A claims examiner is reviewing a disputed commercial property loss. The insured has submitted a folder of pre-loss photos. Good condition. No visible damage. Timestamps on the files read six months before the reported loss date.
File timestamps can be reset in under a minute. Cloud backups prove when a file was uploaded, not when it was shot. Nothing in that folder establishes provenance beyond reasonable doubt.
ProofLedger solves exactly that problem. Before the loss, when the policyholder anchors a photo or inspection report, a SHA-256 hash of that file is written to two blockchains: Polygon for instant confirmation and Bitcoin for proof-of-work immutability. The original file never leaves the device. What gets anchored is a cryptographic fingerprint, verifiable by anyone with the hash.
The documentation practice is straightforward. A commercial property owner anchors photos and inspection reports after each site visit through ProofLedger. Each anchor creates a timestamped record on Polygon within seconds and queues for the daily Bitcoin batch with a merkle proof tying it to that day's block. The property owner receives a certificate they can store with their policy documents.
When a claim comes in, the carrier's examiner doesn't have to take the insured's word for when the photos were taken. They verify the Bitcoin transaction independently. The timestamp on-chain predates the loss. The SHA-256 hash matches the file in the submission. That's a chain of custody built on temporal verification that no metadata manipulation can replicate.
Under FRE 901(b)(9), a blockchain record can be authenticated as the output of a process or system that produces an accurate result. Authentication still requires foundation, typically a technical declaration explaining how the anchoring process works. It's not self-authenticating under that rule. FRE 902(13) and 902(14) are the self-authentication provisions, applying to machine-generated records authenticated by written certification without live testimony.
For most insurance disputes, the practical question isn't litigation admissibility. It's whether the documentation survives a provenance challenge at the coverage review stage. Pre-loss anchoring shifts that burden. The insured isn't asking the carrier to trust a timestamp. The insured is pointing to a public ledger the carrier can verify independently.
One distinction that matters: a blockchain-anchored timestamp proves the file existed at a specific point in time. It doesn't prove ownership, identity, or the accuracy of what's depicted. The anchor is temporal verification, not a statement of truth about the underlying content. Carriers should evaluate it as one layer of documentation, alongside inspection records, purchase receipts, and policy history.
That's the point of neutral temporal authority. The ledger isn't vouching for the insured. It's establishing a fixed reference point that neither side can move.
Anchor before the loss, not after. Risk documentation, not claim documentation.