that's my key question too.
a two seater: you and maybe willing buddy, short trip, good-weather-only, experimental makes sense, its cheaper and the same fun.
a five seater: its diferent type of mission,
how do you explain to the passenger at the back. that, you know... ... its home made.......
how do you explain the word experiemental in big letter that shows brightly when you open the door
I would not climb onboard and would not let my familly climb onboard.

do the authority even investigate the crash on non-certified aircraft?

Yes the US rules are a lot easier for flight testing but as this is is a UK product manufactured in the uk and presumably tested in the uk surely it will need some sort of certification in the uk to allow flight in uk airspace
The uk has only one type of home built helicopter flying in uk airspace AFAIK

UK CAA are type approving it hence the 5 seats and day/night VFR. Their website explains this in the GA2.0 area.

If that’s true thats fantastic
As the uk CAA have already agreed to type approval before any flight why couldn’t they do that before with other home built helicopters that have thousands of hours flight time already the CAA are a strange bunch one rule for 1 person and another for the next

The website states "it is built in our UK CAA approved factory".

So has one actually been built in the UK CAA approved factory ?

Can experimental aircraft be used for aerial work ? Or why does it have hook option ?

Thats where the sales department attach the line and sinker :}

They once designed a missile named the Civil Servant, didn't work and you couldn't fire it!

Bell ringer - I don't think you are taking this earnest sales pitch seriously:)

"The hook mount is optional", so making the hull to accept the hook mount would be a sensible idea , especially as they say "going for type approval at a later date"
Would be nice to see a prototype, or even a running turbine

A prototype or concept development aircraft needs to be able to fly to prove its designed systems and concepts. If the CAA didn’t approve the build, no new designs would fly in UK at all. Much of the snag-busting should have been done during simulations and ground runs, hopefully with every sensor you can shake a stick at. The only item not calculated might be the noise generated in flight....

The excerpt said the factory was CAA-approved. It did not say anything about the helicopter being CAA approved.

Can a regulator approve a factory? What does that even entail?

It means either a POA or at least an AMO.

A Factory is a Production Organisation that can produce batches of materials for stock and sales
A maintenance organisation can only fabricate small parts for a particular project i.e not produce stock parts.

A Factory can be the like of BAES or Airbus that have to demonstrate how they have control of the suppliers, materiel and processes to produce a constant result.

If they can produce a standard part they can be awarded the right to issue a Form 1. If they can produce an aircraft, they can be awarded for a Form 52. It can take 5-10 years for a Form 52.

If it remains a kit, then AMO is sufficient. Its good to have anyways, not mandatory.

The website states "it is built in our UK CAA approved factory".

A FACTORY, not an approved maintenance organisation.

Not EASA approved, but CAA approved..........

Slightly incorrect...anyway!
A ‘Kit’ still has to be ‘manufactured’, i.e. in a factory, and properly certified (Forms 1 and/or 52). But a purchased Kit can be “assembled” by an AMO or even a private person (with appropriate supervision) and released with a SMI-CRS.

I was talking about the assemble part, otherwise its just a kit, isn't it?

There is still a huge disconnect with the complexity of the proposed final aircraft and my idea of a "kit".
Rotorway, Helicycle ... that is my idea of a kit ....
So much more to mess-up with a 500hp turbine, and don't get me started with the complexity of the wire harness for those nice screens.