In cases where serious money is at stake, individuals may object to the forensic accountant’s findings and insist that another report be made. “Although technically it is open to them to get their own forensic assessment, the courts absolutely loathe having opposing forensic reports presented to them,” says Lloyd Platt.

“That’s because it complicates things, it irritates judges who have to decide whose report is more accurate and more likely. The evidence will have to be given by both the forensic accountants and the judge (will have to) decide.”

In one particularly volatile case, “the forensic accountants almost came to blows in court, screaming at each other that their reports were all the more reliable,” he recalls. In the end, the judge overruled them both, reaching his own conclusions about their respective valuations and criticized the forensic accountants for their conduct.

While fighting for cash through the courts is not a new phenomenon, Lloyd Platt says technology has allowed individuals to become more creative. Investing in cryptocurrencies they’ve grown in popularity because they’re almost impossible to find, she says. One in 10 Britons have traded in decentralized currencies, according to HMRC figures, some of which hide all details of a transaction, including the sender and recipient.

For spouses hoping there’s a gold mine floating somewhere in the cloud, she adds, “If you don’t have a starting point or a route or copies of something on a computer, you can forget it.”

Given the significant hurdles at stake, how likely are ex-partners to recover what they believe they are owed?

“People who are ultra, ultra-suspicious tend to win because they tend to discover things,” says Lloyd Platt. “However, some people have unrealistic expectations, can be overly suspicious and (are) wound up by either their lawyer or other family members and go on a fishing expedition that goes absolutely nowhere.”

It is the duty of those in the profession, she adds, “to say when they think they have reached that point.”