POL00029718
POL00029718
tol t4
Oulrbaches gant 18 Cf23 bh?)
Page
Andrew Winn
From: Jenkins Gareth Gl
Sent: 04 May 2012 10:00
To: Andrew Winn
Subject: RE: Branches affected by Receipts Payments and Discrepancies issue
Andy,
Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you.
V've had a trawl back through my old emails and what I’ve found is the following:
4. Both these Branches were in the original list associated with the “Lost Discrepancy” issue we had
2010.
2, lve found a comment saying that the loss with 422946 was primarily due to a Migration Issue a
will be investigated separately”. (Email to Emma Langfield cc to you on $/1/11.)
3. Apparently on 4/8/10 the Branch rolled SU AA from TP. 4 BP 4 into TP 4 BP 5 and also migrated th
night. Looking in the Opening Figures table there are NO Opening Figures for TP 4 BP 5 (other thé
dummy zero cash line). This means that the Cash of £21,975.83 and Discrepancies of £45.82 plus
Stock have been lost. If these two figures are added together we get the £22,020.65 Receipts Pa’
mismatch. I don’t know if this information was passed to POL. There was also an email from Ste’
Parker to you on 5/1/11 mentioning this (but not all the detail).
4. \canalso see that although 113459 was in the original list, it seems to have dropped off very ear
This is because it wasn’t in the original list from POL and also the precise symptoms in terms ofe’
left behind were different. I. can’t find any trace of any further investigation of this in my emails.
Given that the discrepancy amounts in both cases was very large, I’d be surprised if they weren't
properly investigated at the time, but they don’t seem to be included in the lists relating to the “
Discrepancy” investigation.
wo
if you want this followed up further I suggest you raise it with the POL Problem Management team (Emr
Langfield), who can get the Fujitsu Problem Management team to dig further.
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Business Applications Architect
Post Office Account
FUJITSU
Lovelace Road, Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 8S)
Tel:
Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
POL00029718
POL00029718
Page ‘
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Subject: FW: Branches affected by Receipts Payments and Discrepancies issue
Hi Gareth
Going back to the dark ages here I'm afraid. We had the receipts and payments issue post HNGX roll out th
spent a lot of time on. There are a couple of branches that still seem to be outstanding 122946 & 113459 th:
highlighted in red on the affected branches spreadsheet.
The RPM spreadsheet is the one that was used to resolve the branch discrepancies. The two branches are
on there.
I seem to recall a couple of branches not fitting into the standard profile of all the other branches who had iss
~ so I'm assuming it was those. I can’t find anything subsequently about them. Did these get investigated
separately?
Thanks
And
From: Paul Dann
Sent: 05 October 2010 10:27
To: Emma Langfield; Andrew Winn; Antonio Jamasb; Mark Weaver; Dave Hulbert; Ian Trundell; Alan X Simp
Karen J White
Subject: RE: Branches affected by Receipts Payments and Discrepancies issue
All
Please find attached analysis of POLFS for the affected branches, there are two branches that are not showi
the amount as being stuck in discreps
Cheers
Paul
From: Emma Langfield
Sent: 04 October 2010 14:53
To: Andrew Winn; Paul Dann; Antonio Jamasb; Mark Weaver; Dave Hulbert; Ian Trundell; Alan X Simpson; t
J White
Subject: FW: Branches affected by Receipts Payments and Discrepancies issue
Afternoon
Please see summary of issue attached as well as list of branches affected so far. I will be raising a conf call f
1600 this afternoon.
Kind regards
Emma
Live Service Team
Service Delivery
Post Office Limited
POL00029718
POL00029718
Page‘
right Mark; Woolgar Mike
eits Payments and Discrepancies issue
Emma,
Please can you pass this on to anybody in POL who needs it. I don’t have a full list of who was on the call.
As promised on the call, I've tidied up the list of affected Branches and put them into the attached spreadshe
<<Affected Branches.xls>>
I've also added in a further 11 Branches that raised events as part of last week’s rollovers.
