Data Recovery Case File · Second Fixes & Trade Handoffs · The Quote Contains Information
A File List From Another Lab Proves the Drive Has Already Been Read
His enquiry arrives with a competing position already established. A drive that stopped being detected by his machine's firmware, where "another service has recovered a list of my data and quoted me a figure including a destination drive." That list is the most valuable thing in his enquiry — producing it means they reached the drive and read its structures, which tells him more about his prospects than the price does.
| Media | 2TB hard drive — not detected by host firmware; assessed by another provider who produced a recoverable file listing and a quotation including destination media |
| Reported situation | Drive no longer detected by host firmware · assessed by another recovery provider · file listing produced by that provider · quotation given including a destination drive · owner assuming physical failure · comparison sought |
| Fault class | Device-level failure with demonstrated readability — successful listing indicating structures reached; extent of prior intervention to be established |
| Equipment used | Existing file listing treated as evidence of achieved access · whether prior work wrote to the drive established before any new attempt · current draw measured on a controlled bench supply · imaged write-blocked before any reconstruction · listing verified against recovered content |
The decode: what the other lab's work has already established
Why a file list is not a small thing: to produce one, they must have restored enough access to read the drive's directory structures. That is most of the difficulty in any recovery — a drive not detected by firmware has to be reached before anything can be listed, and they reached it.
What that tells him about his own prospects: the drive is readable by someone with the right equipment. His assumption of physical failure is probably right, and it is a physical failure that has already been worked around once — which is considerably more encouraging than an enquiry with no assessment behind it.
Why the listing is also the thing to scrutinise: a list of filenames demonstrates that directory structures were read. It does not by itself demonstrate that the file contents are intact — those are separate regions, and a directory can survive where data has not. Whether the listed files open is the question worth asking of any provider.
What is worth establishing before anything else, and it is not the price: what was actually done to the drive. If the earlier work was read-only, the drive is as it was; if anything was written, the current state reflects that — and a second attempt has to account for it.
Why that question is fair to ask of them: a provider acting in good faith will say whether they imaged the drive, whether they opened it, and whether any repair was attempted. It costs nothing and prevents both repetition and false assumptions.
Whether an image already exists, which changes everything: if they captured the drive, the difficult and risky part is done and the material sits on a stable copy. A drive that has been successfully imaged does not need to be read again, and that is worth knowing before it is handled further.
Why the destination drive being included in a quote is normal: recovered material has to go somewhere, and it is never written back to the source. Including the media is ordinary practice rather than padding, though it is worth being clear about what capacity is being supplied.
What comparing quotations should actually compare: not the figure alone. Whether the drive would need opening, whether parts are required, what the terms are if the attempt fails, and whether the listed files have been verified as openable — those determine what is being bought.
What must not happen while he decides: no powering the drive to check anything, and no further attempts elsewhere. A drive that has been reached once should not be spent demonstrating it can be reached again.
On the bench
The existing file listing was treated as evidence of achieved access — production of a listing requiring that directory structures were successfully read on a drive not detected by host firmware, which establishes readability while not itself demonstrating that file contents are intact, those occupying separate regions. Whether prior work wrote to the drive was established before any new attempt, read-only assessment leaving the original state intact whereas repair or capture attempts alter the position. Imaging ran write-blocked before any reconstruction.
The outcome
The existing listing treated as evidence of achieved access, prior write activity established first, and the drive imaged before any reconstruction. Free assessment, one fixed written figure including VAT; where a drive has to be opened, 50% of parts and labour is payable upfront with the balance only on success — otherwise no recovery, no fee. The decode: that file list is the useful part of what you already have. Producing it means someone reached a drive your machine cannot detect — so ask what they did to it, whether an image exists, and whether the listed files actually open.
When you already have a quote and a file list
Ask three questions before comparing prices. First, what was actually done to the drive — read-only assessment leaves it as it was, while anything written changes what a second attempt is working with. Second, whether an image was taken, because if the drive has already been captured the difficult part is done and it needn't be read again. Third, whether the listed files have been opened and verified: a directory listing proves the structures were read, not that the contents survived, since those are separate regions. Then compare what's being bought — whether opening is needed, whether parts are required, and the terms if it fails.
Ask what was done to the drive — call Easy Data Recovery on 028 9002 0144; existing listing treated as evidence of achieved access, prior write activity established first, imaged before any reconstruction.
Request a quote online →
Our case files are drawn from genuine enquiries received by our laboratory over the past ten years, anonymised to protect client confidentiality. Each one describes the diagnostic and recovery procedure our engineers apply to that fault, using the equipment listed.