POL00060275
POL00060275
Witness Statement Post Office Lid
Criminal Justioe Aet 1967, Section 9; Magistrates Court Act 1980, sub secton, SACIKa) and 58:
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1
Statement of Stephen BRADSHAW
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of I pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and belief
and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully
stated in it anything, which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 40 day of April 2013
Signature
Further to my statement dated 21” March 2012, 20 September 2012 and 20 December 2012.
From my position in Post Office Ltd I have access to Post Office records including any audits have taken place at Post Office
branches. I can say that where I refer to and or produce Post Office records that these records have been completed in the ordinary
course of Post Office business by persons who had or may reasonably supposed to have had personal knowledge of that matter or
the matters dealt with in the information supplied. The person or persons who created and or complied such records cannot
reasonably be expected to have any recollection of the matter dealt with in the information supplied.
I can say from Business records that an audit took place at Fazakerley Post Office branch on 6 October 2005. The reason for the audit
was that cash on hand had been misreported. The overall result of the audit was a shortage of £26.67. The Post Office had a previous
discrepancy of £33.80 that they had not adjusted, the stock was short by £17.34 but this was due to missing European Air packs and
a check of the cash on hand revealed a surplus of £24.47.
I now produce a copy of the audit report dated 6 October 2005 as SB/58.
In response to the letter from Laurence Lee & Co it can be seen on SB/S2 that the National Business Support Centre was contacted
‘on 4 August 2005 concerning a loss of £592.21, on this initial call the caller stated they had a surplus but had also made a lottery
Signature Signature witnessed by
POLO11 (Side A) Version April 2012
POL00060275
POL00060275
Witness Statement
Criminal Justioe Act 1967,
219; Magistrates Court Act 1980, sub secton. SA(3Xa) and $8; crminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1
Continuation of statement of Stephen BRADSHAW
declaration. There was a follow up call on 11 August 2005 stating the loss has been carried forward and believes it is due to the
lottery. A further telephone call was received by the NBSC on 25 August 2005 concerning this loss and the caller stated that she
believed it was due to an upgrade in the Horizon system
The matter was resolved on the 14 September 2005 by Branch Development Manager Kevin RYAN.
To the best of my knowledge no audit or any investigation into any £4,000 shortfall at Fazakerley Post Office branch took place and no
file or any other documentation exists.
can also say from business records that prior to the audit on 6 January 2012 the following checks also took place:
Date Type of Audit Reason for Audit
14 January 2010 Transfer — Full check of all cash and The sub postmaster was reinstated.
stock but no recorded audit report.
146 September 2010 Post Transfer Visit A follow up audit after the reinstatement
of the sub postmaster on 14 January
2010
05 November 2010 Financial Assurance Audit This audit is put on as a result of the
Branch Performance Profile. All Post
Offices are entered onto the Risk Model
and the top 100 branches receive a visit
During these types of audits the cash
and High value stock would be checked
but a full check of all the stock is not
done.
13 May 2011 Financial Assurance Audit ‘As above
02 December 2011 Special Audit This audit was requested as the business
Signature Signature witnessed by
POLO11A Version April 2012
POL00060275
POL00060275
Witness Statement
219; Magistrates Court Act 1980, sub secton. SA(3Xa) and $8; crminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1
Criminal Justioe Act 1967,
Continuation of statement of Stephen BRADSHAW
identified that £20,000 could be at risk as
the Overnight Cash Declared between
February 2011 and September 2011 had
increased and then decreased during
this period.
In addition to the above checks Fazakerley Post Office branch was upgraded to Horizon on Line on 8 July 2010. Prior to the migration
the cash on hand in the branch would be physically counted and checked.
A further Audit took place on 20 July 2012. This audit was in response to the sub postmaster accepting the Transaction Corrections
for the Animal in Needs deposits of £34,115.50 for the period of September 2011 to December 2011 that had not been credited when
they were presented at Fazakerley Post Office
I can also say from business records that a visit was made to the branch on 6 September 2005 by Kevin RYAN regarding the
reported loss of £592.21 were the Officer in Charge states that it is something to do with the upgrade onto Horizon on Line and no
errors could be found. When Mr RYAN attended the loss had cleared and there was no explanation.
A visit was also made by Kevin RYAN on 6 February 2006 regarding a shortage of £3959 in January 2006 and all documents,
transaction and event logs were checked and there was no indication what had caused the loss.
On 18 July 2006 Tina MELLOR visited SEAFORTH Post Office (the branch run by Mr ASKER's wife) to discuss with Mr and Mrs
ASKER issues at Fazakerley. During these discussions Mr ASKER stated that he would speak with Chesterfield regarding the money
he owes and that he trusts his staff and that it is a mistake that has been made and said he knew the money had not been stolen.
Signature Signature witnessed by
POLOTIA Version April 2012
POL00060275
POL00060275
Witness Statement
Cmnal Juste Act 1967, Section 9 Magistates Court Act 1980, sub secon GAMA) and 68 erminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1
Continuation of statement of ‘Stephen BRADSHAW
CAN
Signature Signature witnessed by
POLO11A Version April 2012