Some Branches in the list have not yet produced a BTS and so may not be aware of the problem (I've noted
these in Col I).
I've also added in the absolute value of the lost discrepancy so as to produce totals in Row 56 as requested I
Andy Winn.
Summary is:
° 53 Rollovers affected
° 2 Branches appear twice in the list (in one case it may be a duplicate of one error — this needs furtt
investigation)
° Net total is about £41K
° Absolute total is about £46K
° Only 4 cases where amount is over £1,000
Note that in many cases the affected SU is missing from the spreadsheet. We know how to find this out, but
not yet done so in all cases. We will clearly need to do that if we are to attempt to fix the issue in Horizon.
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Applications Architect
Royal Mail Group Account
FUJITSU
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page
Andrew Winn
From: Parker Steve (7
Sent: 05 January 2011 1
To: Andrew Winn; Duty Manager
Ce:
Subject: Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation
Andy, Emma
These are the results of the investigations into the outstanding discrepancies.
Summary
Caused by action taken at branch — No further action being taken by RMGA
3 branches are accepting discrepancies again immediately after TP rollover (071939, 196230, 2967
1 branch closed without clearing final discrepancy (273311).
Known system problems — actions already in place
2 branches had two occurrences of the known R&P problem where discrepancies weren't carried
forward (159632, 208020). These are explained on the spreadsheets previously sent to
1 branch lost its opening figures due to delay completing rollover (412420). This has been previous
raised with POSD in September which (I think) resulted in an auditor being sent into the site?
Other problem — Further action being taken by RMGA
1 branch (122946) had a problem during migration but appears to have had a receipts and paymen
mismatch subsequently which may not have been investigated. We have raised a new incident for
site (TFS 3421481 - PCO207483) and will progress.
Details
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page:
071939 Charvil
This branch created a new stock unit 01 on 24th August, in addition to AA which they had used for
some time. For the next three months they did not keep the stock units properly in step, and had
already accepted sizeable discrepancies a stock unit already in the new TP, before clearing and roll
over the other stock unit in the older TP. They have now gone back to a single stock unit but are
carrying forward a loss of around £909 (originally from August before new stock unit creation) whi
they accept again immediately after rollover, so discrepancy account never empty. I can provide ft
information if required.
122946 Oaktree
PC0202635 refers to a migration system problem at this branch, which aborted the migration and
required remedial action. BTS after migration shows a large non-zero trading position. Needs furtt
investigation into cause and consequences.
159632 Bassaleg
This branch had R&P mismatches in TP 4 (393.35) and TP 6 (-729.01) because the discrepancy was
carried forward from one balance period to the next. If you add these together, you get -335.66, v
is very close to the figure on the spreadsheet (-335.82). It's also what you get if you add up the
numbers in pink on the ‘all discrep' sheet for the branch. So I think this is all caused by the known
problem.
196230 Thorney
The loss of £127.61 (accepted 20-27 Oct) was cleared to cash on 17th Novat the end of TP 7, but
immediately accepted again in TP 8. No problem.
208020 Moor Park
This branch had R&P mismatches in TP 6 (-33.82) and TP 6 (76.96) because the discrepancy was no’
carried forward from one balance period to the next. If you add these together, you get 43.14, the
figure on the spreadsheet. So I think this is all caused by the known problem.
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page
This branch closed on 27th August and the kit was removed soon afterwards. They rolled their st«
unit imtoa new BP with a £2 gain, but did not do a final TP rollover and never cleared the discrepa
2967 15 Clare
On 5th Oct and 10th Nov, the branch accepted the discrepancy again immediately after TP rollove
(loss G7pand gain 1.85 respectively). No problem.
412420 The Crescent
This branch had major problems because they rolled over some but not all stock units into a new”
and after 62 days some opening figures were lost. I believe an auditor went in to sort out the brat
and there will be inconsistencies in POLFS data (we mentioned this at the time - late September -
don't know if anything was done to try to get POLFS back in line).
