POL00145530
POL00145530
From: Kevin Gilliland,
Sent: Wed 17/07/2013 7:44:24 AM (UTC)
To: Susan CrichtonI
Ce:
Subject: Re: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13
Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
I've caught up with Nick:
A process will be in place this morning where no suspensions will take place under 2k if they commit to paying
the money back and all other cases will be referred to one of the national contracts managers, who then at least
initially come through to either, nick, Michael, angela or me - to get a sense of what we are dealing with an help
us to formulate new criteria.
T hope this helps.
K
Sent from my iPhone
On 17 Jul 2013, at 08:19, "Susan Crichton" > wrote:
Hi me again Paula is looking for a call at 10.30 to update her generally. Can you be on that? If not you
then Nick?
Thanks
Susan
From: Kevin Gilliland
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 07:10 AM
To: Susan Crichton
Cc: Alwen Lyons
Subject: Re: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13
Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
I talked to nick yesterday about new criteria and an escalation process, who it gets escalated to
etc. so no it won't have filtered down the line yet and it's not a flick of a switch because, as we
know from the case we reviewed, it's a complex and sensitive process particularly around how we
communicate this. I'll pick up with nick this morning and update you.
Sent from my iPhone
On 17 Jul 2013, at 07:48, "Susan Crichton" wrote:
Kevin have you made any progress re looking at the process for suspension and
termination? Obviously if you have this hasn't filtered down the line.
Also Paula will be chasing for an update today
Susan
Sent from my iPad
POL00145530
POL00145530
Begin forwarded message:
To: Susan Crichton
Subject: Fw: FOR ACTION: ‘ustomer name:
Anna Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin
Norbury
Were we reviewing this after the David case
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
Sent from Blackberry
From: Lin Norbury
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:25 PM
To: Alwen Lyons
Cc: John Breeden
Subject: RE: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen
Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Alwen
No, the process at the time of this termination case and currently has not
changed. Suspension cases are progressed by the relevant Contracts Advisor
who recommends the case outcome eg re-instatement or summary
termination and depending on the geographical location of the branch (North
or South) either John Breeden or I review the case and give concurrence as
appropriate.
Regards
Lin
Lin Norbury I Agents Contracts Deployment Manager - South
6-16 New York Street LEEDS LS2 7DZ
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 16 July 2013 19:26
POL00145530
POL00145530
To: Lin Norbury
Subject: Re: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen
Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Lin
In view of everything that is going on is there now a new process for
signing off terminations etc
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
1, "Lin Norbury"
wrote:
Hi Val
Case details entered below as requested. Account was taken
that she had repaid all the monies, but that did not out way the
facts of theft, fraud, false accounting and password sharing.
Let me know if you think you will need the hard copy file to be
retrieved?
Regards
Lin
Lin Norbury I Agents Contracts Deployment Manager -
South
6-16 New York Street LEEDS LS2 7DZ
From: Valerie Stanley On Behalf Of ECT
Sent: 16 July 2013 13:37
To: Lin Norbury; Pressofficeengland
Cc: Colin Burston; Kathy Sulley; Nigel Parry; Alwen Lyons
Subject: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna
Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Importance: High
POST OFFICE LTD
STAKEHOLDER
CORRESPONDENCE TEAM
INVESTIGATION & FEEDBACK
REQUIRED
ICASE REF NO: ECT 524/13
DEADLINE FOR FEEDBACK TO ECT:19/7/13
ICUSTOMER DETAILS: Anna Skoczen
SUBJECT: termination of contract
BRANCH NAME: Ammanford BRANCH CODE: 427642
FOR THE SIGNATURE OF: ? Lin Norbury
Hi Lin
Please find attached letter sent to Paula Vennells by ex
subpostmistress admitting to inappropriately "borrowing"
funds.
I'm not sure if this is on the back of the interim report
regarding Horizon integrity as she does mention the lack of
support by POL and any management visits. She does also
states that the NFSP advised her she shouldn't have
admitted her actions and blamed Horizon instead. Were Mrs
Skoczen's efforts to repay the money taken into account at
all and is there anything that can be done at this late stage to
review the case?? - it does look like an appeal has been
unsuccessful so I wonder whether we have the full picture.
