POL00062371
POL00062371
oO i t t
Witness Statemen “OFFICE
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3}(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Mr Kevin ORGILL
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of three (3) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shail be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 31st dayof March 2003
- Signature = K Orgill
is
1am employed by Post Office Ltd. a part of the Royal Mail Group as an Auditor
working within the Security & Audit section and have been so employed for
approximately 4 years though have been employed by the Post Office for about 8 years.
The role of the audit team is to carry out routine audits of Post Office Branches in order
to carry out verification of cash and stock as well as conduct certain compliance checks.
At times audits are specifically requested by the Retail Line Manager or by members of
the Investigation section.
On Tuesday 14'* January 2003, I was part of a team of four auditors who attended
Rugeley MSPO, 18 Anson Street, Rugeley WS15 2BF on the request of the Investigation
section, this team was lead by Mr Glyn Burrows the Audit Manager.
Part of my role was to carry out the verification of the ‘AM’ stock unit which I was
aware was the Manager's stock and I also verified the ‘PH’ stock unit (philatelic stock).
The AM stock unit was the cash and stock held in the two safes in the back office, one of
these safes held mainly the bulk coin whilst the other safe held the banknotes.
Signature K Orgill Signature witnessed by M Patel
CS011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
i)
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continyation of statement of Kevin ORGILL
In order to carry out this verification I would interrogate the Horizon computer system
and print off a Balance Snapshot for AM stock unit. This I did at 0819 hours and I
produce this printout as item number KO/01. This printout illustrates the amount of
cash and stock which should be held by this stock unit and it can be seen that this
printout indicates that there was £ 72,159.03 in cash, £ 282,000.00 in Foreign Currency
and £ 1,449.00 in National Lottery instant game cards, giving a total of cash and stock
within AM stock unit of £ 355,608.03.
I would initially start with counting the cash on hand and as I count each denomination
I note it down on a form called the Security & Audit - Cash Summary, I now produce
the form I used for the cash verification as item number KO/02. I initially reached a
total figure of £ 68,916.98 as shown in the 1st column, however, some further
amendments were required which lead to the figures shown in the 2"4 column equating
to £ 69,191.98. Subsequently this figure was further changed when a further £70.96 was
located bringing the final figure up to £ 69,262.94.
At the time, I wrote on the Balance snapshot (item KO/01) -2967.05 next to the cash
declared figure of £ 72,159.03, however, the final cash difference to what was indicated
on the snap shot was £ 2,896.09.
I then looked for the £ 282,000.00 worth of foreign currency, however I could not locate
it within either of the two safes and the staff who were present at the office were asked
if there was anywhere else that stock or cash for the AM stock unit was stored, they
were not aware of any other stock or cash in relation to the AM stock unit and therefore
I puta cross sign next to the figure of £ 282,000.00.
Signature K Orgill Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 11/02
Zz
G5
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Kevin ORGILL
The figure for the National Lottery instants changed by £10 making a total of £ 1,459.00
which meant that the physical amount of cash and stock held by the AM stock unit as of
14% January 2003 was £ 70,721.94 as opposed to what the snap shot declared of
£ 355,608.03, giving a difference of £ 284,886.09 of which £ 282,000.00 was as a result of
no foreign currency being on hand within this stock unit.
I then passed these figures and paperwork to Mr Burrows and then proceeded to verify
the PH stock unit which again was slightly different to what was declared on the
snapshot but not to any great extent, the figures were within £ 50 of each other.
Signature K Orgill Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSO11A Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Oo Witness Statement
(CJ Act 4967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B; MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Deborah Alison EDWARDS
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of five (5) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true,
Datedthe 31st dayof March 2003
€ Signature D A Edwards
Iam employed by Post Office Ltd. a part of the Royal Mail Group as an Auditor
working within the Security & Audit section and have been so employed for
approximately 8 years though have been employed by the Post Office for about 12
years.
The role of the audit team is to carry out routine audits of Post Office Branches in order
to carry out verification of cash and stock as well as conduct certain compliance checks.
At times audits are specifically requested by the Retail Line Manager or by members of
the Investigation section.
On Tuesday 14" January 2003, I was part of a team of four auditors who attended
Rugeley MSPO, 18 Anson Street, Rugeley WS15 2BF on the request of the Investigation
section, this team was lead by Mr Glyn Burrows the Audit Manager.
Part of my role was to carry out the verification of the ‘BU’ stock unit which is the
Bureau de Change stock unit. This stock unit was a till which was located in one of the
safe compartments in the safe next to the Bureau de Change counter position.
Signature D A Edwards Signature witnessed by M Patel
C8011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
ED
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Deborah Alison EDWARDS
In order to carry out this verification I would print off a command 2 and a command 3
printout from the Forde Moneychanger equipment. I did this at 0811 hours and
produce the printout as item number DAE/01. I should point out that the printout
indicates 0911 hours, however, the clock on the machine had not been adjusted and
therefore was one hour ahead.
The command 2 printout indicates all of the Foreign currency on hand together with the
travellers cheques, it lists each foreign currency type, the number of notes and travellers
cheques and the sterling value of the notes for that currency. At the bottom of this
printout it gives a total sterling value of all of the various currencies held and in this
case that figure was £ 21,263.79.
The command 3 printout provides a summary of the transactions which have taken
place that week such as a total sterling value of Buy Notes (BN), Sell Notes (SN) and
Balance. The printout then also lists each of the currencies and shows how much was
bought and sold.
It can be seen that at the time of this printout the Forde Moneychanger was indicating
that there had been 21 transactions where notes had been bought (BN) to a sterling
value of £ 5,594.24 and that there had been 44 transactions where notes had been sold to
the sterling value of £ 371,082.58. The Balance is shown as a sterling value of
£ 21,263.79 which matches the total on the command 2 summary and should be the
sterling value of foreign currency held in the Bureau till.
