Packetvectorpoint
Client notes
How the reports were used
These notes name a report type, a constraint in the file, and what happened after the letter left Rustaveli Avenue. None of them are star ratings.
The workshop photographs that kept returning
We instructed the claims anomaly briefing after a repair shop in the Kutaisi hinterland appeared on four motor claims with very similar workshop images. Packetvectorpoint did not visit the shop. They lined dates of loss against invoice numbers and said, in the first paragraph, that most photo files had no dates left. That sentence slowed our committee by a week. It also stopped us from speaking as if the metadata were still there. The timeline with four clusters was the page we actually passed around. We later opened a fuller flagship report on two of the folders only.
Payroll lines just under dual control
Our finance manager already suspected a new IBAN. What we lacked was a page that showed the three beneficiary changes sitting just under the dual-control line, paid inside nine days. The fraud detection report’s annex did that with one chart and a methods note that admitted we never saw the wet-ink forms — only the extract. Counsel used the exhibit list as the start of a handover, then asked for a separate case evidence pack with row references. The letter did not tell us whether to dismiss anyone; it told us which window to freeze.
Shorter notes
The pattern review was the right width. We had one card-settlement extract and a meeting the following Thursday. Three plates were enough. I still wish they had flagged the Sunday-hour cluster in the oral note, not only on the chart — I missed it when I was talking.
Periodic letters are dull, which is the point. Cycle four finally named a new night-hour supplier we had added ourselves and forgotten to document. Slightly embarrassing. Useful.
I needed captions that an advocate in Tbilisi could read without calling me. The pack took longer than the first fee note because we added exhibits after the list was meant to be locked. That was our change, and they re-quoted instead of pretending it was the same job.
Names of organisations are withheld because the underlying files still sit with those clients. If you want a conversation with a referee, ask when you send a brief; we will only connect you where the client has already agreed.