FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
From: Lillywhite Tom[/O=EXCHANGE/OU=ADMINGROUP1/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=LILLYWHITET]
Sent: Thur 25/02/2010 8:01:33 PM (UTC)
To: Kirkham Suzie[{_ RC
Subject: I RE: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
I think we are all watching this with interest
Tom Lillywhite
Principal Security Consultant
Information & Security Services
FUJITSU
Web: http://uk.fujitsu.com
Fujitsu Services Limited, Registered in England no 96056, Registered Office: 22 Baker Street, London WiU 3BW
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu does
not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free.
From: Kirkham Suzie
Sent: 25 February 2010 15:26
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Cc: Lillywhite Tom
Subject: RE: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
Gareth
I have asked JP to liaise with Hugh Flemington on this - don’t reply at the moment. I'll let you know in due course how
we are going to handle this
Kind regards
Suzie
Suzie Kirkham
Account Manager
Royal Mail Group
FUSITSL
oad, Bracknell, Berks. RG
Fujitsu Services Limited, Registered in England no 96056, Registered Office 22 Baker Street, London, W1U 3BW
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu does
not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
From: Jenkins Gareth GI
Sent: 25 February 2010 15:05
To: Kirkham Suzie; Lillywhite Tom
Cc: Allen Graham (BRA0O1); Thomas Penny
Subject: FW: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
Suzie / Tom,
Please see email trail below. This is another example of postmasters trying to get away with “Horizon has taken my
money”. Dave Smith seems to have put me forward as the expert to help on this.
How should I respond to this request?
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Applications Architect
Royal Mail Group Account
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu Services does
not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free.
From: dave.posne'
Sent: 24 Februai
To: mandy.talb
Gareth GI; adrian.
Cc: andy.haywardt’ RO ji .
Subject: Fw: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal
; andy.bayfiel¢
Mandy,
For info as discussed.
Alison,
Please note the string of emails below.
Do you know who, in P&BA, could provide knowledge on the Fujitsu audit log (pink highlighted text below)? It
would also be useful if that person could access all information about the debts at Alresford (blue highlighted
text below) in readiness for a conf call on this subject.
Andy (B),
Ditto re emails below.
P&BAs remit is really the back office workings of Horizon. From a front line users perspective, could you offer
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
up a Training Manager who would have knowledge in this area.
Gareth,
I've a feeling you may have an in-depth knowledge of all areas of Horizon, but are you able to assist.
Adrian,
I believe you had/have this case as a fraud enquiry (POLTD/0910/0029) and have also obtained Fujitsu logs
as part of enquiries. I think this was a £10k rem loss and subsequent audit shortage (representing the £50k
owed to Late Account). I know you are on leave this week and next, but I may call on you thereafter from an
Investigative stance (if timescales allow) to participate in discussions.
Carol,
You've been asked to assist (blue text below). If you haven't contacted Chesterfield yet, this is covered under
Alison above. If you have contacted Chesterfield could you let me and Alison know who is dealing at
Chesterfield.
All,
Once I have names, locations, contact numbers, I'll look to arrange a conf call - so Mandy can lead on
clarifying requirements and we can agree a way forward. Feeling is that timescales seem tight so hopefully we
can arrange for next week. I probably can't obtain the Fujitsu logs that Adrian has until he returns, so will need
to see if duplicates can be obtained or a fresh request to Fujitsu is necessary. Apologies for size of email and
if it seems disjointed, but this seemed the easiest way of communicating with you all.
Regards,
Dave Posnett
Fraud Risk Manager
—_ Forwarded by Dave Posnett/e/POSTOFFICE on 24/02/2010 10:37 -----
John M Scott
23/02/2010
Hayward Andy”
18:41 me Y
"B Murphy lain" ¢_
rge debt outstandin
Dave.
Please see below, if you can support and assist Mandy Talbot in the issue described, I'll leave to you to get
engaged with those involved.
Cheers.
John.
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
----- Original Message
From: David X Smith
Sent: 23/02/2010 18:34 GMT
To: John Scott
Subject: Re: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
John,
More likely to be Dave Posnett that will be of assistance to Mandy,
Dave
Dave Smith
Head. Of C&lS, Post Office Ltd
Sent from BlackBerry
----- Original Message -----
From: John M Scott
Sent: 23/02/2010 17:47 GMT
To: Sue Lowther
Cc: Mandy Talbot; David Smith; Rod Ismay
Subject: Fw: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
Sue.