I then commenced physically counting each of the currencies within the Bureau till and
Signature DA Edwards Signature witnessed by M Patel
esata, Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continyation of statement of Deborah Alison EDWARDS
wrote down the figures I found on a piece of paper which I now produce as item
number DAE/02. It can be seen that some of the figures agreed with the command 2
printout and others did not and I have indicated on DAE/02 the differences. There
wasn’t any huge discrepancies, just the odd amount here or there.
There were some other foreign currency amounts which I needed to transfer into the
Forde Moneychanger in order to obtain a final balance which I did at 11:51 hours (12:51
as indicated on the printout), I produce this printout as item number DAE/03. I then
printed off a new command 2 and command 3 printout, which I now produce as item
number DAEF/04 which indicates the amendments made and shows a total sterling
value of £ 21,642.20 which is the sterling value of the foreign currency held in the
Bureau till at that time. The command 3 printout shows the balance in sterling of
£ 21,642.20
During the course of the audit, I was made aware of the fact that the ‘AM’ stock unit
had indicated that it held £ 282,000.00 worth of Foreign currency which could not be
located and therefore to keeps things tidy as it was indicated as foreign currency it was
decided that it should be transferred from the ‘AM’ stock unit to the Bureau (BU) stock
unit which I did at 12:21 hours as indicated by the printout produced by the Horizon
computer system which I now produce as item number DAF/05. I also noted the
transfer of this amount on the ‘AM’ stock unit balance snapshot (item KO/01) and it is
my handwriting which appears on this printout indicating Foreign currency
“Transferred to BU”.
I then produced a command 10 (weekly summary) printout from the Forde
Moneychanger, I now produce this printout as item number DAE/06. This printout
Signature D A Edwards Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 58, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Deborah Alison EDWARDS
shows the total cash held value of £ 22,938.72 and it is this figure which is input into the
Horizon system, the figure is made up of the figure of £ 21,642.20 which is the foreign
currency sterling value held and a revalue figure of £ 1,296.52. The revaluation figure is
as a result of the fluctuating exchange rates over the course of the week.
I then verified the cash (sterling) held within the bureau till by counting what was
physically held in the till and noting down the different denominations on a form called
a Network Audit - Cash Summary and then entering these amounts into the Horizon
system to produce a ‘Declared Cash’ Horizon printout, I now produce both as item
number DAE/07. It can be seen that the amount of sterling on hand in the Bureau till
that morning was £ 11,373.01.
With the above two figures of Foreign currency held £ 22,938.72 and the cash sterling
held £ 11,373.01 together with any further stock items, you get the ‘TOTAL STOCK &
MOP’ figure which in this case was £ 34,491.73.
In order to then obtain a final balance for the Bureau stock unit, you are required to
feed into the horizon system all of the figures relating to ‘RECEIPTS’ which is anything
which has been paid into that till, for instance Remittance items (REM) received from
Hemel Hempstead, etc including in this instance the figure of £ 287,000.00 as a transfer
in, £ 282,000.00 of that having been transferred in from ‘AM’ stock unit. Also all of the
figures in relation to ‘PAYMENTS’ must also be input into the Horizon system and this
would include any amounts such as Remittances out ete. In this particular instance I
was given a figure by Mr Burrows of £ 642,258.79 to input into the payments sections
and I believe this figure related to the value of several cheques which had been
removed from the Bureau till by the Police on the previous evening.
Signature DA Edwards Signature witnessed by M Patel
cso11a Version 3.0 11/02
7O
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3}(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Deborah Alison EDWARDS
Having input all of the required figures into Horizon, I was able to balance this stock
unit, however the figure of £ 642,258.79 made up part of the final office shortage, I
produce the final Balance for BU stock unit as item number DAE/08.
Signature DA Edwards Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSDttA Version 3.0 11/02
@)
POL00062371
POL00062371
\) Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 58, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
OFFICE,
Statement of Mr Glyn Burrows
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18’)
I This statement (consisting of five (5) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 11th dayof April 2003
- Signature
Tam employed by Post Office Ltd a part of the Royal Mail Group as an Audit Manager
working within the Security & Audit section and have been so employed for
approximately 12 years though have been employed by the Post Office for about 22
years.
The role of the audit team is to carry out routine audits of Post Office Branches in order
to carry out verification of cash and stock as well as conduct certain compliance checks.
At times audits are specifically requested by the Retail Line Manager or by members of
the Investigation section.
On Monday 13¢ January 2003, I received a phone call from Mr Colin Price a member of
the Post Office Ltd Investigation team who requested a special audit to be carried out at
Rugeley Post office on Tuesday 14 January 2003.
On Tuesday 14" January 2003, I was part of a team of four auditors who attended
Rugeley MSPO, 18 Anson Street, Rugeley WS15 2BF on the request of the Investigation
section, this team was lead by myself and I was responsible for overseeing the audit and
Signature G Burrows Signature witnessed by M Patel
C011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Glyn Burrows
the input of data into the Horizon computer system in order to complete the office cash
account.
One of the initial actions I would perform at such an audit is to log onto the Horizon
computer system and request an ‘office snapshot’ printout. I can confirm that I
requested such a printout at 0831 hours on 14* January 2003, I produce this printout as
item number GB/01. The office snap shot printout provides a summary of all of the
cash and stock which should be held at the office at the time of the printout, it will also
provide a summary of all receipts and payments in relation to transactions conducted at
the Post Office since the beginning of business on Thursday 9 January 2003 up until
the time of the requested printout.
