COURSE OF BEHAVIOUR • CONTEXT • SERIOUS EFFECT

Coercive Control Pre-Charge Investigations

Controlling or coercive behaviour allegations are built from a pattern, not a single incident. We analyse the relationship chronology, communications, financial and digital material, alleged impact, interview account and wider context before advising on evidence, reasonable lines of enquiry and pre-charge strategy.

Request a pre-charge review Police interview not happened yet?

IS THIS THE RIGHT STAGE?

What pattern of behaviour is actually alleged?

Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 requires repeated or continuous controlling or coercive behaviour between people who are personally connected, a serious effect on the other person, and knowledge or constructive knowledge of that serious effect. The chronology and cumulative context therefore matter.

The relationship and date range also affect the statutory scope. From 5 April 2023, amendments made by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 removed the previous cohabitation requirement for relevant former partners and widened the section 76 definition of “personally connected”. The amendment is not retrospective, so alleged behaviour before 5 April 2023 must be analysed under the version of section 76 then in force.

Interview completedYou have given an account and the investigation remains open.

On pre-charge bailYou have a bail return or review date and a charging decision may be approaching.

Released under investigationThere is no fixed bail date, but the police are still gathering or reviewing evidence.

File with the CPSThe case may already be with a reviewing prosecutor, but no final charge has been authorised.

Send us the key facts firstAllegation • police force • interview date • bail/RUI status • next date • core defence material

Request a pre-charge review

What does 'serious effect' mean?

The prosecution may seek to prove serious effect by showing fear that violence would be used on at least two occasions, or serious alarm or distress having a substantial adverse effect on usual day-to-day activities. The alleged impact should be tested against the evidence and the dates relied upon.

Changes to work, social activity, travel, finances, medical contact, home security or routine may be relied on. The defence should distinguish what is evidenced, what is inferred and what may have another explanation.

Messages, finances and relationship context

Investigations may rely on messages, call records, bank material, location evidence, smart-device data, social media, CCTV, witness accounts and records showing changes in routine. Individual communications should be read in sequence and in the wider relationship context rather than as isolated extracts.

Timing matters.

Ordinary relationship disagreements, shared financial arrangements or frequent contact are not automatically coercive control. The legal question is whether the evidence proves the required repeated or continuous controlling or coercive behaviour and its serious effect.

How we build the defence chronology

We map the alleged course of behaviour against messages, calls, visits, financial arrangements, living arrangements, separation dates, witness accounts and any police or safeguarding contact. This helps identify disputed events, missing context and periods where the prosecution theory does or does not fit the objective record.

Where appropriate, we identify evidence that should be preserved or obtained, including full message threads, CCTV, banking records, location material, third-party witnesses and records relevant to the alleged impact on day-to-day life.

What can pre-charge representations address?

Representations may address whether there is a qualifying course of behaviour, whether the alleged serious effect is evidenced and caused by that behaviour, whether the required knowledge is established, whether material has been taken out of context, and whether further enquiries should be completed before any charging decision.

What should you send us for the first review?

ChronologyA clear sequence of events, including key communications and dates.

DocumentsMessages, emails, records, photographs, receipts or other relevant material.

Witness materialPotential witnesses who can address disputed or contextual facts.

Personal impactEmployment, professional, health or family consequences where legally relevant.

Coercive control investigation FAQs

What must be proved for controlling or coercive behaviour?

Section 76 requires repeated or continuous controlling or coercive behaviour towards a person who is personally connected, a serious effect on that person, and proof that the suspect knew or ought to have known the behaviour would have that serious effect.

Do the people involved have to live together?

Not for conduct on or after 5 April 2023 where the amended statutory definition of personally connected applies. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 removed the previous cohabitation requirement for relevant former partners. The amendment is not retrospective, so earlier conduct must be assessed under the version of section 76 then in force.

What counts as a serious effect?

The prosecution can establish serious effect either by showing that the behaviour caused fear of violence on at least two occasions, or that it caused serious alarm or distress with a substantial adverse effect on usual day-to-day activities.

Can individual messages, financial arrangements or frequent contact prove coercive control by themselves?

Not necessarily. The offence is concerned with repeated or continuous controlling or coercive behaviour and its serious effect. Individual events should be placed within the full chronology, relationship context, causation evidence and cumulative pattern relied upon.

Can pre-charge representations guarantee no further action?

No. They can identify chronology problems, missing context, evidential weaknesses, causation issues, statutory-scope points or reasonable lines of enquiry that should be considered before charge, but the final decision remains with the investigator or prosecutor.

