Data Recovery Case File · Formatted & Logical Faults · A Pattern With Two Explanations
Which Folders Failed Tells You Which Fault You Have
His enquiry describes selective failure on a drive that otherwise behaves. A backup drive holding family photographs, where after upgrading his computer "it only recognised some of the folders on the drive, except the two folders with all of the family photos. The drive is recognised OK but I can't get the photos off." Two explanations produce that pattern — and one of them is free to fix, so it should be tested first.
| Media | External backup hard drive — device enumerating and volume mounting; specific directories inaccessible while others open normally; host machine recently replaced |
| Reported situation | Backup drive holding family photographic content · computer replaced approximately two months previously · drive recognised and mounting · most folders accessible · two folders containing photographs not accessible · contents required |
| Fault class | Selective directory inaccessibility — profile ownership or directory record damage; distinguishable by whether affected folders are visible or absent |
| Equipment used | Ownership condition tested before any assumption of damage · affected folders assessed for visibility versus absence · no repair or consistency check permitted · imaged write-blocked where structure damage was indicated · directory records recovered from surviving copies |
The decode: two causes, and the test that separates them
The first explanation — ownership. Folders created under a user account carry that account's ownership, and an account exists on the machine that created it. Connect the drive to a replacement computer and it meets folders belonging to a user it has never heard of, so it declines access. His having upgraded two months ago makes this the leading candidate.
The second explanation — directory record damage. Each folder is described by a record on the drive, and if the sectors holding a particular record are unreadable, everything inside that folder becomes unreachable. Neighbouring folders are unaffected, because their records sit elsewhere.
The test that distinguishes them, and it takes seconds: are the affected folders visible but refusing to open, or absent altogether? Visible and refusing is ownership — the system can see them and is declining. Absent is structural — the record describing them could not be read at all.
Why the ownership version should be tested first regardless: the fix is a few clicks in the folder's properties, taking ownership. It is non-destructive, it costs nothing, and it either works immediately or rules itself out.
Why the pattern is slightly suspicious for the other explanation: ownership normally affects everything created under one account, not two folders out of many. Failure confined to a specific pair, while their siblings open, points more toward records than permissions — so if ownership does not resolve it, structural damage is likely.
Why that would still be a good position: the drive mounts, most folders read, and the fault is confined to specific records. The photographs themselves are physically present and undescribed, which reconstructs from surviving structure copies.
What must not happen in either case: no consistency check. A repair meeting an unreadable directory record resolves the inconsistency by removing it, which converts an unreadable folder into no folder at all — and it is the standard next step people take.
What is worth noting about the drive's role: he calls it a backup drive, so the photographs may exist elsewhere. That is worth establishing before anything is commissioned.
On the bench
The ownership condition was tested before any assumption of damage — folders created under a user account carrying that account's ownership, so a replacement machine declines access to folders belonging to a user it does not recognise. Affected folders were assessed for visibility versus absence, visible-but-refusing indicating ownership while complete absence indicates an unreadable directory record. No repair or consistency check was permitted.
The outcome
Ownership tested before any assumption, visibility distinguished from absence, and records recovered from surviving copies where structure damage was indicated. 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: check whether those folders are visible and refusing to open, or absent altogether. Visible means ownership, which you can fix yourself in a minute. Absent means the record describing them could not be read.
Some folders open on a drive and others do not
Check whether the affected folders are visible but refusing to open, or absent altogether — that single observation tells you which of two faults you have. Visible and refusing is ownership: folders carry the account that created them, and a replacement computer declines access to a user it has never heard of. Taking ownership in the folder's properties fixes it in a minute, costs nothing and is non-destructive, so try it first. Absent altogether means the record describing that folder couldn't be read, which is structural. Either way, don't run a consistency check — a repair resolves an unreadable record by removing it.
Try taking ownership first — then call Oxford Data Recovery on 01865 593000; visibility distinguished from absence, no consistency check permitted, directory records recovered from surviving copies.
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.