For instance the office snapshot, GB/01, states that the amount of cash that should be
present at the office at 0831 hours on 14th January 2003 is £125,458.72. It also provides
the sterling value of the amount of Foreign currency that should be on hand at the office
at that time of £389,005.30.
It is then a process of verify the cash and stock which is actually on hand at the Post
office and seeing if it agrees with the office snapshot.
I was made aware early on during the audit of the office by Mr Manish Patel, of the
Investigation team, that several cheques to the value of £638,675.65 had been removed
from the Bureau Till by the Police, therefore this amount immediately became a known
office shortage as the cheques were physically not on hand at the office.
Signature G Burrows Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSO1HA Version 3.0 41/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Glyn Burrows
As each team member verified particular stock units, the results were provided to me
and I collated our findings via the P32 accounting sheet on my laptop. In particular, Mr
Kevin Orgill carried out a verification of the ‘AM’ stock unit and Ms Alison Edwards
carried out the verification of the Bureau Stock unit (BU).
In relation to the ‘AM’ stock unit, ! was made aware by Mr Orgill that the Horizon
snapshot (K0/01) in relation to this stock unit indicated that there should be £282,000
worth of foreign currency, however, this amount was not on hand, there were also
some other discrepancies found in this stock unit by Mr Orgill.
As the declared figure £282,000 related to an entry against Foreign currency, it was
decided that this amount should be transferred to the Bureau (BU) stock unit as J was
already aware that there would be a shortage in this stock due to the removal of the
above mentioned cheques. I also provided Alison with a figure in relation to the
missing cheques. Alison required this information in order to balance the Bureau stock,
the reason for Alison needing this information was that the overall discrepancy would
be transferred to our accounting team in Chesterfield known as Late Accounts, who
deal with the recovery of assets.
The reason for transferring the amount to late account was that we were not in
possession of the cheques and we did not know at the time if when presented the
cheques would be honoured. If the cheques were honoured then the amount would be
credited to the same late account to be offset against the discrepancy declared during
our Audit of accounts.
As each stock unit was verified it would then be ‘balanced’ and any shortages or
Signature G Burrows Signature witnessed by M Patel
cSottA Version 3.0 11/02
a
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Glyn Burrows
surplus found were adjusted with the main ‘AM’ stock unit, which as a result
ultimately balanced showing a shortage of £ 3086.39.
The Bureau stock unit was finalised and showed a shortage of £642,258.79 which was
made up of the value of the missing cheques (£638,675.65) plus an additional £3,583.14
which was differences in sterling and currency on hand compared with the Horizon
snapshot for that stock unit.
Therefore the audit declared a total shortage for the office of £645,345.18, which was the
amount, transferred to Late account.
At 1406 hours I produced another Horizon office snapshot which now showed the new
figures following the verification carried out by my team, as a result it can be seen that
the amount of cash on hand was now £123,649.03 as opposed to £125,458.72 as indicated
on the earlier printout GB/01, a difference of £1,809.69 and the foreign currency on
hand as verified by my team was now £22,938.72 as opposed to £389,005.30 as indicated
on the earlier printout GB/01, a difference of £366,066.58. I now produce this Horizon
snapshot printout as item number GB/02. I can also confirm that the writing that
appears at the top of this printout is that of my colleagues Mr Kevin Watkins, which
shows the office shortage figure of 645345,.18.
As mentioned previously I would also input the relevant data onto an electronic P32a
spreadsheet using my laptop computer, which indicates cash and stock figures as well
as figures in relation to transactions performed that week. It also shows the final audit
balance of the office, which in this case was a shortage of £645,345.18, I now produce a
printout of the electronic P32a form as item number GB/03.
Signature G Burrows Signature witnessed by M Patel
csotta, Version 30 11/02
GE
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Glyn Burrows
Following the day of the audit I completed a written report of the audit and sent a copy
to both Mr Mark Irvin (Retail Line Manager) and Mr Manish Patel (Investigation Team
manager), I produce a copy of my report as item number GB/04.
Signature G Burrows Signature witnessed by M Patel
csot1a Version 3.9 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Margaret Ann Pearce
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18")
This statement (consisting of five pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 14th dayof January 2003
Signature MA Pearce
I am the above named person and I am currently employed as Manager at Rugeley
Post Office. I began working here approximately October 1998, I originally was
employed to do the back office work, but after a few months I began working on the
counter. My basic hours at this time was 30 (thirty) hours per week. For the past few
months, this has changed as I am now paid a salary by Carl Page, the Subpostmaster.
My hours of attendance have that been that most Mondays I would not work, however,
on occasions I have done, Tuesdays would be 8am to 3pm, Wednesdays 8 till 6.30pm,
Thursdays 9am — 3pm, Fridays 9am — 5.30pm and Saturdays 9am —2pm. I can confirm
that Carl would not work any set hours he would come into the office differing hours. I
can confirm that up until last week it would be myself predominantly that would open
the post office. However, last week I did speak to Carl and he confirmed that he would
always be here on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. If Carl did open up he
would do so alone, where I would always have another staff member. On arrival at the
office, at approximately 07.45, we would receive a fax, which states the rates to which
Signature MA Pearce Signature witnessed by ™ Bushell
CSO011A (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
C (CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Mrs Margaret Ann Pearce
the Bureau would need to be done. I know how to input this into the forde money
changer, but I cannot recall the last time that! done this. To the best of my knowledge
this would be done by Carl and in his absence Jane would do it. If a customer came
into the Bureau section of the office, the customer would ring a bell, if Jane was
available, she would come in and serve the customer. If Jane was busy with a
customer on the post office counter, I would then go through to the Bureau and serve.
fi The procedure would be to input the amount needed and the machine would tell you
how many Euros were needed, however, on rare occasions customers would tell me
that they had negotiated a special exchange rate with Carl. If this happened I would
process at the rate the customer stated. On occasion, if Carl was not in the office he
would make an entry in a diary stating which customer was due and to what rate to use.
