analysing stabilised footage from Lake District sighting - lens flare or something else?

I've been doing some image stabilisation work on footage my cousin recorded near Windermere on 3rd September around 22:15. The original video is quite shaky (shot on mobile, natural shaking) but I've stabilised it using Adobe After Effects and noticed something odd.

There's a stationary object above the lake for about 12 seconds that doesn't match any known aircraft patterns. It's roughly triangular with three distinct light points. I've cross-referenced flight paths for that evening - no helicopters, no drones registered in the area, and no commercial traffic.

The obvious explanation is lens flare from the moon, but the flare doesn't move with the camera direction in a way that's consistent with my testing. I've attached the stabilised footage and the raw file below. Would be grateful for a second opinion from this community.

Can you tell us the exact camera specs and lens type? Smartphone? Compact camera? The lens characteristics matter loads for flare analysis. Also, was there cloud cover? And did your cousin see it with naked eye or just on camera? This changes everything.

It's roughly triangular with three distinct light points.

I'd love to see the file but the forum won't let me download videos. Can you upload to Vimeo unlisted and share the link? I do a lot of video analysis work and I'm quite good at spotting compression artifacts vs. genuine anomalies.

The stabilisation process itself can create artifacts - especially if the original footage is heavily pixelated (as mobile footage often is). When you're moving pixels around to stabilise, sometimes you get strange patterns that don't exist in the original. I'd want to see both versions side-by-side before drawing any conclusions.

Did the object make any sound? Change brightness? Move at all? Because three stationary lights above a lake is almost certainly a boat, helicopter, or reflected light from nearby roads. The interesting cases are ones where the object does something no conventional craft can do - impossible acceleration, defying gravity, moving through obstacles, etc.

Really interesting analysis approach though. Most UFO reports are just eyewitness stuff, so having someone actually do proper video forensics is refreshing. Even if this turns out to be conventional, the methodology is sound.