Data Recovery Case File · Formatted & Logical Faults · The Neighbours Are Evidence
The Other Partitions Describe Where the Erased One Began and Ended
This enquiry describes a slip with an unusually helpful context. A drive divided into partitions where the owner "wanted to format one of the partitions but made an error and erased the side that was needed. I recovered all of the files using software online" — with results that were not what was hoped. Erasing one volume on a divided drive leaves the others intact, and those survivors carry information that makes reconstructing the erased one considerably easier.
| Media | Hard drive divided into multiple partitions — one volume erased in error; remaining volumes unaffected; prior software recovery attempted |
| Reported situation | Drive divided into partitions · format applied to the incorrect volume · required content erased · remaining volumes unaffected · recovery attempted using consumer software · results not satisfactory · content required |
| Fault class | Single-volume format on a partitioned drive — partition boundaries recoverable from surviving structures; content present pending overwrite |
| Equipment used | Surviving partition entries used to establish the erased volume's boundaries · format type and post-format write extent established · imaged write-blocked before any reconstruction · previous filesystem structures located from surviving copies within the erased region · files validated by opening |
The decode: why a divided drive is a better position than a single one
What formatting one partition does: writes a fresh empty filing structure within that volume's boundaries and marks its space available. It is confined to that volume — the partition table describing where each one begins and ends is untouched, and every other volume continues exactly as before.
Why that containment is the good news: on a single-volume drive a format affects everything. Here it affected one region, and the drive still knows where that region is — which is a substantially better starting position than most format cases in this archive.
Why the surviving partitions are actively useful: the partition table lists all of them, including the one that was erased. So the exact start and end of the affected volume are known rather than deduced, and a reconstruction can be confined precisely to that region instead of searching an entire drive.
What that means practically: the search space is bounded. Everything outside those boundaries can be excluded, and everything inside them is known to have belonged to the erased volume — which improves both the speed and the reliability of what comes back.
Why the format left the content: a quick format writes structures and does not visit files. The content occupies the volume exactly as it did, undescribed rather than removed, until something writes over it.
Why the previous software attempt disappointed: consumer recovery tools scanning without reference to the partition structure carve from raw content, which returns files without names or folders. A structured reconstruction that knows the boundaries can recover the filing information as well, which is the difference between a heap and a library.
What decides how much survives: whether anything has been written to that volume since. A drive left alone after the mistake is in a very good position; one that has been used, or scanned repeatedly with tools that write, less so.
What must not happen: nothing further written to any part of the drive, and no repartitioning. Altering the partition table would remove the boundary information that makes this straightforward.
On the bench
Surviving partition entries were used to establish the erased volume's boundaries — a format being confined within one volume while the partition table describing every volume's start and end remains intact, so the affected region is known rather than deduced and the search space is bounded precisely. Format type and post-format write extent were established, and previous filesystem structures located from surviving copies within the erased region.
The outcome
The erased volume's boundaries established from its neighbours, the written extent measured, and structures recovered from surviving copies within that region. 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: a divided drive is a better position than a single one. The format was confined to one volume, and the partition table still records exactly where that volume starts and ends — so reconstruction is bounded rather than searching.
Formatted the wrong volume on a partitioned drive
Write nothing further to any part of the drive, and don't repartition it — the partition table is currently your best asset, because it still records exactly where the erased volume began and ended. That containment is what makes this better than a whole-drive format: the damage is confined to one region and the boundaries of that region are known rather than deduced, so a reconstruction is bounded instead of searching. A quick format also writes structures without visiting files, so the content sits there undescribed. If consumer software returned files without names, that's carving working blindly — a structured reconstruction can recover the filing information too.
Write nothing further — call Oxford Data Recovery on 01865 593000; boundaries established from surviving partition entries, write extent measured, structures recovered from copies within the erased region.
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.