I can confirm that a customer, ~ GRO
am aware Carl would speak to!
part of a conversation between the two of them. I do not have a great deal of input in
the Bureau till, however, I am aware that any cheques that have been transacted need
to be accounted for in the relevant cash account week. I can also confirm that there
Signature MA Pearce Signature witnessed by M Bushell
cesta Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Mrs Margaret Ann Pearce
has been a problem in relation to the Bureau de Change sign as this was moved last
year, but the electrician has not been back to fix it as yet. Occasionally there would be
a need for me to contact Hemel Hempstead in order to request more currency. If the
large order was questioned by Hemel Hempstead, I would just explain that it was
needed for a business customer. I also at one point raised the point about Mr
Whitehouse having so many Euros with Carl and I was just told that there was no
problem and nothing to worry about. With regard to the counter stocks all staff would
balance their own stock on a Wednesday and then this would all be collated to produce
a full office balance. On a Thursday morning I would check ail the work for the week
before it was despatched out. I can recall! ‘coming into the office for the
last 18 (eighteen) months.
Signature MA Pearce Signature witnessed by ™M Bushell
SOTA Version 3.0 14/02
ia)
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18’)
This statement (consisting of three (3) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
betief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 26th dayof March 2003
Signature M Pearce
Further to my statement of 14" January 2003, I wish to cover some of the aspects
regarding the office balance. Each clerk including myself would have a stock unit
which basically is the cash and working stock. There were 6 stocks at that time, mine
being stock unit 02. There were three other stocks, one the Bureau till, the second was
the philatelic stock and the third the ‘AM’ stock which was Carl Page’s stock which is
all the stuff in his safe and the back office.
On a Wednesday evening after the office had closed for business each clerk would
balance their own individual stock unit and verify their cash and stock to ascertain if
the stock balanced, or there was a shortage or surplus. I would on occasions balance the
philatelic stock though sometimes that would merely be rolled over into the following
week.
As Far as I know, Jayn would balance up the Bureau till as far as she could and Carl
would balance te ‘AM’ stock (Manager's stock) on the Thursday morning. On the
Wednesday evening when each of the counter stocks were balanced, if there was a
shortage or surplus, Carl had instructed me to transfer this to the ‘AM’ stock unit so
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
$011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann Pearce
that at the end of the evening on the Wednesday, each of the counter stocks would
show a balance and could be ‘rolled’ over into the following week. This would mean
that all of the figures relating to the counter stocks would have been entered into
Horizon and would only require Carl to Balance the ‘AM’ stock on the Thursday
morning in order to balance the whole office.
The final office accounts were not always finalised on the Thursday and if Carl wasn’t
at the office the accounts had to wait until his return. There were times when the cash
account had not been finalised until Friday or even Saturday.
Once Carl had entered his figures onto Horizon, he would either print of the final cash
account or would ask me to do so. On the occasions I had been asked to print off the
final cash account, I would do so and then datestamp the form and sign it at the top
before one of the copies was sent away to Chesterfield. I would not check any of the
figures declared on the cash account as I did not have control of the ‘AM’ stock and I
assumed Carl had checked the figures and that they were correct.
T have been shown today, several cash accounts relating to week numbers 19, 20, 23, 25,
26, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, for the year 2002 which bear my signature. I have been
asked to comment on the figure which appears on the 2"4 page of the cash account, in
table 5, line 52 which is the foreign currency on hand figure. I took no part in obtaining
this figure and do not know where or how this figure is obtained
There would be times when Carl and I would go through the office ‘snapshot’
produced by Horizon and check off the correct entries.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
Sorta Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann Pearce
As I mentioned in my previous statement, I had a limited amount to do with the Bureau
de Change transactions at the office and although I do recall serving customers where
we have bought back Euros from them, these as far as I can recall, have been for small
amounts such as 50 - 100 Euros. I personally have not performed a transaction of
buying back Euros for 1000 or more.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Oo Witness Statement rf POST.
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 54(3)(a) OFFICE
and 58, MC Rules 1981, r 70) ~ o
Statement of Mrs Margaret Ann PEARCE
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of six (6) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be fiable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 30% dayof April 2003
Signature I Pearce
Further to my statement of 26" March 2003, I have been asked by Mr Patel of the Post
Office Investigation section to clarify certain issues which he has raised with me if ] am
able to so.
I do know that there have been times when Rugeley Post Office has either been running
very low on a particular type of Foreign Currency or we have run out completely and
on those occasions Carl Page would ask Jayn normally to order the currency from the
local Co Op Travel outlet in Rugeley. Although I know that this has happened at times
I have only ever to been asked to do this myself on a couple of occasions.
On the occasions I have done this, I would take the cash from the Bureau till in sterling
for the amount, which we needed to purchase from the Co Op. I would then telephone
the Co Op travel and normally speak to a lady called Gwen who works there and place
an order with her. Shortly after placing the order I would go to the Co Op'travel and
purchase the currency, which had been requested. The rate.that this currency was sold
to me would be the Co Op’s normal selling rate, they would not provide us witha
better rate and I would not know the exchange rate prior to arriving at their outlet.
Signature Mi Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
S014 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
QO) eset 1967, 59; Mc Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(@) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r70)
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
Having purchased the required currency from the Co Op, I would take the currency
and the Co Op till receipt back to the Rugeley Post Office. I used to place the receipt in
the Bureau till in case it was ever needed and I would then book the currency into the
Forde moneychanger. I would book the money in at the same exchange rate as it had
been purchased from the Co Op and I would book the whole amount in as one
transaction, I would not break them down into smaller transactions.
