Case Studies

What Forensic Auditing Uncovers

The following scenarios are entirely hypothetical — constructed to illustrate the kinds of findings forensic document auditing can produce. They are not based on real cases, real clients, or real engagements. We do not disclose client matters under any circumstances.

Medical Billing Fraud

Phantom Procedures in a Post-Surgical Billing Record

Medical RecordsMetadata AnalysisBilling Fraud

Context

Hypothetical scenario: Plaintiff's counsel retains a forensic auditor to examine hospital billing records following a surgical procedure. The client disputes charges totaling over $40,000 for procedures she has no recollection of receiving.

Forensic Findings

Billing codes for three distinct procedures appear in the record with no corresponding clinical documentation — no operative notes, no anesthesia records, no nursing entries.
Metadata analysis of the electronic health record reveals that two billing entries were added to the record 11 days after the procedure date, under a different user credential than the treating physician.
Cross-referencing the billing record against the facility's own internal coding guidelines identifies two codes that are mutually exclusive — they could not have been performed in the same surgical session under the documented anesthesia duration.

Outcome

In this hypothetical, the forensic report supports a billing dispute with the insurer and a formal complaint to the state health department. The insurer reverses the disputed charges prior to litigation.

Immigration Document Analysis

Falsified Service Timestamps in an Immigration Proceeding

Government RecordsTimestamp FraudImmigration

Context

Hypothetical scenario: An immigration attorney engages a forensic auditor to examine government-generated service records central to a removal proceeding. The client maintains she was never served with the documents the government claims to have delivered.

Forensic Findings

The service record bears a timestamp placing the alleged service at a time when the client's travel records — independently verified — show she was outside the country.
Metadata embedded in the digital version of the service record shows a creation date three weeks after the claimed service date. The document was generated after the fact and backdated.
The document's internal structure contains formatting artifacts consistent with a template not in use by the issuing agency until after the claimed service date — a finding corroborated by publicly available agency records.

Outcome

In this hypothetical, the forensic findings are submitted as part of a motion to reopen the removal proceedings. The matter is remanded for further proceedings.

Contract Authentication

Backdated Contract in a Commercial Dispute

Contract AuthenticationTimestamp FraudCommercial Litigation

Context

Hypothetical scenario: Defense counsel in a breach of contract action retains a forensic auditor to examine a contract the opposing party claims was executed 14 months prior to the dispute. The defense contends the contract was created after the fact.

Forensic Findings

The document's metadata shows a creation date consistent with the claimed execution date — but the last-modified date falls 18 days before the contract was first produced in discovery, suggesting recent editing.
The font used in the contract body includes a character set not released by the font vendor until eight months after the claimed execution date. The document could not have been created on the date it bears.
The digital signature embedded in the PDF was generated using a certificate issued to the signing party's organization two months after the claimed execution date.

Outcome

In this hypothetical, the forensic report is produced in discovery and forms the basis of a motion for summary judgment on the contract claim. The case settles prior to the hearing.

Pre-Litigation Intelligence

Early Assessment Reveals Fabricated Medical Documentation

Medical RecordsPre-LitigationRecord Alteration

Context

Hypothetical scenario: An individual retains a forensic auditor before engaging litigation counsel to assess whether medical records from a treatment facility support a potential malpractice claim. The client suspects the records were altered following a complaint she filed with the facility.

Forensic Findings

Comparison of records obtained at two different times — one set retrieved before the complaint, one after — reveals substantive differences in three clinical notes. Entries that were neutral in the original set have been revised to include language favorable to the facility.
Metadata analysis of the revised entries shows modification timestamps that post-date the client's complaint by between four and nine days.
The revised entries contain terminology inconsistent with the treating physician's documented clinical vocabulary — suggesting the revisions were made by a different author.

Outcome

In this hypothetical, the pre-litigation assessment gives counsel a clear picture of the evidentiary landscape before any filing. The forensic findings are preserved and the client proceeds to engage litigation counsel with a documented record of the alterations.

Important Notice

All scenarios on this page are entirely hypothetical and were constructed for illustrative purposes. They are not based on real cases, real clients, or real engagements of any kind. Barzey Forensics maintains strict confidentiality on all client matters and does not disclose, summarize, or reference actual engagements in any public-facing material.

Ready to Discuss Your Matter?

Case reviews are confidential. Describe your matter and we will assess whether forensic document auditing can produce useful findings.

Request a Case Review