File move timing issues on network folders

I am experiencing issues with rules that move files from one network folder to another:

1. when copying EyeTV recordings to a central "inbox" folder on my NAS from my HTPC, the rule that moves these files to another NAS folder for processing will often kick in when the original copying process is not yet finished, somethimes resulting in Meta Tags being lost or an incomplete file being moved.

To work around this, I added a "Date added not in the last 1 hour" condition. But now the file never gets moved. When I looked at the rules preview for the file, I saw that the "Date added" attribute is not fixed, but regularly pushed back to lie in the last approx. 15 minutes.

2. a workflow for MP3 files: when they are moved into a specific folder, the first action runs a shell script that saves the creation and modification dates, calls id3v2 to embed the file name in it, and then restores the dates. The next action in the workflow moves it to another folder for sorting into subfolders based on name.

This workflow works in about 95% of cases, in 5% the mp3 file is already moved off before the conversion is complete, resulting in a file with size 0 and wrong creation/modification dates sorted into the target folder.

But after my shell script is finished, the correctly sized and dated file is also moved to the target directory. There, a rule runs that sorts the files into subfolders based on name, with the option "replace the existing file". This should, in theory, replace any incomplete file with the correct version; however, this does not work; the incomplete file is not overwritten.

With this workflow, I have both tried adding a "sleep 5" line to my shell script, and also a "date added is not in the last 5 minutes" condition to the sorting action, but both have no effect on the problem whatsoever.

Hazel is 3.2.3, NAS folders connected through SMB.

Any tips/suggestions?

Thanks,
Stefan

Check the logs. Also, is it possible there are other programs operating on these files? The date added being updated is particularly odd. Also, what kind of NASes are involved? Some devices aren't terribly good with implementing file protocols.