Tcannot now remember the amounts involved or the specific currency types I would
have purchased from the Co Op but it would have more than likely been euros and
probably for several hundred pounds worth and I would only perform these
transactions for customer who had already ordered currency and were noted in the
black diary which we kept by the Bureau till.
Ido know that Jayn Batey and Carl Page have also been to the Co op to buy currency.
__} T have never been asked to or have
broken down a single transaction into smaller amounts.
Thave been shown a schedule identified as item number MP/3 by Mr Patel who has
asked me to comment on five transactions for the purchase of euros on Friday 7 June
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
Sorta Version 3.0 41/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continyation of statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
2002. There would appear to be 5 transactions one after the other amounting to 77,500
euros, I am fairly confident that I did not do that transaction as I would not have broken
the full amount down into several smaller amounts.
As previously stated in my first statement I did not have a great deal to do with the
Bureau till or the transactions but on the occasions when I take a cheque from
correctly, I would not take a post dated cheque fromt_
customer at the Post Office.
As far as I can recall any transactions which I have conducted wit! ifor
the purchase of Euros, he has always paid for by Cheque, I personally have never taken
a cash amount from him for such transactions nor part cheque and part cash, the full
amount has always been in the form of a cheque.
There is definitely one occasion when Jayn made me aware of some o:
cheques which had not been despatched at the end of the cash account week, however I
cannot now recall when that was, I believe it was towards the end of 2002.
In relation to the cheque taken for transactions other than for the Bureau, these cheques
would be despatched on a daily basis from this office for processing, there might be
some occasions when due to pressure of work they were not despatched that day but
would then go the following day, they certainly would not be held for a week like the
cheques for the Bureau were.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 11/02
(85
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(es) (CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70}
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
i has purchased his euros he would leave the office, I have never
had to cancel or reverse one of his transactions on the Forde moneychanger and the
During the period of 2002, I have on occasions ordered the Foreign Currency from the
Cash Centre in Hemel Hempstead and on the occasions that I have dealt with it I would
book the currency into the Forde moneychanger after having collected it from the Royal
Mail building next door and verify the contents of the special delivery pouches. I
would then book this amount in onto the Forde moneychanger by entering the amount
and type of currency into the machine together with the exchange rate supplied on the
advice note from Hemel Hempstead.
The last time that Rugeley Post Office was audited i
2002. During that week Carl was away on holida
was not due to attend the office all week. Although I am the office manager and I am
aware of how to perform a large part of the weekly office balance I do not know the full
procedures and there are certain areas, which J could not do such as balancing the
Bureau till and amalgamating the figures with the AM stock. Before Carl left to go on
holiday he told me to go as far as possible with the weekly balance and that he would
then finish it of on Sunday when he got back from leave, I believe he also told me to
give him a call should the auditors turn up whilst he was away.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 11/02
BE
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
On the morning of Thursday 27% June 2002, Jayn and myself arrived in the vicinity of
Rugeley Post Office and noticed a number of smartly dressed people waiting outside
the Post Office which I automatically assumed they were the auditors so both Jayn and I
sent Carl a text message using our mobiles phone.
We then opened up the office and allowed the auditors in and explained to them that
Carl was not here and that the office was not balanced as I did not know how to
complete it. Shortly afterwards Carl rang the office telephone number and I spoke to
him and he wanted me to do something with the Bureau till, I cannot specifically
remember whether it was to do with transferring an amount from the AM stock to the
Bureau, or Bureau to AM and it may have related to some cheques but I do not
remember now and at the time I did not understand what Carl wanted me to do nor did
I particularly want to do anything whilst the auditors were there. Within about 15 to 20
minutes of the 1s telephone call Carl had rung the office again twice to ask me if I had
done what he had asked and I explained that I had not been able to do it. I would say
that he sounded concerned when I had told him I had not been able to do it and
therefore he eventually asked to speaks to one of the auditors so I passed the telephone
over t0 the head auditor whose name I think was Glyn.
i should state that I did not feel it was my responsibility to do what Carl was asking me
to as if it was something he should have done then I did not see why I should have
become involved.
The auditors then continued to try and balance the office and eventually they left at the
end of the day, I cannot recall how the office balanced that week.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSottA Version 3.0 11/02
@
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Margaret Ann PEARCE
Ihave provided Mr Patel with a number of exercise books which we used at this office
to record various figures, I produce these books as item number MAP/01. The books
were used to record the daily cheque figures which were sent away from the office to
Data Central. Each clerk would enter the number and value of cheques they had taken
for a particular day into the book and then when the cheques were to be despatched the
person performing this task would total all of the figures up and check they all agreed
before entering the values into the BCV and then despatching them. There is also
another exercise book which is called the weekly book where the daily figures in
relation to cheques are recorded as one amount which then provides the total for the
week and this should agree with what appears on the weekly cash account.