Can you please support and advise Mandy & Co in this exercise and provide some initial thoughts.
Mandy - Sue leads on Information Security for POL.
Cheers.
John.
— Forwarded by John M Scott/e/POSTOFFICE on 23/02/2010 17:44 —-
David X Smith To: Mandy Talbot/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE
22/02/2010 23:54 ce: “John Scott ~
Subject: Re: Fw: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro infol_inl
__....,{Not as best placed as I might be to assist.
access the audit log via Fujitsu. Within Fujitsu I believe Gareth Jenkins is
the individual best to interpret the audit log but also to explain how Horizon is set up to maintain integrity both
in normal running and when failures occur. Rod would have to field someone to explain the back office
controls we have.
I will contact Fujitsu to make sure that Gareth or a suitably qualified alternative is in place.
I would suggest one of the big accounting firms would be the best bet for an expert report. They have system
experts. This is likely to be quite expensive as Horizon underwent very frequent change.
Hope this helps,
Dave
Dave Smith
Head. Of C&IS, Post Office Ltd
Sent from BlackBerry
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
—— Original Message -----
From: Mandy Talbot
Sent: 22/02/2010 10:40 GMT
To: David Smith
Subject: Re: Fw: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
Dave
Thank you for the very comprehensive reply.
Who do you suggest we go to within the business and Fujitsu to obtain the full audit logs? I am really sorry to
learn that you will be leaving us, can you suggest who we should talk to about Horizon issues after you are
gone? Hopefully its early retirement or a brilliant job offer but we will be sorry to see you go.
I agree that once we get everything we can together than it should be examined by POL and Fujitsu- again
can you suggest some useful candidates who are expert but also quite robust so as to be capable of rebutting
anything that the Subpostmistress' expert can throw at us.
Ultimately given the complexity of the Horizon system are there any external individuals or firms who you can
recommend would have the appropriate background to create a proper report in case POL has to defend
itself?
Carol
Can you arrange with Chesterfield to get full detail of the discrepancy together with all the documentation
behind it and an explanation of how each of them contributed to the final total loss. It also needs to confirm
whether other transaction corrections are expected. Also if any documentation was removed from the branch
at the time of the audit we need to identify where it is and retrieve it.
Regards
Mandy Talbot
Dispute Resolution
Company Secretary's Office
Royal Mail Legal Services
100 Victoria Embankment
London
EC4Y 0HQ
David X Smith To
18/02/2010 11:17 ce:
Subject:
Mandy,
Forgive me if this is a rather long response but its important given my impending departure from the Post
Office that my logic is fully understood after I'm no longer around to ask.
I've been embroiled in the various newspaper, TV and flag case letters all claiming that Horizon is at fault. As
yet I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to back up any of these claims. However, a recent meeting with
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
MPs encapsulated the issue we face very nicely. People know that computer systems go wrong from time to
time, particularly, government computer systems, and, therefore, believe that a computer system such as
Horizon could have caused these discrepancies. As long as the argument is carried out on the level of what
could happen then we will always struggle to win it. Our greatest chance of winning the argument case by case
is to fix the debate on what actually happened.
Two cases of which I believe you are familiar further reinforce this view and shape my response to your
question. In the case referred to as Cleveley's an independent expert was appointed. Unfortunately POL and
Fujitsu did not manage this spectacularly well and probably fielded the wrong people or at the very least
insufficiently briefed people. I read the so called experts report and I have to say it was far from the
professional effort I would have expected. There was no sign of a systematic approach to evidence gathering
or that the expert had gained essential knowledge of how Horizon enables accounting integrity to be
maintained. The expert concluded that Horizon could have created the discrepancies. Crucially the audit logs
which would have proven what did happen on the system had not been retained. We settled out of court. This
matter was determined on what could have happened.
In the case of Castleton we were able to disclose the audit log. My recollection is that Castleton's solicitor, or
an expert retained by the solicitor, examined the log and concluded that Horizon did not cause the
discrepancy. I seem to remember that Castleton fired this solicitor and decided to continue with his
counterclaim. He lost ! Having heard Castleton's arguments , the Judge decided that were was “no flaw’ in
the Horizon system, and that “the logic of the system is correct’: he said “the conclusion is inescapable that the
Horizon system was working properly in all material aspects’. We won the case on the basis of what had
actually happened.
