SupportProgressedWednesday, 8 Apr 2026·Pinnacle Insurance

Support Case #3296 - Pinnacle Insurance Comply v2 Report Formatting Issue

Support confirms Comply v2 PDF rendering bug; will provide fix ETA today

Oliver Grant reported formatting defects in the first SOC 2 report generated in Aegis Comply v2, which launched the day before the call. Marcus Williams reproduced the issues in a test environment and confirmed a PDF rendering bug affecting section header truncation, control status table pagination, and footer page counts. Oliver flagged an internal audit review next week that requires clean reports, so Marcus will escalate the defect as high priority, update the ticket with the timeline urgency, and email an ETA today. Marcus also walked Oliver through a CSV export workaround for the control status data as an interim reference.

Read the full transcript →40 turns · 8 min captured of 14 min stated

How the call went

Oliver was professionally frustrated about the broken v2 report and concerned about the audit deadline, but the call stayed cooperative and ended neutrally.

Opening

0

Close

0
Overall-1
+2+10-1-2start of callend

3 scored turns of 40. Hover a point for the model's reason, or read the transcript.

How the conversation ran?Talk share is measured from speech time in the captured portion of the transcript.

AegisCloud 61%Customer 39%
Questions we asked
11
Questions they asked
5
Turns
40
Longest silence
2s

Who was on the call

AegisCloud

Customer

  • Oliver Grant?Matched on an initial rather than a full name, so attribution is weaker.

What happened7

The moments the model picked out, grouped by kind. Each opens onto the turns behind it.

Issue raised3?A problem was brought up on the call.

  • Oliver reports that the first on-demand SOC 2 report generated in Comply v2 has formatting defects: PDF section headers truncate mid-word and the control status table splits across pages.

  • Marcus reproduces both defects in a test environment, confirming the truncation on longer control category names such as Processing Integrity, and attributes the issue to the PDF rendering service in the v2 release.

  • Oliver reports that footer page numbers are wrong, showing a total of twelve pages for a longer document, and Marcus reproduces and adds it to the bug report.

Commitment1?Someone committed to doing something.

  • Marcus commits to escalating the defect to engineering as high priority and to emailing Oliver an ETA today.

Decision1?A decision was reached.

  • Marcus offers the CSV export of the control status data as a workaround and Oliver locates and accepts it as a backup for internal reference.

Risk1?A risk to the account, project, or system was surfaced.

  • Oliver explains there is an internal audit review next week and he needs clean reports before then, making the fix timeline urgent.

Recap1?A summary of what was agreed.

  • Marcus recaps the next steps — filing with engineering, flagging audit urgency, emailing the ETA — and confirms reports must be regenerated after the fix rather than auto-updated.

What was promised3

CommitmentOwnerDueAction type
Escalate the Comply v2 PDF rendering bug to engineering as high priority, update the support ticket with the audit timeline urgency, and check for other customer reports.Marcus WilliamsAegisCloud
8 Apr 2026said “right after this call
escalate case?Raise the priority or visibility of a ticket, case, incident, or request to a higher-tier team, manager, or leadership, including P1/P2 designation and formal escalation paths.
Email Oliver an ETA for the fix today after speaking with engineering.Marcus WilliamsAegisCloud
8 Apr 2026said “today
send artefact?Deliver or transmit a prepared document, report, email, or update to a recipient by sharing, emailing, circulating, or handing it over.
Download the CSV export of the control status data as a backup for internal reference ahead of the audit.Oliver GrantCustomerNo date givenother?Anything that genuinely belongs in none of the other categories; use sparingly for tasks outside the standard work types.

Left unanswered2

  • Is the v2 report formatting bug affecting other customers or just Pinnacle Insurance?

    AegisCloudProduct Quality
  • What is the timeline for a fix to the Comply v2 PDF rendering bug?

    AegisCloudProduct Quality

Themes and issues4

What the call was about, and the specific issue recorded under each theme.

ThemeAs the model phrased it?The wording the model used before mapping it to the shared taxonomy.Issue
Reporting?Calls about reporting, analytics, dashboards, and data visibility, excluding compliance-specific reporting.reportingpdf export formatting
Product Quality?Calls about product defects, bugs, QA, and testing.product qualitypost-release regression
Compliance?Calls about regulatory, audit, and security compliance obligations, reporting, and readiness.complianceaudit timeline urgency
Reporting?Calls about reporting, analytics, dashboards, and data visibility, excluding compliance-specific reporting.reportingcsv export workaround

Products mentioned

1 mentions

  • Comply2

    Issue reportedsaid “Aegis Comply v2

Numbers stated on this call1

Values are shown exactly as they were spoken.

ClaimAs spokenMetricStated by
Total page count shown in the PDF footer

The footer's stated total (twelve) does not match the document's actual length as reported by Oliver; Marcus confirmed the mismatch.

page one of twelve or something, but the document is clearly more than twelve pagescountOliver Grant

Coaching3

How the AegisCloud side handled the call.

Strengths (3)

  • Asked targeted clarifying questions about scope (all reports vs SOC 2-specific), export method, and browser before reproducing the issue.

  • Respected the customer's compliance sensitivity and reproduced the issue in a test environment rather than requiring the report to be shared.

  • Secured concrete next steps, including engineering escalation, an ETA email today, and a CSV workaround with step-by-step instructions.

Improvement notes (0)

Nothing recorded.

How far to trust this call

Every fact above was extracted from the captured portion of the transcript only.

Transcript coverage51%

8 min captured of 14 min stated. Anything said in the remaining 6 min is absent from this page.

Mean transcription confidence93%

0 turns flagged low-confidence.

  • Clocks unaligned(warning)

    2 participant(s) speak before joining — transcript and events are on different clocks. Do NOT derive absolute timestamps by joining these two sources.

  • Partial transcript(warning)

    transcript covers 50.9% of a 14.1min meeting; 6.4min after the final turn is unaccounted for

The model's own note: Transcript is partial. Turn 34 is attributed to the customer but contains an answer to his own question, which he apologises for in turn 35; Marcus confirms the content in turn 36.

Extracted 2 Aug 2026 by deepseek-v4-flash · extractor v1.0.0 · schema v1.1.0 · extended thinking on · 29,302 tokens