Signature M Pearce Signature witnessed by M Patel
csoi1A Version 3.0 14/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, $9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Ms Shirley Jayn Batey
Age if under 18 Over 18 (if over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of 11 pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 14th dayof January 2003
Signature S J Batey
lam employed as a counter clerk at Rugeley Post Office, Rugeley, WS15 and have
been so employed for approximately 4 years. During this time Mr Carl Page has been
the Subpostmaster and Margaret Pearce who is also employed at this post office
usually performs some of the roles of subpostmaster when Mr page is away from the
office. When I initially started employment at this office, I used to work on a part time
basis on given days of the week, which I cannot now recall. At that time, Mr Page's
wife used to also work at the office, a lady called Debbie and the majority of the time Mr
Page or his wife performed the day to day Bureau de Change transactions with the
customers. I at that time had not been trained to perform this task and therefore did not
perform bureau de change transactions. I! commenced performing Bureau de change
transactions about 3 years ago, though initially I did very little in the way of bureau
transactions as Mr Page and his wife normally dealt with them. At that time I was
shown the basics of how to perform these transactions by Mr Page and how to use the
Forde Moneychanger machine. At that time Mr Page played a full role at the office, he
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSO11A (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
a)
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, $9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
was here on a daily basis and served on the counter together with the other staff. I also
believe that Mr Page performed the office accounts and Margaret assists him up to a
certain point and Mr Page finalises the accounts. I have not taken part in known how to
complete the weekly post office accounts. Around Christmas 2001, Mr Page's wife
Debbie left the post office and I then took on a greater role of performing bureau
transactions, though Mr Page still performed a number of these transactions although I
would say to a lesser extent as he started to remain at the office for shorter periods
spending sometime away from the office. When Mr Page or I was not available, then
Margaret would perform the bureau transactions. In order to perform bureau
transactions the office requires exchange rates for the selling and buying of different
types of currency that the post office deals with. I am aware that First Rate, the bureau
de change organisation that the post office uses, fax through on a daily basis the
exchange rates that the office should use for transactions that day. The fax either
comes through the evening before or on the morning of the day for which the rates
apply. There are exchange rates for a number of currencies for both selling and buying
currencies and for the sale and buy back of foreign currency travellers cheques which
are at a slightly different rate to cash transactions. I have also noted that the fax, which
is relevant to a Saturday, makes specific reference to a special exchange rate in
relation to US dollars and Euros for any transactions above £5000 sterling. Although I
am aware of this fax with the exchange rates, I have never been required to or asked to
enter the exchange rates into the Forde Moneychanger, which is used to perform the
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
csotiA Version 3.0 11/02
C
m
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss SA(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
bureau transactions. As the main transactions at this office involve US Dollars and
Euros, I am aware that these exchange rates for cash transactions are changed daily
on the Forde Moneychanger machine, however, the other currency is not changed daily
and is only update to the current value as and when a customer requests this type of
currency. The Post Office does not physically hold all types of currency at the office
and the vast majority of the “non popular” currency such as Hong Kong Dollars etc.
needs to be ordered specially from the post office cash centre in Hemel Hempstead.
Mr Page keeps a small AS size black diary specifically for bureau transactions and to
record when a customer who has previously ordered currency will be coming into collect
it. On these occasions when a customer comes into collect pre ordered foreign
currency, I will enter that days exchange rate into the Forde Moneychanger at the time
of the transaction. On most occasions Mr Page enters the new exchange rates into the
Forde Moneychanger himself, on the occasions where I have set the exchange rates
for US Dollars and Euros, the most popular currency types I have asked Mr Page what
rate I should enter into the machine for the selling only of these two types of currency.
The travellers cheques and the buying back of cash currency is set as per the daily fax.
I am aware that Mr Page sets the rates for both US Dollars and Euros to a slightly
higher rate than what the First Exchange fax stipulates and this has always been the
way Mr Page has operated the bureau since I have been here. I am aware that the
notes in relation to the two above currencies for selling is higher and therefore the
customer gets more foreign currency for each pound, however, I have not queried this
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSottA Version 3.0 14/02
(9
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
G (CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
J
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
with Mr Page and just gone by what he tells me to do. The Forde Moneychanger is
connected up to a display board which displays on the customers side the rate of
exchange for various types of currency, however the display board in this office has not
been working for several months. When I serve a customer, they enquire as to the
current exchange rate, which for Euros I would know that day as it is a popular
transaction or if I didn't know it the Forde Moneychanger when interrogated will print out
the exchange rate. If the customer wishes to proceed, I would then take the cash
sterling from them and enter the amount into the forde moneychanger once I had
entered which currency was required. I then press a button labelled reverse sell which
automatically works out the amount of the currency the customer should get which is
printed out on a till roll attached to the machine. This till roll is a duplicate roll and the
top part of it is torn off and given to the customer together with the foreign currency and
the undercopy remains attached to the original roll so that at the end of the week there
will be a whole roll or more for bureau transactions performed that week. These rolls
when complete for one cash account week ( Thursday to Wednesday) I store in the
bottom drawer by the bureau de change work station. During the time that I have been
here I can only recall one other occasion besides the bureau transactions fo!
GRO
i where I have been requested to perform a transaction for over £5000
sterling. This happened about 1 year ago when I served a gentleman whom I know and
he purchased Euros for a greater value then £5000 sterling. I cannot now recall how
much this transaction was for but I had to call Mr Page for the exchange rate that!
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
csOttA Version 3.0 11/02
AZ
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
should use as the transaction over £5000 sterling attracts a slightly better exchange
rate. The 1°‘ recollection I have o I coming into the post office to
perform bureau de change transactions is around summer 2002, however, it could well
be prior to that. Initiall ould always be served by Mr Page and I was
aware that this entailed large amounts of Euros, though I did not know at what rate
these transactions were done at unless Mr Page forgot to change the rate back on the
forde money changer, this has occurred once or twice and at these times I have noted
that the selling rate used by Mr Page for Euros t ] “Ihas been a lot higher
than what the forde money changer was initially set up and higher than the value given
on the fax from First Rate.. I have on several occasions questioned Mr Page as to why
he gives such a high exchange rate value to!
explanation but am told that: tputs through a lot of business at the post
office and he (Mr Page ) gives him a preferential rate. There are no other customers
that I have served or know of who gets such high exchange rates asi
HSBC account. Depending on how large the transaction is
out and sign two or three cheques and hand them over as payment for the Euros. The
Euros which would have been ordered in from Hemel Hempstead would then be
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
cso1ta Version 3.0 11/02
, 9
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss SA(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
I together with the bureau de change receipt. The
money normally is placed into a holdall andi
en leaves the post office.