I believe that we should therefore allow an expert to examine the audit log having been fully briefed on how
Horizon maintained integrity as this gives us the best chance of winning the argument. However we need to
do so in a controlled manner and I suggest the following way forward.
1. It is not clear whether we have examined the audit log for this branch over the period during which the
discrepancies occurred. If not we should do so. It would also be useful to understand the details of the
investigation including a statement from P&BA as to whether it is possible that there are outstanding
transaction corrections.
2. Horizon is a very complex system. We should ensure that the experience of the expert equips him to carry
out the task. Being a bit of a whiz on a pc wouldn't make the guy an expert - I'd expect a background in the
technical detail of say large scale banking system as the experience that would equip someone to carry out
this task. This is not just in our interest it is also in the interest of the subpostmistress.
3. We should control the process. Firstly whoever faces off to the expert - and I'd suggest a combined Post
Office/Fujitsu effort- should have first immersed themselves in what we discover from 1 so that they can
prepare their explanation in the light of what we know. Secondly we should set out how Horizon maintains
integrity and illustrate how this is ensured and explain how the audit log demonstrates this integrity. Then and
only then should we handover the audit log. Finally we should ensure that the expert has an open channel to
our experts to follow up any queries. Finally, and we possibly can't insist on this, we should try to get the
opportunity to comment on any report that is drafted before it is finalised.
Let me know how you want to proceed,
Dave
David Smith
Head of Change & IS
Post Office Ltd
2nd Floor,Bunhill Row wing, 148 Old Street,LONDON, EC1V 9HQ
Postline:
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
Mandy Talbot
To: David X Smith
ce: Rebekah Mantld. 1 Caro! Balan
Subject: Fw: Alresford Large debt outstanding , legal request fro info
17/02/2010 11:18
David
Has Pol received requests like this before and if so how has it responded to them? Does the business in
principle have any objection to meeting with a "computer expert" and explaining to him how the system works.
Possibly even showing him the data. It may be beneficial in resolving this case but it will set a precedent. If
we refuse I anticipate there is no way that we will be able to recoup any money on the sale of the branch
without litigation which will revolve around computer evidence. I have looked up Vella who appears to be
featured on a number of websites as a computer expert but what his experience is in the field is impossible to
tell. Your opinion would be really useful to us in advising the business how it should respond to the request
against the background of attacks on Horizon in the press and Courts.
Regards
Mandy Talbot
Dispute Resolution
Company Secretary's Office
Royal Mail Legal Services
100 Victoria Embankment
London
EC4Y 0HQ
Carol Ballan
16/02/2010
16:44
¥ Jessica Madro
ge debt outstanding , legal request fro info
Mandy, I am aware that there are many cases at the moment , both current and ex PM's, where there are
challenges regarding the integrity of the Horizon system .
Background to this case, I've had two I meetings with the PM to discuss how the £50k loss came about in may
2009 but she( Mrs Sangha) has so far been unable to provide any evidence. I provided her with both Sales &
non sales information for the period 2/3/2009 to 6 /7/2009 , so that she could go through the data and check it
alongside her paperwork . Again she has never come back to me with any queries/challenges .
In line with our debt process, in that all debts have to be cleared/recovered prior to any transfers taking place
, iwrote to Mrs Sangha asking for her to either supply me with a letter of undertaking or a cheque for the
outstanding amount , she ignored my letter in Dec so i followed this up a couple of weeks ago and have now
received the response from her solicitor. I did authorise deductions of £1600 per month to start clearing the
debt , which stands to day ay £46, 286.74.
If the transfer does happen then the business will end up incurring costs in a legal case
Mrs Sangha has done a commercial deal with the Co-op and the branch is due to transfer on 24th March 2010
, which she was advised that should this debt not be cleared then we may consider stopping the transfer
FUJ00156122
FUJ00156122
Please can I have you advice on a response to her solicitors
Many Thanks
Carol Ballan
Contract Advisor - South East England
Post Office Ltd - Network Support
Royal Mail Building, 1* Floor Admin Block, 98 Sandling Road, Maidstone ME14 1AA
Confidential Information: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient
(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorised review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact me
by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>>> Alresford - Solicitors letter.pdf attachment was removed from this email <<<<