FUJ00156869 - Email from Michael Harvey to Helen Lamb re Summary of meeting with Post Office

Evidence on official site

FUJ00156869
FUJ00156869

From: Harvey Michael[/o=Exchange/ou=AdminGroup1/cn=Recipients/cn=HarveyM]
Sent: Wed 18/09/2013 3:05:32 PM (UTC)
To: Lamb Helenj___

Subject: Summary of meeting with Post Office

Helen,

Below is my summary of the meeting (with some internal comments regarding options — which I will remove from ).
Please confirm whether I have covered everything and/or it matches your recollection. Once agreed I would like to
share it with Pete Newsome and James Davidson.

Attendees
Lesley Sewell Helen Lamb
Susan Crichton Mike Harvey
Andy Holt

Internal Comment

Action

POL have implemented a mediation process
for any claims/issues Sub-Postmasters may
have with regard to claimed lost
transactions/discrepancies

Note SC herself said
that claims were limited
to 7 years but that they
were accepting those
from earlier subject to
determining what data
they actually had.

AH to send ToR for
Mediation Process
(publicly available
document

The Mediation Process will have an
independent chair and Sub-PMss will have
access to external support funded by POL.

This process is separate from the legal
process

POL require Fujitsu to assist this process by
providing the data etc (as per current
Horizon Prosection support processes).
However, it would be of value if we could
provide explanatory reports too (pitched at
the Sub-PMs technical level to explain the
data etc. For example, if we say X could not
happen because the two systems were
running on separate Network Protocols,
explain in layman’s language what that
means)

This could be something
we ask for James’
assistance with
developing as he would
be a good conduit
between the technical
and laymans as he is
very capable of working
in both areas

Fujitsu will develop this
as requested as part of
the mediation process.
In order to gain
consistency of approach
we suggest that this is
managed as a Project
and it may be
something that James
Davidson could manage
in order to ensure a
good bridge between
the technical and
layman’s explanations.

POL may be looking at improvements to
their systems and aspects of the Horizon
system, for example POL may want changes
to the audit log/roll back process in order to

We need to ensure that
we are clear that we
have delivered the
services and as such any

AH to liase with Pete
Newsome with respect
to the changes that POL
may request.

make it eaiser for Sub-PM’s to
use/understanding

changes are charegable.

AH indicated there are
currently 12 or so
changes they may
request.

POL detailed that they have nearly
completed a review of the Criminal Cases
(about 150 so far). Of these they have
flagged 9 as potentially having an issue in
light of the Second Sight report.

POL’s criminal barrister from Cartwright
King solicitors has flagged a discrepancy
between the evidence given in court and the
information provided as part of the Second
Sight audit. This could mean that the
relevant Expert is “tainted”.

I disagree that the
Expert is “tainted” but
ultimately there is little
point challenging it as
we agree it may be a
sensible time to
transition to a new
expert to ensure
continuity of service

SC to determine
whether she can share
the report with Fujitsu
(MH)

POL looking for some means of providing an
“independent” witness/expert with respect
to future criminal cases. This may be an
academic.

MH pointed out concerns he had about how
viable such an approach would be with
respect to past transactions.

We need to remember
this is all about data
integrity and as such I
am of the view that we
remain best placed to
provide the data and
give a context/
explanation as to where
is came from and any
factors affecting it.

POL have/are having
conversations with
Imperial College re the
“academic”.

LS has concerns
regarding the use of an
academic /
independent expert but
for her it depends on
sight of the ToR.

SC to share with MH the
proposed ToR for an
“independent expert”
for our
comment/review.

SC indicated she may
also request MH attend
a call with Counsel on
Friday afternoon

POL flagged that Counsel is concerned
regarding the change of data audit system.
HL and MH explained that the process will
be independently checked throughout the
process and nothing will be done with POL’s
agreement

Note LS stated she did
not have any concerns
regarding this process

Once the paper’s are
completed, Fujitsu to
present them to POL
(including Counsel).

FUJ00156869
FUJ00156869
FUJ00156869
FUJ00156869

Kind regards,

Mike

Michael Harvey
Commercial Director and Solicitor

Fujitsu
22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW

= Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?