The normal procedure for the acceptance of cheques for payment of foreign exchange
services should only be up to the cheque guarantee card value or a bankers draft up to
whatever value required and of course cash up to whatever value is required. Although
I know what the correctt post office procedure is, Mr Page has stated that it is ok to
accept cheques to a higher value and other customers have paid. for currency using
their personal cheques to a higher value than their cheque guarantee card, but only up
to about £1000, usual several hundred pounds but not the £100,000 plus cheques that
presents at this office on about a twice weekly basis if not more. Mr
Page has instructed me that the cheques accepted for bureau transactions remain in
the bureau till and are brought to account at the end of the post office accounting week,
ie Wednesday evening each week and then physically despatched by post to Post
Office Counters Ltd, Data Central, 89 - 93 Central Street, London, EC1B 1NP ina
special red and white striped plastic envelope. It is normal practice for cheques taken
at the counter for other transactions (not bureau transaction) to be despatched to the
above address on a daily basis for processing. This system is applied every day of the
week, however, the cheques for bureau transactions are only sent once a week on a
Thursday morning following the cash account. Normall fl ~ I comes into the
post office during business hours, which are 08.00 — 17.30 Monday to Friday and 09.00
~ 14.00 Saturday. In the last few months I have noticed that the Euro transactions
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 1402
@y)
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
oO (CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
ave increased dramatically and he has also taken to
collecting the Euros outside of business hours. The reason I say this is because I
normally order the large volume of Euros from the cash centre, which arrive at the office
the following day and are then secured in the main safe. On my arrival at work the
following day the Euros are gone and therefore I assume,
them when the office is shut. He does still come in when the office is open but not that
{ often now though the number and value of these transactions have grown immensely.
from a lady who made me aware of two cheques one for about £100,000 and one just
under £100,000, which had bounced and was told by the lady that she would need to
agreed it with Mr Page. I performed the transaction but again raised this with Mr Page
when I saw him but again I was not really given an explanation as to why/GRO}
always felt that something was not right. S J Batey
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
csottA Version 3.0 14/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Ms Shirley Jayn Batey
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of three (3) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Datedthe 26th dayof March 2003
Signature S$ J Batey
Further to my statement of 14 January 2003, I wish to add that on a Wednesday when
the Post Office performs it’s weekly balance, I only work up until 1730 hours, therefore
at about 1630 hours I would stop serving the customers and balance my own stock unit,
stock unit number 06. I would then leave the Horizon printout by my work position
and lock away my till in the safe and then go home.
I was also responsible for performing part of the balance for the Bureau till and this I
would normally do during the early part of the day on Wednesday. In order to do this
1 would press the command 2 and command 3 function buttons on the Forde
Moneychanger.
The command 2 printout would list all of the different currencies held in the Bureau till
and provide the amount of each currency held and the sterling value of each currency.
I would then check each currency in the till against the Forde Moneychanger printout to
make sure they agreed.
The command 3 printout was used to verify the travellers cheques sold and bought and
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Pate!
C8011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continyation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
the credit card transactions which again I would verify. Having done this the command
2 printout was usually thrown away, however, the command 3 printout was left on the
counter by the Bureau till.
Later in the afternoon, I would then obtain a command 10 printout, weekly summary
from the Forde Moneychanger and this would again be left by the Bureau position for
Carl to deal with. The command 10 printout showed the total sales and purchases that
week, together with the revaluation figure and the sterling equivalent of what was on
hand in the Bureau till.
Ihave been shown by Carl how to enter some of the figures into the Horizon system
and I would therefore enter the figures shown on the command 10 printout in relation
to credit card sales and travellers cheques sales and purchases into the Horizon
terminal. I did not enter any other figures into Horizon which had been taken of the
weekly summary printout.
I would on a Wednesday “REM IN” currency to the Bureau till and the figure entered
onto Horizon. I should point out that I produce two command 10 printouts as one is
attached to a form called Bureau de Change Commission and Revaluation summary,
form P4833 and then posted of to Chesterfield. The other remains in the office as stated
earlier. I produce a sample of form P4833 as item number SJB/01.
I have today been shown a weekly cash account and specifically a figure on page 2 in
table number 5, line 52 labelled Fgn Curr Sterl Equiv, when-Carl manged this office I
did not know what this figure related to and where it had been obtained from, however
since the incident with Carl, I have been trained in the Bureau de Change further and
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
S011 Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, £70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
know that this figure is the Sterling equivalent of how much currency is held in the
Bureau till.
Whilst operating the Bureau till when Carl was managing the Post Office, I have
performed numerous transactions where I have bought back Euros from the customers
and the amounts involved are generally very small, between 10 - 200 Euros. I cannot
recall ever having bought back more than 1000 Euros from a Customer.
Signature S J Batey Signature witnessed by M Patet
CSO11A Version 3.0 11/02
42
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Staternent
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a)
and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Statement of Ms Shirley Jayn Batey
Age if under 18 Over 18 (If over 18 insert ‘over 18')
This statement (consisting of Five (5) pages each signed by me) is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shal! be liable to prosecution if I have
wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe true.
Dated the 30! dayof April 2003
Signature J S Batey
Further to my statement of 26 March 2003, I have been asked by Mr Patel of the Post
Office Investigation section to clarify certain issues which he has raised with me if lam
able to so.
Ican confirm that there have been times when Rugeley Post Office has either been
running very low ona particular type of Foreign Currency or we have run out
completely, on some of those occasions Carl Page would ask me to contact via
telephone the Co Op Travel outlet in Rugeley and order a certain amount of the
currency that we required. I should state that the main currency which has been bought
form the Co Op Travel in Rugeley would be euros though other currency types have
been purchased from the Co op.
