It can be, and it can be a criminal offence, not just a sign of insecurity or a difficult personality. If someone is going through your messages, monitoring who you talk to, or restricting who you’re allowed to see, that pattern is something the law explicitly recognises.
The offence this falls under
Since 2015, controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship has been a specific criminal offence under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. It carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment, and it can be prosecuted whether the relationship is ongoing or not.
The legal threshold is either of two things: behaviour that causes someone to fear violence will be used against them on at least two occasions, or behaviour that causes serious alarm or distress with a substantial adverse effect on that person’s usual day-to-day life.
Statutory guidance issued by the Home Office is explicit that this includes monitoring someone’s communications and online activity, alongside other recognised patterns like isolating someone from friends and family, controlling their money, or an overbearing regulation of everyday life. Digital surveillance isn’t treated as a separate, lesser issue, it’s folded into the same offence as other forms of control.
It’s about the pattern, not one moment
This offence is built around repeated or ongoing behaviour, not a single incident. It has to happen on two or more occasions, or take place over a period of time, with the effect of exerting power, control, or coercion over another person.
That matters, because a lot of digital monitoring doesn’t feel like one dramatic event. It’s checking your phone every time you put it down. Asking who a message was from before you’ve even opened it. Getting upset, or worse, if you don’t reply fast enough. None of that has to be a single frightening incident to count, it’s the accumulation that the law is built to recognise.
Why this gets dismissed so often
Because it can look, from the outside, like jealousy, or overprotectiveness, or someone who just needs a lot of reassurance. Abusers often frame it that way themselves. But the law doesn’t ask whether the person doing it meant well or felt insecure, it asks whether the behaviour, in pattern, caused fear or a serious, ongoing effect on your life. Intent to control is what matters, not whether it was dressed up as love or worry.
If this sounds like what you’re experiencing, you’re not overreacting, and you’re not imagining it. Our guides cover how to document this kind of pattern safely, and what your options are.