Incredible tale – totally believable since a couple of my friends had a similar but less dramatic event with CGU one of IAG’s fronts here in Melbourne two years ago.
A technical point, the advanced MetaData in a PDF is inherited from the source software or system that created the file which is why you cannot edit it in the PDF, that can only be done using the source and then recompiling the PDF which would then have the date of this operation in the PDF.
The PDF you are looking at was created using Word 16 integrated into an application using Adobe’s Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP), this is a system that allows back-end word processing systems gain a common method for capturing, sharing, and leveraging this valuable metadata. Commonly used in lawyers and similar offices where large numbers of documents are produced that use the metadata, to label and identify the documents. Users would not appreciate that the file stores metadata of this type, the system just magically and uniquely titles the documents.
You are correct, the XMP metadata in this file points categorically at the document being produced by the Young Hunter WP system that has the XMP platform fully implemented for these purposes.
If this guy Hlavac, what a twat name is that, was lawyer for IAG and he sent you an offer surely IAG are bound to honour the offer!
Lame excuses that it was forged suck if the evidence shows it came from his office, who else could get onto his server and send the message to you.
They owe you more than that, it was a good deal for them, they just tested you seeing if you would take it, cheating bastards just like the story you tell of them.
I hope justice wins in the end and IAG are forced to pay you far more!
Thank you for contacting Adobe Support about this issue. Most law firms now digitally sign their documents to avoid this confusion but this does not seem to have happened here looking at the two documents you supplied.
The first, produced by you, being Origin and Cause of the fire.pdf has little metadata and is consistent with a simple file, saved by Word in PDF format.
The Advanced Metadata shows it was created in timezone +01:00, Europe with Creator Chris Robinson on 20 June 2018 at 11:47:18
All perfectly normal, the date and creator in the Advanced metadata cannot be edited.
The second document, 5755-887-L180607CJH.pdf is more interesting, it appears to have been created by an advanced user of Word, the metadata title being – Microsoft Word – L180607CJH-Mr C J and Mrs-IAG NEW ZEALAND LIMITED – CLAI which has been automatically produced by a Word Macro probably since it is concatenated partial fields from the document itself. The letterhead itself is also concatenated graphics drawn presumably from the firms data word processing database.
Once again, I viewed the advanced Metadata, here the timezone is shown as +12:00 Pacific Antartica, New Zealand and lots of Islands in the Pacific. Creator was cjh on 6 July 2018 at 13:10:21
I can therefore confirm the second document was produced in the Pacific Antartica time zone using an advanced WP application of Word as would be common in a business setting. The user name and time reflect the date and digital signature used in the document, perfectly as I would expect.
If this document is a forgery as claimed by the signatory then it appears it was produced internally, there is nothing in the document itself to show it wasn’t produced by the creator recorded by the metadata.
I trust this assists you, it is a very strange document to produce and then disclaim responsibility for when it contains large volumes of metadata that identify the creator and timezone where the document was produced.
We are not allowed to publish our email address, you can reach me through the Forum – address is mandatory so spoof.
Thank you Julian for the info and for posting it as a comment here as requested, IP address from you comment is 188.8.131.52 – Los Angeles.
Brilliant, the doc was produced in NZ on a business WP system using Young Hunter graphics, style and typeface.
I still cannot see why, apart from sheer vindictiveness it makes no sense, maybe a change of mind after it was sent but again why?
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.