On the occasions I have been asked to do this, which does vary depending on the time
of year but could be once or twice a week in the main Holiday period or one or twice a
month during other times, Car] would tell me how much of a particular type of
currency he wanted to buy and hand me an amount of cash Sterling to buy them. 1
assumed he had taken the cash from the Bureau till though I do not know this to be the
Signature JS Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
C8011 (Side A) Version 3.0 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
case. I would then telephone the Co Op travel and normally speak to a lady called
Gwen who works there and place an order with her. Shortly after placing the order I
would go to the Co Op travel and purchase the currency, which had been requested.
The rate that this currency was sold to me would be the Co Op’s normal selling rate,
they would not provide us with a better rate and I would not know the exchange rate
prior to arriving at their outlet.
Having purchased the required currency from the Co Op, I would be given a till receipt
and I would take both back to the Rugeley Post Office. The receipt obtained from the
Co Op was not retained and normally just thrown away, the currency was then booked
into the Forde moneychanger. Carl had told me to book the currency into the Forde
moneychanger at the same rate as we had purchased it for from the Co Op so if they
had sold us euros at an exchange rate of 1.5, I would book the euros into the Post Office
Forde Moneychanger at 1.5. Carl had also told me to book in the currency in several
amounts for instance if I had just bought 5000 euros, I would book them in at 1000 euros
ata time. This would mean there were five (5) transactions, the reason Carl gave me for
doing this was because he would get paid by the Post Office for each transaction and so
rather than it being one transaction it would be five transactions for which he would get
paid more.
I cannot be certain of the amounts involved but Carl would generally give me between
£500 and £4000 to buy the currency from the Co Op but it was not always euros that
were purchased. I should also state that it is not always me who goes to the Co Op
Travel, Carl has been himself and I believe others at this office have also been.
Signature JS Batey Signature witnessed by M Pate!
csot1A, Version 30 11/02
oO*d
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss SA(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
‘GRO_ a at Rugeley Post Office I have never had an occasion whe: ’
) __..., he would actually be in the
Post Office and he would tell me how many euros he wanted and I would then use the
Forde Moneychanger to work out the sterling amount that he had to pay.
normally write it out at the time of the transaction whilst he was at the office
As far as I can recall any transactions which I have conducted with
the purchase of Euros, he has always paid for by Cheque, I personally have never taken
acash amount from him for such transactions nor part cheque and part cash, the full
amount has always been in the form of a cheque.
As mentioned previously in the my last statement, I have been told to hold back the
cheques in the Bureau till in relation to all cheques for Bureau transactions only
including those for} here have been two occasions that I can recall
when I have taken cheques out from the Bureau till mid cash account week and
prepared them for despatch meaning I have added their value to the BCV and REM’d
them out which means I have entered the total number and value of cheques to be
despatched into the Horizon computer system, however when Carl had found out I had
done this he physically went to the bundle of cheques and removed only those relating
___GRO
occurred sometime in June 2002 and I believe October 2002.though I cannot recall the
which he then placed back into the Bureau till. These two occasions
specific dates nor can I now remember the number of cheques that Carl fished out or
their value but they were large amounts.
Signature JS Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSOITA Version 3.9 11/02
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(@) (CJ Act 1967, 89; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
comes in for an amount of euros for which he pays by one or more
cheques, however, the times I have served him I would always put in the transaction as
GRO requesting the amounts to be broken down into smaller
transactions nor has Car] asked me to enter them in as a number of transactions on the
Forde moneychanger.
Ihave been shown a schedule identified as item number MP/3 by Mr Patel who has
asked me to comment on five transactions for the purchase of euros on Friday 7* June
2002. There would appear to be 5 transactions one after the other amounting to 77,500
euros, I am fairly confident that I did not do that transaction as I would not have broken
the full amount down into several smaller amounts.
and the only time I recall ‘GR 0 4 handing back euros to Rugeley Post Office
was once in about October 2002 time when he had just bought some euros from the Post
Office and then it was noticed that the office did not have many euros left and sol
I I should add that he had not left the premises and I can not
I recall a time when he has brought back the euros to the office after having left the Post
Office.
During the period of 2002, 1 would have been mainly responsible for placing the order
Signature JS Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
CSO1tA Version 3.0 11/02
2
POL00062371
POL00062371
Witness Statement
(CJ Act 1967, s9; MC Act 1980, ss 5A(3)(a) and 5B, MC Rules 1981, r 70)
Continuation of statement of Shirley Jayn BATEY
of Foreign Currency from the Cash Centre in Hemel Hempstead and I would generally
also book the money in when it arrived at Rugeley Post Office. This would entail
collecting it from the Royal Mail building next door as the currency would arrive in
several Royal Mail Special Delivery pouches, opening each pouch and verifying the
amounts enclosed agreed with the enclosed advice note. I would then book this
amount in onto the Forde moneychanger by entering the amount and type of currency
into the machine together with the exchange rate supplied on the advice note from
Hemel Hempstead.
There was a period in September 2002, I cannot recall the exact dates but Carl was away
on Holiday for a weekI I and during this time I decided to despatch the Bureau
cheques away properly on a daily basis. When Carl returned from his holiday he told
me again not to send away any of the cheques taken for the Bureau transactions.
As mentioned in my previous statement, I perform some of the balancing for the
Bureau on a Wednesday and then leave the remainder for Carl to complete. There is
definitely one occasion which was during the latter part of last year (2002) when after a
cash account week upon my arrival at the office on the Thursday of the new cash
account week I had notice a number of! GRO } cheques were still in the
Bureau till and I made mention of this to Margaret.
Signature JS Batey Signature witnessed by M Patel
cso1ia Version 3.0 11/02
Gos