identical to the file we recorded, so nothing was modified between intake and export.

Yes for FPR. CPR-style disclosure lists are on the roadmap; ask if you need it now.

Yes. The record, the verification and the bundle-shaped output are the same. Our employment tribunal evidence guide covers time limits, subject access requests, Slack and Teams exports, disclosure and covert recordings.

WhatsApp .txt/.zip; one or many .eml files; standard .mbox; Android SMS Backup & Restore SMS/MMS XML; iMazing and generic CSV/TSV; LinkedIn messages.csv; Snapchat chat_history.json; Apple Messages sms.db/chat.db from a Mac, including modern attributed-body messages, with a picker to choose which conversation belongs to the case; Messenger/Instagram JSON or a ZIP containing one conversation; Telegram Desktop exports in both HTML (the default) and JSON; Slack workspace export ZIPs (or day files with users.json); Microsoft Teams Graph JSON, the Teams data export tool ZIP or a Graph PowerShell CSV; Skype and Teams personal messages.json; Google Chat Takeout messages.json; Discord data packages and DiscordChatExporter JSON; Viva Engage Messages.csv; and conservative generic message JSON. Workplace exports keep every message's channel and thread. Signal's native encrypted backup is not supported.

Yes. Select several compatible files together or add batches later. Each batch is preserved and SHA-256 hashed; the case analysis is rebuilt over the exact-deduplicated combined record. Imports with more than two sender labels require explicit group/multi-party confirmation so unrelated mailbox or phone-backup threads are not mixed silently.

iMazing CSV is the preferred route. Direct sms.db/chat.db import is beta and reads rows with plain-text bodies. Apple's modern attributed-body records, tapbacks, edits and attachment-only rows may not expose plain text and are reported as skipped rather than reconstructed or guessed. Keep the original database and any WAL/attachment material for evidential review.

No. Customer evidence is never used to train models. The local rule-based overview does not send chat content to an AI provider. For the optional Deep Fact-Finding Review, we disclose the proposed provider, what will be sent and the estimated provider cost, then require your explicit opt-in before sending any chat. Provider terms and safeguards are included in that disclosure.

Case data is stored on our own dedicated server, hosted by Hetzner in Germany (EU). The standard overview is local and rule-based. Separately, an explicitly opted-in Deep Fact-Finding Review sends the scoped chat record to the disclosed AI provider, and opted-in draft transcription sends relevant audio to the disclosed transcription provider. See the security page for the full picture.

Not for the local rule-based overview. For a Deep Fact-Finding Review, no chat is sent until we have disclosed the provider, data flow and estimated provider cost and you have explicitly opted in. Declining does not turn the local overview into AI processing; it simply means the deep review is not performed.

Your case data is kept until you delete it. You can delete individual uploads, evidence files and reports at any time, and you can delete your entire account and all data with it, self-serve, from account settings. Deletion removes the data from our database and our disk immediately.

Yes. Available on request via the contact form.

You are responsible for the lawful basis on which you're processing third-party data. The most common bases in family proceedings are "necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims" under Article 9(2)(f) of the UK GDPR and the corresponding DPA 2018 Schedule 1 condition. We don't audit your basis but we expect you to have one.

Parsing and direct counts are deterministic once an export has been recognised, but identity labels, missing/deleted content, ambiguous source timestamps and export limitations still matter. Tone and behavioural-pattern rules are indicators for review, not findings. The source table, parser warnings and preserved originals show what was imported and what may have been skipped.

AI output can be wrong. In the Deep Fact-Finding Review it is treated as structured input, not a final answer: overlapping findings are deterministically deduplicated and synthesised, direction and directedness are classified, and every quotation must match the source exactly or be excluded. The report is neutral and two-sided, but it still requires professional judgement.

No, and we are not trying to. Advice, drafting, negotiation and advocacy are your solicitor's work. We handle the reading and organising that comes before it, so the time you pay for goes on judgement rather than page-turning. Most solicitors would rather receive an organised record than build one.

Where engaged by a solicitor as part of a specific matter, we operate within the solicitor's evidence-handling workflow and the privilege attaching to that workflow. Where engaged direct by an individual, we are not subject to LPP, but our staff are bound by NDAs.

If you have a solicitor, it's usually better for them to engage us. That way the work product is covered by LPP and the solicitor signs off on what's exported.

One-off charge, one export from one source, one verified court-style summary. No subscription, no auto-renew, and the £49 is credited in full against a Case Review within 30 days.

It is a one-off payment per case, with 12 months of access. No auto-renew. You keep read-only access to existing exports forever.

14 days from purchase on Case Review. Taster: refundable if the export fails. Court Bundle: refundable up to the point the bundle is generated.

The local rule-based overview is processed by software. The Court Bundle / white-glove service, including the optional Deep Fact-Finding Review, is not fully automated or self-serve and may involve authorised staff handling the record to deliver and quality-check the agreed work. We explain access and scope before engagement.

After scope and explicit AI-processing consent, the full supplied record is divided into overlapping, gap-aware context windows. An AI provider returns structured findings. Deterministic code deduplicates and synthesises overlaps; direction and directedness are classified; quotations are checked exactly against the source; and the report presents both parties under the same rules. It does not advocate for either side.

The Court Bundle is £2,499 per case: a hearing-ready, paginated, hash-chained bundle with exhibit list, chronology and source manifest, with a supervised deep review and a human quality check. Exceptionally large records are quoted individually. A deep-review report assists fact-finding and solicitor review; it is not itself evidence or a court document.

Yes. The product is live: sign up and run a case today, and the £49 Taster is a one-off way to see your own record analysed. Court Bundle matters are scoped via the contact page.

Be upfront about gaps: the in-product audit-log UI and the CPR-style disclosure-list export are on the roadmap. Ask for specifics if it matters for your decision.