LEGAL GUIDEUpdated 30 September 2026

Prepared by Theodorous. Principal Solicitor: Paris Theodorou.

Official sourcesSerious Crime Act 2015, section 76 — legislation.gov.uk Domestic Abuse Act 2021, section 68 — legislation.gov.uk Domestic Abuse Act 2021 (Commencement No. 1) Regulations 2023 CPS: Controlling or Coercive Behaviour guidance

WHAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY PAYING FOR

What do you receive if you instruct us?

The value is in identifying the points capable of affecting the decision, obtaining or preserving the right material, and presenting the defence case in a form the investigator or prosecutor can properly assess.

Case and charging analysisWe identify the alleged offence, the issues the prosecution would need to prove, the present investigation stage and the realistic decisions available before charge.

Defence evidence planWe identify messages, CCTV, records, witnesses, expert material or other evidence that may undermine the allegation, support the defence account or expose a missing line of enquiry.

Written representationsWhere the timing and evidence justify it, we prepare structured submissions addressing evidential sufficiency, legal issues, reasonable enquiries, public interest and any lawful alternative to prosecution.

Follow-up and next-step adviceWe send the representations to the appropriate decision-maker, deal with sensible follow-up where required and advise on the response, further investigation or any charging decision.

When paid pre-charge work may not be justified

Sometimes the correct advice is not to send representations yet. We may advise that better evidence should first be obtained, a particular enquiry should be requested, the interview position should be protected, or a defence point should not be disclosed prematurely. If a letter would add little, be disproportionate to the issue or create unnecessary strategic risk, we will say so. No solicitor can guarantee that a charge will be avoided.

Current legal frameworkOur approach is grounded in the current Code for Crown Prosecutors, the Director’s Guidance on Charging and the disclosure framework. As at September 2026 the CPS is consulting on a draft ninth edition of the Code; that draft is not yet the operative Code and is not relied on as if it were in force.

Code for Crown Prosecutors Director's Guidance on Charging Attorney General's Disclosure Guidelines

Pre-charge strategy

Test the pattern, the impact and the context

A coercive-control case should be analysed as a sequence. The defence must identify what conduct is alleged, when it occurred, how it is said to be controlling or coercive, what serious effect is relied upon and what evidence connects the two.

Course of behaviour

Repeated incidents, communications and decisions need to be placed in date order. The defence should separate conduct that is admitted, disputed, innocently explained or unsupported by independent evidence.

Serious effect and causation

The prosecution case may rely on changes in routine, work, social life, health or security. Those changes should be evidenced and linked to the alleged behaviour rather than assumed.

Digital and financial context

Full message threads, banking records, shared bills, location data and smart-device records can confirm, contradict or materially qualify a selective narrative.

Knowledge and legal scope

The prosecution must address whether the suspect knew or ought to have known the behaviour would have the required serious effect. The relationship and dates also matter to the statutory scope.

Documents commonly used in pre-charge work

a detailed signed account or witness statement from the client where tactically appropriate;
messages, emails, call data and social-media records preserved in original form;
CCTV, doorbell footage, photographs and location material;
employment, medical, education or character material where it is genuinely relevant;
documents showing ownership, payment, consent, authority or chronology;
expert or specialist evidence where the issue cannot fairly be resolved without it;
a schedule identifying the exact enquiries or material sought from investigators.

Timing matters: representations are usually more useful before the file is finally determined. If a charging decision appears imminent, tell us the bail or review date and provide the core papers as early as possible.

FEES & SCOPEWe scope the work around the decision that is actually approaching.A defined private instruction can include review of the allegation and interview, analysis of the available evidence, an evidence or enquiry plan, written pre-charge representations and proportionate follow-up. Where the scope can be identified in advance we can quote a fixed fee. Larger evidence sets, witness work, conferences, expert material or continuing liaison may require a wider scope. We confirm the work and fee before starting.

Request a case review How our fees work →

UNDERSTAND THE STAGE

Guides linked to pre-charge strategy

Pre-charge engagement guideThe recognised voluntary process after interview and before charge, including enquiries and disclosure considerations.What happens after a police interview?Bail, RUI, further enquiries, charging decisions and the practical steps to take while the case remains open.Released under investigationWhat RUI means, how the investigation continues and why an open-ended investigation still needs active case management.Pre-charge bailBail conditions, review dates, investigation management and the relationship between bail and the charging timetable.

Before charge

A pattern allegation needs a pattern-based defence.

Send us the allegation, police force, interview date, bail or RUI status, relationship chronology and the principal messages, financial records or other material.

Request a pre-charge case review