POL00069524
POL00069524
Stephen Dilley
From: cath.oglesby!
Sent: 01 October 2006
To: Stephen Dilley
Subject: Re: FW: Re-revised Second statement of Cath Oglesby: P.O -v- Castleton
Stephen,
1) I didnt authorise Castleton to place the amount in the suspence account, this had to be done via the helpline
and the number he has written would suggest that he took this route.
2) The only snapshots that I was aware of will be ones mentioned in my notes, so if I havent mentioned that one
before, then I probably havent seen it before.
3) I remember talking to John on the phone, but honestly cannot recall the detail of what we discussed.I have not
saved the e-mail he refers to, sorry.
Rough Drawing completed today and will post tomorrow.
Regards,
Cath.
GRO
27/09/2006 13:02
Dear Cath,
I refer to my voicemail of today. Sorry to nag, but I wondered if you'd had the chance to look at this email and
its attachments yet? (I know we've discussed point 1 in the email below).
Kind regards.
Stephen Dilley
From: Stephen Dilley
Sent: 13 September 2006 19:27
To: 'cath.oglesb’ o
Ce: 'rmorgan{. } Tom Beezer; mandy.talbot:
Subject: Re-revised Second statement of Cath Oglesby: P.O -v- Castleton’
Dear Cath,
I refer to my email of 12 September. I attach a very slightly amended further draft. I've just inserted the times
of the balance snapshots at para 45 (a) to (d).
A few further questions not included in the statement:
1. Who authorised Castleton to transfer the monies at various stages into suspense account? Liz Morgan tells me
that a subpostmaster could transfer a loss into a suspense account if either:
(a) they provided a sufficiently detailed and acceptable explanation for the discrepancy;
1
POL00069524
POL00069524
(b) they submitted a hardship form which showed that they could not afford to make good the shortfall in the
cash account; or
(c) exceptionally, the RLM authorised it.
Liz cannot recall this matter very well and does not recall authorising the transfers into suspense and wonders if
you did. That said, I note the cash account for week 46 (week ending 11 Feb 04) has "Suspense ref.
H.13041710 Liz" hand written on it. To me that suggests for that week at least, Liz authorised the transfer.
2. In para 45(b) of your statement, you refer to the balance snapshot of
14 Feb timed at 11.59am which showed that Marine Drive needed £95,896.59 in its till to achieve a perfect
balance. I just wondered if you knew at the time that there was another snapshot of the same day timed at
8.55am which showed that at 8.55am, Marine Drive needed £92,100.36 to achieve a perfect balance in its till?
(Copy attached). Does that make the end of day cash declaration of £102,706.10 even more significant? If you
didn't know about that at the time, I don't propose we should mention it in your statement.
3. John Jones thinks he emailed you before doing the appeal to ask why the advice you had given to Mr Castleton
had not been followed by him and any reason as to why such losses were consistently dismissed as being a fault
with the Horizon system and that he followed up his email with a telecon.
John deletes all his old emails. Do you have a copy of this email or remember this?
Iam out of the office between 15 and 22 September inclusive and look forward to hearing from you as soon as
possible.
Kind regards.
Stephen Dilley
From: Stephen Dilley
Sent: 12 Septe'
To: ‘cath.ogleshv..
Ce: 'rmorgani. GRO
Subject: Revised Second statement of Cath Oglesby: P.O -v- Castleton
Importance: High
Dear Cath,
I refer to the conference with Counsel on 11 September and attach a revised copy of your second witness
statement for approvaltogether with a marked up version showing the changes I have made. I have not yet
corrected the page numbering of the exhibits and will endeavour to do so as soon as possible. In the meantime,
please could you have a very careful read of the latest versionand as Counsel stated, make any changes that you
feel are appropriate, because this is your statementand you have to be 100% happy with it. Please could you
also let me have a rough plan of the ground floor of the Marine Drive branch so that we can exhibit it?
(It doesn't need to be a Picasso).
I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.
Kind regards,
Stephen Dilley
Solicitor
for and on behalf of Bond Pearce LLP
www.bondpearce.com
The information in this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged and protected
by law. The intended recipient only is authorised to access this e-mail and any attachments. If you are not the
intended recipient, please notify the sender as soon as possible and delete any copies. Unauthorised use,
dissemination, distribution, publication or copying of this communication is prohibited.
Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before transmission.
You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. Bond Pearce LLP accepts no liability
for any loss or damage which may be caused by software viruses.
Bond Pearce LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership registered in England and Wales number OC311430.
2
POL00069524
POL00069524
\egistered Office: 3 Temple Quay, Temple Back East, Bristol, BS1 6DZ.
A list of Members is available from our registered office. Any reference to a Partner in relation to Bond Pearce LLP
means a Member of Bond Pearce LLP.
Bond Pearce LLP is regulated by the Law Society.
>>>> STATEMENT_1107486.DOC attachment was removed from this email <<<<
>>>> eCopy scanned document.pdf attachment was removed from this email
> >>> <<<<
JESSIE OSI SEI IOI IE ISI ISIE IORI SSI IEA SEIS CI BSISI IEICE SEIS ISI IDA DKA IIASA
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 and then delete this email from your system.
JOSE SUSIE IIR IS OCORE EI SOR ODE SIC OCORIO IE ID OROKIE IO EOC RATIO AK