To
POL00118610
POL00118610
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
Juliet McFarlane
Principal Lawyer POLTD/0506/0685
From Graham Brander
Investigation Manager Date 11/08/2006
Further to your memo dated 26 June 2006, I have now completed the
enquiries covered in your points 1 — 3.
1
South Warnborough Post Office, like the vast majority of other
offices, does not have an Over Night Cash Holding (ONCH)
target. The cash requirements for this office are determined by
an automated system (Flexible Planning/Planned Orders). The
system plans their cash needs on the latest cash usage and
payments at the office. If the office were holding too much cash,
then a message would be sent to the office on Horizon, advising
them of how much cash to return. The message does not just
flash up but would have to be accessed via the appropriate
menus on Horizon. Additionally, Horizon would also advise the
office of how much cash was due to be sent to the office. There
is an override facility, so that the Postmaster can alter the
amount of cash he/she is due to receive on the Planned Order.
Unfortunately, it would appear that records of amounts requested
to be returned are only held for thirteen weeks.
Concerns regarding the amount of cash held by this office were
initially raised by Ms Rebecca Portch, Retail Cash Management
Support on Monday 06 March 2006. Ms Porch had identified that
this office paid out, on average, £2,500 a week, yet had been
holding in excess of £20,000 since the start of the year. On 06
March 2006, Ms Portch contacted South Warnborough Post
Office and asked the Postmistress to return at least £25,000 on
Wednesday 08 March 2006. As you are aware from my original
report, this money was not returned and the Postmistress, Mrs
Jo Hamilton was signed off on sick leave on Tuesday 07 March
2006. A deficit of £35,644.89 was then identified following an
audit on Thursday 09 March 2006.
Mr Paul Duckworth, Retail Cash Manager North has supplied me
a schedule detailing daily cash on hand figures that were input
into Horizon at South Warnborough Post Office between the
period 01 January 2006 and 09 March 2006. A copy of this
schedule can be found at Appendix B (contents no. 16). It can
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
POL00118610
POL00118610
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
be seen that three entries are highlighted, all of which are for low
value cash holdings. It would appear that the office didn’t declare
it's cash on those days and the Flexible Planning System has put
in predicted cash on hand figures based on the transactions that
would have been conducted.
Copies of e-mails from Ms Portch and Mr Duckworth detailing
the above can be found at Appendix C (see contents no. 12).
I have established that apart from Mrs Hamilton, the only other
person who appears to have worked in the Post Office between
January 2005 and March 2006 is Mrs June Partridge. I have
obtained a statement from Mrs Partridge, a copy of which is
associated at Appendix A.
Mrs Partridge states that she was employed to work in the village
shop but assisted in the Post Office as and when required. The
Post Office is contained within the Village shop. She states that
she never assisted with the balancing at the Post Office and that
she never completed any cash declarations. She also states that
she was only aware of the cash in the counter drawer and never
accessed the safe. She stated that if the cash in the counter
drawer was getting low, Mrs Hamilton would replenish it from the
Post Office safe.
South Warnborough Post Office migrated to Branch Trading on
05 October 2005. No visit would have been made to the Post
Office but they were sent an Interactive Training CD ROM, a
copy of the Transition Guide a copy of the Quick Reference
Guide, a Branch Trading Calendar and one each of the Branch
Trading Balancing and Reporting manuals. Each Postmaster
would also have been invited to attend the numerous Face 2
face Events explaining the migration to Branch Trading. A
number of offices requested replacement items or videos in
exchange for the CD ROM. There is no record of South
Warnborough Post Office requesting a video.
Copies of e-mails from Mr Martin Drake, Business Change
Manager detailing the above can be found at Appendix C (see
contents no. 13).
An e-mail from Ms Claire Smith, Capability Development
Manager details the fact that Mrs Hamilton did not take the
Branch Trading ‘Grass Roots’ test. This was a voluntary test
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
POL00118610
POL00118610
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
only. A copy of that e-mail can be found at Appendix C
(Contents no. 14).
