POL00043063
POL00043063
To: Andrew Parsons GRO j Rodric WilliamsI “Kenneth
Garveyt, “GR Ln. __
Ce: fi Amy Primef ichael
Whartonf -
From: Ben Foatt..
Sent: Wed 09/10/2019 6:30:31 PM (UTC)
Subject: RE: Fujitsu / KELs issue - privileged [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Hi Andy
My comments below. Thanks for helping us to progress the audit urgently.
Kind regards
Ben
Ben Foat
Group General Counsel
Ground Floor
20 Finsbury Street
LONDON
EC2Y 9AQ
Mobile :I
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: Finsbury Dials, 20 Finsbury Street, London, EC2Y 9AQ.
From: Andrew Parsons [mailto;
Sent: 09 October 2019 1
Kenneth Garvey <_ >; Sherrill Taggart
4 Michael Wharton
Please find below an update on the Fujitsu / KELs issue. Sorry for the long email — I have tried to pull all the strands together in one
place.
1. We have received 14,000 KELs from FJ.
a. It appears in several cases the KELs only go back approximately 3 versions and so we do not have a complete
copy of all back-versions. We are investigating this and asking FJ to confirm that this is because the missing KELs
are not held by Fu.
2. KEL review
a. Stage 1 - From a textual analysis of the KELs undertaken so far, our understanding is that the previous versions of
the KELs are on average 91% similar to the disclosed documents. This analysis is ongoing to ensure all
versions of the KELs in the trial bundle have been captured and it should be noted that the textual analysis does not
pick up documents which are less than 85% similar.
b. Stage 2 — review of the back-versions of the KELs used in the Horizon Trial to determine whether the differences
are material. We currently believe that there are around 650 KELs to be reviewed. This figure should be confirmed
tomorrow. The review should be completed by mid-next week.
c. Stage 3 - review of all back-versions of KELs (including those not used in the Horizon trial). Tony Robinson has
some concern about doing this because if we find any adverse documents, we will be required to disclose them to
POL-0039545
POL00043063
POL00043063
Freeths. At present, we have offered to disclose the KELs to Freeths but they have not taken up that offer. Tony is
considering this point further.
3. Audit of Fujitsu
a. Scope of Audit: We have spoken to Johann (PO internal audit). He believes that Deloitte should be able to assist
with this within their current framework arrangement with Post Office. In the email exchange with the board, the
focus was placed on auditing "Fujitsu's disclosures" which we have taken to mean their disclosures of documents in
the litigation. On this basis we have prepared the attached draft scope for the audit, which breaks the disclosures
down by risk level. Please could we have your comments on this? Does this meet the board's expectations?
Andy — the scope of the audit is two fold:
(1) Auditing the scope of litigation services (Court Support Services contractually required by FJ to POL) (ie
checking that what they have advised to date and the controls around that is accurate and effective)
(2) Auditing the broader FJ relationship though this is just as much about POL controls around FJ (rather than just
FJ performance of its broader contractual / legal obligations owed to Post Office)
b. Our next steps are:
i. Liaise with Johann to confirm that Deloitte can deliver this scope of work.
ii. Seek Tony Robinson's advice on commissioning this audit and the risks of doing so (eg. finding
problems that lead to further disclosures). We will ask for Tony to put this in writing because I suspect PO /
the board may wish to consider this before commissioning the audit.
c. Having spoken to Ken, I understand that the board may want a wider audit of FJ from a commercial perspective.
That is beyond WBD's capability. Is someone in PO picking this up?
This is what Deloitte/external auditor should be doing (see my comment above). Ken Garvey needs to work with Ben
Cooke and Shihka in IT with this because the CIO (Shihka) is the accountable person for this supplier though I am
accountable for making sure the audit is done.
4. Who should do the audit?
a. This will likely be most easily and quickly done using existing Deloitte resource and existing PO audit processes.
Deloitte could then be commissioned as soon as the scope of work is settled.
b. I understand that Rod had some concern about using Deloitte due to their historic involvement. I share that
concern but believe it can be mitigated by Deloitte using a ring-fenced team who are not apprised of any earlier
work,
c. Do you want us to provide some alternative names?
5. Privilege issues
a. If the audit is limited to what we propose in the attached and Deloitte use a ring-fenced team, we believe that
litigation privilege will apply to this work. A wider audit of Fujitsu will not be protected by privilege. We will ask
Tony to address this in his note.
6. Feedback from the Court / Claimants — nothing yet.
7. Responses to Ben's 6 points in his email yesterday.
ii. The scope of the audit- what aspects of the court case process will they look at and the general controls
around FJ
See attached.
iii. The extent to which we need to access FJ or are able to use the informatioh already provided to date
The auditors will definitely need access to FJ's systems.
iv. The existing resource and controls around FJ (we may need to engage with people like Julie Thomas)
I understand that this relates to point 3c above so is outside of WBD's knowledge.
POL-0039545
POL00043063
POL00043063
ve Appoint the external party (Deloitte or whichever one)
See point 4 above.
vi. Updating on timetable and when we are likely to have some assurance over their processes and what
they have done to date in the Court Case support.
This will need to come from Johann / Deloitte once appointed
I'd be grateful for your input on the points in red above. We will provide regular further updates as more information becomes
available.
Kind regards
Andy
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
Sign up for legal updates, e-newsletters and event invitations
womblebonddickinson.com
WOMBLE
&// BOND
DICKINSON
:
(Cri
Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this em
confidential and may be I
please notify
ohibited and may be unlawful
The information in this lv.nrivileged and protected by law. ben.fo:
is soon as possible and delett
about how we use personal data is in our Pri
only is authorised to access this e-mail and any
ise, dissemination, distribution, publication
Policy on our website.
athori
hments. If you are not ben. fo: ndrew parson:
£ this communication of
atta
y ed to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before transmission. Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage
which may be caused by software viruses and you should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment
Content of this email which does not relate to the official business of Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP, is neither given nor endorsed by it,
and and Wales under number 0C317661. Our re;
+r toa member of the LLP, or an employee or con
tered office is 4 More London
int who is of equivalent
This email is sent by Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP which is a limited liability pa
Riverside, London, SE1 2AU, where a list of members’ names is open to inspection.
standing. Our VAT registration number is GB12339362
ship registered in En
se the term partner to r
ervices in the US, the UK,
fe, another Womble Bond
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is a member of Womble Bond Dickinson (Inte
and elsewhere around the world, Each Womble Bond Dickinson entity is a separat
ational) Limited, which consists of independent and autonomous law firms providi
entity and is not responsib
Dickinson entity. Womble Bond Dickinson (International) Limited does not practice law. Please see www.womblebonddickinson.com/
for the acts or omissions of, nor can bind or ob!
notices for further details,
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
RR RAR RAR AA A AR 6 AR AR A ARR ACA A A A A A AR RR AC RR RAR A A A
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.
POL-0039545
POL00043063
POL00043063
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: Finsbury Dials, 20 Finsbury
Street, London EC2Y 9AQ.
AEC ISI SIGIGIGIGIC ACC ACI RCI ACGICIC ACCA CHR ACR RICA A ACA RR RGR A CAC ACH HR RR A A A CACAO RR RR A CACAO RGR RGR
“Post Office Limited is committed to protecting your privacy. Information about how we do this can be found on our
website at www.postoffice.co.uk/privacy”
POL-0039545