POL00029912
POL00029912
Message
From: Mark Underwood1 [/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MARK UNDERWOO222A42EC-51A8-4DFA-A353-DCEA512679657B4]
Sent: 21/08/2015 14:30:44
To: Angela Van-Den-Bogerd [/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Angela.Van den bogelcSfcfe7-2672-42d9-b324-4ea8d2814853]; Lorraine
Lynch [/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Lorraine
Lynccc79d6a8-60cc-4685-a5c4-712124e950f20b7]; Ward, Alexandra — "GROSS
cc: Steve Allchorn [/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Steve.allchornc4c0SO8f-8aab-43a8-8e73-7 9babcd2566b]; Melanie Corfield
[/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Melanie
Corfilde623c2-38b2-49fb-ae9a-12e4b20d626720c]
Subject: RE: Transcript of Panorama
Hi,
With thanks to Mel for obtaining the large part of the below information from Peter Newsome...
Looking at the transcript, I think the below is the key sentence from RR. He states:
“RR: We went in through the backdoor and made changes. Sometimes you would be putting several lines of code in at a
time. If we hadn’t done that then the counters would have stopped working”.
What RR is actually talking about here is, I think, open to interpretation.
What we do know about RR is that he:
e worked in 3rd / 4th line support on the 6th floor for a couple of years in the early 2000's;
e worked on ‘estate management’ rather than the accountancy side;
e — left Fujitsu on good terms as he had become disillusioned with IT to become a chiropractor in the Bracknell area.
What we know about Horizon pre- 2010 is:
e It was a ‘dial up’ system (encrypted) and Fujitsu application software specialists could access the system
remotely, as you would expect them to be able to do as part of any standard IT support function, but the
system did not allow remote agents to manipulate branch transactions. These remote agents perform tasks like
examining diagnostic information not transmitted to the central servers and modifying application functionality
on behalf of the subpostmaster that is not part of the standard interface e.g. forcing the counter to re-download
its personality and product set data.
@ Remote agents could not ‘work’ the terminals as there was no functionality for this
Every access was logged and so there is an auditable footprint where records are still within the retention period
JS interpreted RR’s statement to be in relation to financial records. The reality is that, given the above- RR’s role
would have involved putting in codes for various and numerous reasons - updating, maintaining etc - but this would
have had nothing to do with branch transactions.
This in mind, I think our initial reply should be that, RR was actually referring to providing support rather than editing
transactional records.
As included in our Scheme report:
It is also possible for Fujitsu to view branch data in order to provide support and conduct maintenance but this
does not allow access to any functionality that could be used to edit recorded transaction data. Having reviewed all
POL-0026394
POL00029912
POL00029912
the cases, no-one (including all the Applicants and Second Sight) has been able to identify a specific transaction
that did not originate in branch.
A number of different explanations were found for the ‘unknown’ transactions:
- The transaction was conducted by the Applicant but they could not remember the transaction. Every input into
Horizon is logged against the unique identity of the user. Each user ID is personal to that user and protected with a
password that must not be shared. Where the transaction data was available, the Post Office was able to identify
the user entering the questioned transactions. In some cases, this was the Applicant (where the Applicant had
confirmed that their password was secure).
- The transaction was entered using the Applicant's user ID but the Applicant had shared their password with other
staff members. In these cases, the most likely explanation is that a staff member had conducted the transaction
without the Applicant's knowledge.
- A staff member had conducted the transaction with their own user ID without the Applicant's knowledge (albeit
that a postmaster is able to determine this himself by accessing the branch records available through Horizon).
- The entries correlated to periods when relief or temporary postmasters were running a branch.
- The entries were conducted by Post Office staff conducting audits of branches and who had logged on to the
branch terminals with the Applicant's full knowledge but these entries were determined not to affect the branch's
accounting position.
If, it is then asserted that RR was referring altering financial records or the Balancing transaction Process, I think
our lines should be similar to:
e As we have always said, Horizon does not have functionality that allows Post Office or Fujitsu to edit or
delete the transactions recorded by branches
e It has however always been possible for Post Office to correct errors in and/or update a branch's
accounts. This is most commonly done by way of a transaction correction however it could also be by way
of a balancing transaction or transaction acknowledgement.
e A Post Office employee could also, in special circumstances, log on to a branch terminal locally (i.e. by being
physically in a branch) using a new User ID and password and then conduct transactions (though these
would register against that unique User ID).
e All of the above processes for correcting / updating a branch's accounts have similar features. All of them
involve inputting a new transaction into the branch's records (not editing or removing any previous
transactions) and all are shown transparently in the branch transaction records available to Subpostmasters
(as well as in the master ARQ data).
e We have never made the BTP a secret. In fact we reference it in both our published Scheme Report and our
Reply to Second Sight’s Part Two Report.
Does this give you what you need?
Mark Underwood
Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme
POL-0026394
POL00029912
POL00029912
From: Mark Underwood1
Sent: 21 August 2015 12:11
To: Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Lorraine Lynch; Ward, Alexandra
Cc: Steve Allchorn
Subject: RE: Transcript of Panorama
Hi Angela, understood — leave it with me
Mark
Mark Underwood
_£omplai view and Mediation Scheme
From: Angela Van-Den-Bogerd
Sent: 21 August 2015 12:05
To: Mark Underwood1; Lorraine Lynch; Ward, Alexandra
Cc: Steve Allchorn
Subject: RE: Transcript of Panorama
Mark,
Would you also provide our (PO) response to what Richard Rolls’ said on the programme. I expect this to
be a key discussion point on Monday and I'd like to have a robust response/explanation of the mention of
going in by the back door and altering the coding - I need a lay person’s explanation on what this actually
means.
Thanks,
Angela
“ Angela Van Den Bogerd
Head of Support Services
. 1% Floor, Ty Brwydran,
Atlantic Close,Llansamiet
Confidential Information:
This email 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 email and destroy all copies of the original message.
From: Mark Underwood1
Sent: 21 August 2015 11:29
To: Lorraine Lynch; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Ward, Alexandra
Cc: Steve Allchorn
Subject: RE: Transcript of Panorama
Angela & Lex,
With reference to the below — please see attached
POL-0026394
POL00029912
POL00029912
Mark
Mark Underwood
_Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme
From: Lorraine Lynch
Sent: 21 August 2015 11:08
To: Mark Underwood1
Cc: Steve Allchorn
Subject: Transcript of Panorama
Mark
Would you be able to send the transcript of Monday night’s Panorama to Angela and Lex Ward (BD) please. They are
mediating M005 on Monday and her mediation statement has mentioned the programme.
L
POL-0026394