The auditor completed the Branch Trading Statement for period
11 on 09 March 2006. It would appear that Mrs Hamilton must
have been the person who completed Branch Trading Statement
for period 10 (13/01/06 — 08/02/06). This statement showed a
shortage of £6.74 and the cash on hand as being £35,515.83. As
the cash on hand for Trading Period 11 (08/02/06 — 09/03/06)
was £1,933.48 then either the whole audit deficit of £36,644.89
went missing between those two periods (no evidence to suggest
it has) or the cash figure on Trading Statement period 10 must
have been false. It appears that Mrs Hamilton was not
completing weekly balances, as she should have been. Each
Trading Period is split into four or five Balance Periods and a
Final Balance should be produced at the end of each week and
then rolled to the next Balance Period e.g. Trading Period (TP)
10, would start in Balance Period (BP) 01 and after the first week
should be rolled to TP 10, BP 02 and so on until the end of the
Trading Period.
2. As previous mentioned a statement has been obtained from Mrs
Partridge. It states that she was not responsible for the fraud and
did not assist with the balancing.
3. I have not obtained any statements regarding the training given to
Mrs Hamilton. In Mrs Hamilton’s prepared statement she states that
when she first started working in the Post office she received two
weeks of half-day training sessions.
She implies that initially there was nothing very technical about
working in the Post Office. She states that she ‘mastered’ balancing
with the help of one of her staff. When Mrs Hamilton became
Postmaster in October 2003 she would have been asked if she
required any training. Records kept in the Area Office, Bournemouth
indicate that no training was required. A copy of that record can be
found at Appendix B (contents no.17). Details of the Branch
Trading package supplied to Postmasters are covered in point 1.
In Mrs Hamilton’s prepared statement she mentions card accounts
and suggests that the Post Office has turned into a bank for which
she received no training. In Mrs Partridge’s statement she states
that the only training she received was that which was given to her
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
POL00118610
POL00118610
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
by Mrs Hamilton, including how to serve customers in respect of the
Post Office Card Account.
I have spoken to Mr Graham Ward, Investigation Team Casework
Manager who advises that a standard statement could be obtained
from Fujitsu covering the fact that the discrepancies would not be
due to system error.
In respect of NBSC calls, Mr lan Speck, Service Review Manager
has advised me that it is impossible to highlight what call may have
caused a discrepancy. He basically states that discrepancies are
due to mistakes made at the Post Office branch, either directly with
the customer, which wouldn’t be recoverable or by incorrectly using
Horizon, which would usually be recoverable by means of an error
notice (now called Transaction Correction) being generated when a
mismatch in the accounting becomes apparent. A copy of the e-mail
from Mr Speck is associated at Appendix C (contents no. 15).
Having looked at the call logs myself I cannot see anything that
relates to a single or multiple discrepancies that would account for
the audit deficit of £36,644.89.
In addition to the response to points 1 — 3 above, I have to advise you that
I have not received any disclosure in respect of Mrs Hamilton’s bank
accounts. I posted disclosures signed by Mrs Hamilton to the two banks in
question but the banks have advised me that they never received them. I
sent out further disclosure forms to Mrs Hamilton, explaining the situation
but so far these have not been returned to me.
I have received from the Area Office, Bournemouth details of £112,000
that was being repaid to creditors by Mrs Hamilton. Mrs Hamilton
disclosed this information to the Post Office in lieu of her appointment to
become Postmaster at South Warnborough Post Office. It states that she
entered a voluntary arrangement with creditors in January 1999 to repay
£112,000 at the rate of £200 a week. The repayments stopped in March
2003 due to lack of income. A copy of this information is included at
Appendix C (see contents no. 16).
These papers are now re-submitted for you to advise on the sufficiency of
the evidence.
Graham Brander
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
POL00118610
POL00118610
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
Investigation Manager
Mobile:
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE