Split-dollar life insurance dispute with grandfather’s former employer. Is a missing policy endorsement realistic, or am I overthinking this?

My grandfather had a split-dollar life insurance policy through his former employer (company 1). 1986 Split Dollar Agreement and 1995 Retirement Election forms show a $232,000 death benefit. Company 2 acquired Company 1 in 2000 and provided those documents after his death and says that’s all they have.

We spoke with an insurance representative from the provider with over 20 years experience. She said her team did an internal review and the policy shows a 99%/1% split, which would pay out roughly $2 million to the beneficiary. She specifically used that 99/1 language, which makes us suspect there might have been an amendment to the policy.

We emailed company 2 asking for written confirmation that:

• The 1986 and 1995 documents are the complete record

• No later amendments or policy endorsements were ever filed with the insurance provider

• They did an exhaustive search of legacy company 1’s files

The concern is that an endorsement could have been filed directly with the insurance provider sometime after 1995 (possibly around the merger) that company 2’s HR files never received or retained. That would explain why the carrier’s system shows the higher amount while the employer only has the original election form.

Is this a legitimate possibility in legacy executive split-dollar plans from that era, or does it sound like a carrier rep just made a big mistake? Has anyone dealt with similar situations where the carrier had different terms than the employer?

We’re planning to demand the full policy file from the insurance provider next. Any thoughts on how strong this angle is or what else we should be asking for?
One detail that’s interesting is that he signed a non compete when he retired. We think that might have come with a modification of the policy.

I apologize if any information is missing or unclear. I’m writing this hastily and will answer any questions that people may have.