POL00021853
POL00021853
Message
From: Pheasant, Andrew
Sent: 27/08/2014 09:
To: Dave Hulbert d
Subject: RE: Second Sight Part Two [BD-4A.FID20472253]
Dave,
Thank you for your swift response — I will scoop these comments up together with others and incorporate them into an
updated draft.
Best regards
Andy
From: Dave Hulbert [mailt
Sent: 27 August 2014 08:58
To: Pheasant, Andrew fa
Cc: Belinda Crowe; Andy Garner; Paul Inwood; Rod Ismay; Rob King; Sally Smith; Andy Holt; David Oliver; Angela Van-
Den-Bogerd; Rodric Williams; John M Scott; Parsons, Andrew
Subject: Re: Second Sight Part Two [BD-4A.FID20472253]
Andrew
My comments are limited to sections 18 and 19. No comments on any other section.
Section 18 - response 6.
can't comment on the details of this, but I do know from conversations with NFSP colleagues that they have made
statements in the past about the recovery processes and messages being confusing. Maybe Rod Ismay can comment on
this.
Section 18 - response 7.
In terms of improvements to Horizon, all of the following could be used.
a) Incident and Problem Management processes - both of these ensure that where a branch reports an issue it is
investigated and resolved. Where several instances of the same issue occurs, then a problem record is created and the
root cause of the issue is identified and fixed (ie to avoid further instances). The resolution of problems can sometimes
be minor amendments to processes or can result in a change to the software code via the next release.
b) Operational reviews with Fujitsu - these take place across each and every month by a number of different specialist
teams in both Post Office and Fujitsu. The purpose is to monitor and review past performance, addressing any issues as
required, and to prepare for known changes or events to come.
c) Operational reviews with the NFSP - these have been in place for over 10 years and have operated on either a
monthly or quarterly basis across this period. It has involved the NFSP Execs meeting with senior representatives from
the IT Service Teams, Network and FSC. A number of operational issues are raised via these meetings and actions taken
to resolve and improve either Horizon (the system) or associated processes. Other systems are also discussed as and
when relevant eg ATM's.
d) Continuous Service Improvement - this is a standard process that IT Services operates with all it suppliers. Fujitsu are
particularly good in this area and have over the years developed and introduced a number of improvements. In 2012/13
[I need to check if I've got the year right] Fujitsu also provided £100k of additional funds to be used by the Post Office for
improvements - they were not contractually obliged to do this. The approach we agreed with Fujitsu was to use the
NFSP's input to drive the improvement initiatives which the £100k would be used on. Tri-party working, including NFSP
members actively involved in demos/tests, resulted in improvements directly driven by the NFSP and funded by Fujitsu.
Section 19 - response 8.
POL-0018332
POL00021853
POL00021853
This response is correct. With regards to the banking transaction example, I believe this to be standard banking
procedures that the Post Office complies with. The RAC (Request, Authorise, Confirmation) and overnight reconciliation
processes designed into Horizon are those we have adopted from the banking industry.
With regards to the risk of data being lost in transit, this is also correct. Should this occur, we have processes in place to
recover the data from it's last known point and resubmit. The Post Office stands the costs for this process and any
consequences, none of which are passed on to subpostmasters.
Regards
Dave
Head of IT Services
Post Office Ltd
On 26 Aug 2014, at 19:13, "Pheasant, Andrew" < ' wrote:
Dear all,
Further to Belinda's email please find attached the first part of the working draft of the response to the
Second Sight Part 2 Report.
We have segmented the response into sections to correspond with SS's Report. The draft to sections 14
- 22 are attached. Sections 4 - 13 will follow shortly. At this stage it is possible that POL may submit only
the relevant sections of the response to applicants according to the issues raised within their cases. In
addition, we will submit a covering note/letter highlighting our general concerns about the Report (such as
the lack of evidence to support the thematic issues and speculation on issues outside of the scope of their
instructions and expertise). There are certain parts of the report where we have asked for more detail
about the processes and procedures and I would be grateful if those details could be provided.
Please can you respond with comments on any relevant sections. If do not have any comments please
just confirm it is a nil response. We will collate the responses and circulate final draft before
submission.
If it would be easier to discuss any issues please feel free to call.
Best regards
Andy
Andrew Pheasant
Associate
for and on behalf of Bond Dickinson LLP
Follow Bond Dickinsor
<image002,jpg><image003.png>
www.bonddickinson.com
From: Belinda Crowe [mailtoz” I
Sent: 22 August 2014 16:41
To: Dave Hulbert; Andy Garner; Paul Inwood; Rod Ismay; Rob King; Sally Smith
POL-0018332
POL00021853
POL00021853
Cc: Andy Holt; David Olivers; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Rodric Williams; John M Scott; Parsons, Andrew;
Pheasant, Andrew; Belinda Crowe
Subject: Second Sight Part Two
Hi all,
I think I have now spoken to most of you and very many thanks for your assistance with this. I attach,
again for some of you, a copy of the Second Sight Part Two report. We will need to get a response out
on this next week and Andy Parsons is holding the pen. Although we have a lot of the information we
need, we still have some gaps and I think the easiest way to deal with this is to have a core team of
experts from the business who can fill the gaps and also clear the final document. I hope it will not be
too onerous, indeed we do not have time for it to be.
I also hope I’ve got every area covered but we will soon find out if not. Those of you that already
provided some information for me, I can confirm that I have passed that on to Andy.
The aim is not to produce a critique of the report but a document which would stand alone but which
deals with the themes and sets out the facts related to each one, making sure we address each point. I
just wanted to join everyone up to get us started. Andy will pick it up from here.
Best wishes and thanks again
Belinda
Belinda Crowe
148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ.
GRO “ Postlines:’
JORIS IEICE IIIA IIIA III IOI OSI DIDI ASIII III IIIA
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the
named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this
communication. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then
delete this email from your system. Any views or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of
the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD
STREET, LONDON EC1V 9HQ.
Seen tee tee tee tec tee tree ttc tee terre centretete tee ereetecteetretierd
Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this email?
POL-0018332
POL00021853
POL00021853
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient,
you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have received this in
error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views or opinions
expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.
POL-0018332