Sent: @4 January 2011 1
To: ‘Andrew Winn'; Duty Manager
Cc: Stewart Mike
Subject: RE: ISSUE - Receipts & Payments mismatch
Andy / Emma
Just to let you know, I have not dropped this one in the post Xmas lethal
Work has started on it today and I'll update you tomorrow on progress.
Steve
To: Parker Steve;
Cc: Duty Manager
Subject: RE: ISSUE - Receipts & Payments mismatch
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page:
The idea of branch trading is that discrepancies are resolved at branch
trading. Therefore the discrepancy account for each branch clears down
roll over. We occasionally have had branches who have rolled their last
stock unit and declared a new discrepancy on the same day. This is
extremely rare and will in all probability be cleared out at the next br
trading roll over.
The additional branches identified may have a simple explanation as to w
the value is there but it would feel extremely careless not to gain
clarification that any other branches displaying the same characteristic
the R&P branches (which should not have discrepancy values rolling forwa
but do) are not a part of the same or a different problem.
We have tried to exclude any branch that has not had a further branch
trading roll over since the problem has become apparent.
When I write to the impacted branches I want to be able to say that Fujii
identified all impacted branches and have analysed each one to ensure th
the corrective action POL need to take is correct. We would all look pre
silly if someone then told us that their “other branch" has a similar
looking problem but no one has identified that!!!
With the current high profile on Horizon integrity I feel we need to
understand what is happening at all these branches.
Cheers
Andy
From: Parker ste ee GRO
Sent: 24 December 2010 11:56
To: Duty Manager; Wright Mark;
GI; Woolgar Mike
‘Jenkins Garet
Cc: Andrew Winn; Antonio Jamasb
Subject: RE: ISSUE - Receipts & Payments mismatch
Emma,
I have to admit to being confused by your request
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page!
these. Most of the branches you have identified here were not subject to
that problem (except 159632 & 208020).
As you know, in general we do not investigate discrepancies as they are
generally a PM issue. We are unable to do anything about it because we dc
know what cash is in the PMs till etc.
Can you give me more detail please, in particular:
a) Why are these discrepancies seen as something other than BAU
b) What do P&BA mean by marooned or stuck
Thanks
Steve Parker
Sent: 24 December 2010 11:10
rt Mike; Jenkins Gareth GI; Woolgar Mike; Parker St
Wright Mar;
GRO
Cc: andrew.winn@ GRO 5 antonio.jamast_ = GRO
Subject: ISSUE - Receipts & Payments mismatch
Morning
Please see below from Product and Branch Accounting. They have identifiec
some branches where values appear marooned in the P&BA discrepancy accour
that either appear not to align to the values in the last Fujitsu
spreadsheet or have not been identified as a part of this issue.
As we wish to communicate with the branches in the new year can Fujitsu f
a look at both the discrepancies in values on the identified branches anc
have a look at why we are seeing stuck values at other branches.
Also we need to have the reproduced copies of the branches trading
statements (as they would have looked) so the letter can direct them to
POL00029718
POL00029718
Discrepancies raised Xmas eve - results of investigation Page I
Many thanks
Emma
Live Service Team
Service Delivery
(See attached file: all discrep.XLs)
FESS OSCE OSA GSC ISSO SIGIGA CSCC ICC igor iO CCI GIO i aa a i kak kak kf ak
Royal Mail Group Limited registered in England and Wales registered numbe
4138203 registered office 3rd Floor, 10@ Victoria Embankment, London, EC4
@HQ
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 communicatic
If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then
delete this email from your system.
FESS AICO CISICIICI OIG ICSI OSC IOC ISI I aia ICI ACK I IC I IR ICC KK a ack ak af aca Kak af a
AC a CR GC AG IC IG CR AG AC CRG AO CR ORR RRR RE RO
Mail Group Limited registered in England and Wales registered number 413€
registered office 3rd Floor, 10@ Victoria Embankment, London, EC4Y @HQ Tr
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