I'm happy to pull a draft together for your signature once I
have the full background to this case, including the appeal
and any correspondence already entered into with Mrs
Skoczen.
Kathy/Nigel
Ihave copied this to you as there does seem to be a
possibility that we may lose the service given the comments
to the end of the first para on page 3.
Alwen
I know that Donna has already sent you over a copy of this -
but have included you so you have a copy of all feedback.
POL00145530
POL00145530
POL00145530
POL00145530
pressoffice
I have put you on copy due to comments in penultimate
para - threat of taking this further and letting public know
how we treat our agents.
Kind regards
Val
Valerie Stanley
Stakeholder Correspondence Team
(See attached file: ECT 524-13 Skoczen Anna .pdf)
Flag Case Fact Sheet: I<image002.gif>
IThe information contained in this
sheet will be used to prepare the final
Iresponse and will be shared with the
lsignatory. It may also be recalled in
Jany FOI enquiry.
Background <image002.gif>An audit was performed at Upper
information & actions IBrynamman Post Office on 6th December 2012 which
taken resulted in a shortage in the branch of £3,198.73.
IThis should include details relating to
Iiwiat mont aneraiwhy it went wrong! {/N€ Charges were not keeping the account in the form
lwhat has been done about it) prescribed by Post Office Ltd and not making losses
Igood without delay, Section 12 paragraphs 4 & 12 of
the Subpostmaster Contract refers.
IAt the conduct interview on 16/01/13 Mrs Skoczen said
that her problems started around July/August 2012
when she had problems paying her bills for the
newspapers from her supplier and the mortgage on the
business. Because of the hours she was working
following her divorce she employed someone to open
lup at 05.30am for a couple of hours but this turned into
more hours and she found that her expenditure was
more than her income. To overcome this problem she
made deposits into her business account but did not
lactually put the cash into the Post Office account.
\When she completed her branch trading statements
she then inflated her cash to hide the losses. This
continued until November 2012 when she decided that
Ishe had to do something about it as she was not happy
lwith what she was doing. On the 28/11/12 the account
lwas between £7k-£8k short and she settled £4,698.85
POL00145530
POL00145530
centrally as she could pay this off using a credit card
land as her husband had said he was due to receive
I£3k from a job he had done she inflated her mutilated
notes to hide this as she intended to put the money into
jthe account when her husband collected the money
lowed to him. On the day of the audit Mrs Skoczen
lstated that her husband was in Birmingham collecting
the £3k he was owed and that he was coming back to
jthe branch to put it into the account. However at the
conduct interview Mrs Skoczen stated that although she}
believed her husband when he said it was money due
to him he had in fact borrowed the cash from his
daughter the day before and was on his way to London
lwhen she called him. All monies owed have now been
repaid.
Mrs Skoczen lodged an appeal which was heard by
Shirley Hailstones on 7 March 2013. Shirley upheld the
original decision to summarily terminate the contract for
services.
[This case was pursued by the POL Security Team; she
was interviewed under caution and admissions of theft
lof Post Office cash of £7000 was made during
interview. There were also admissions of fraud, false
laccounting and money laundering relating to the cash
loss. Admissions were made that PO cash was
deposited into own personal bank account. Sharing of
Horizon username and passwords was also confirmed
by offender during interview.
There is an entry on the EFC which shows a branch
visit by Sarah Williams on 12 Sept 06 in respect of the
planned refurbishment but cannot see any other entries
to suggest further face to face contact. Her
lappointment date in 2003 predates the EFC by about 3
lyears so there could be evidence of post appointment
visits etc in the hard copy file - do you want this
retrieved from Iron Mountain?
I have requested the NBSC call logs but do not expect
jthem to reveal anything of any significance.
It is likely that this contact now from Mrs Skoczen is
driven by her recent request and our refusal to consider
lan application from her husband for the subsequent
(Operator vacancy.
[Additional Information: I<image002.gif>I am not sure that I am the correct
Please supply any additional person to sign off the response as I authorised the
linformation - including any In re ee
Icommercial interest or In Confidence, {termination decision.
which may assist in completing
lresponse or provide a better
lunderstanding to the background.
JAlso advise if information can be used
lin response.
POL00145530
POL00145530
Information supplied by:
<image002.gif>Lin Norbury
<ECT 524-13 Skoczen Anna .pdf>