POL00105719
POL00105719
Addendum to Shortfall Analysis
Brief Details
Claimant Name: Jennifer O'Dell
Claimant Number: 124
Branch Name: Great Staughton_
Branch Code: 288230
Additional Information/Observations
Mediation
e The Claimant was the subject of a Mediation report (MOOS), all supporting evidence
uploaded (Extra Documents/M005_POL_CR_Evidence folder).
¢ The Claimant progressed through the Mediation process. Angela van den Bogerd
represented Post Office at the Mediation meeting and would be able to advise on the
outcome.
° Asa result of the Mediation meeting, the Claimant emailed “scheme enquires” on
22/09/15 for clarification on points raised during the meeting (Extra Documents/Post
Mediation Correspondence folder).
* Post Office replied to the Claimant in an email dated 01/10/15 attaching a response to
the issues raised by the Claimant on 22/09/15 (not available). The Claimant then
responded in a further email (dated 07/10/15 to “scheme enquiries”) that she would
provide further supporting evidence. A final email from the Claimant dated 11/10/15
states that the original questions raised in her initial email (22/09/15) had not been
answered fully, further evidence was attached from the Claimant. Post Office records
show a letter dated 15/10/17 from Angela finalised these previous issues (Extra
Documents/Post Mediation Correspondence folder).
Contractual
e Asigned copy of the Claimant’s contract is available, signed 28/11/00. This is not
included in the Mediation Evidence file. A Conditions of Appointment document is in
within that file, signed by the Claimant 03/10/00 (Extra Documents/MG05 _POL_CR_
Evidence folder)
e Condition of Appointment document states that the Claimant was required to attend
two days training. Post Office have no records to show that the Claimant did or did
not attend. It should be noted that the Mediation POIR states there are no calls to
record dissatisfaction with training.
¢ The Contracts Manager, Sue Muddeman, no longer works for Post Office. A full
documented Case Closure document, with embedded documents to support the
Claimant's suspension, appeal and subsequent termination of contract is available
(Extra Documents/Contract Case Summary folder).
»® Sue Richardson who heard the Claimant’s appeal, no longer works for Post Office.
e The Mediation POIR confirms Post Office has no record of extra training being
requested by the Claimant.
* During an interview, with her Contracts Manager on 08/02/10, the Claimant admitted
to making additional cash declarations in order to conceal discrepancies (Extra
Documents/Contract Case Summary).
Post Office Security
e The Claimant was the subject of an investigation by Post Office Security. In an email
dated 08/07/10, Andrew Hayward, Senior Security Manager, on the advice of Royal
Mail Group Criminal Law Team, advised the Claimant they were being Formally
Cautioned. Post Office (John Longman) added on the 23/07/10 the Claimant would
not sign the Caution. In a further email dated 28/07/10 from John Longman to Andy
1
POL00105719
POL00105719
Date ~~) Contact Additional Info T outcome
~ Entries prior to this are
in relation to Alarm
problems and closure for an
appointment
11/02/2008 I Minor closure IThe above office has Reopened
reported closing today 14/02/2008
11/02 @ 9am due to system
problems. Will advise when
reopen. Callers name is Mrs
05/09/2009 I Losses at
branch ies
Gt Staughton e-rrails
nov-dec 09.doc
09/12/2009 I Letter to Mrs wl »
O’Dell re pa I
greatstaughtinlosses
tosses dec09.doc
23/12/2009 I Letter =
received from can
, Gt Staughton
Mrs O'Dell 29DECO9. pdf
claiming
losses due to
Horizon
31/12/2009 I Intervention #1)
request made
Great Slaughton
and NBSC Call I ctaygnton288230.xs 288230.doc
log and
registered ca
assistants -
requested Gt Staughton NBSC
contacts 09. pdf
01/01/2010 I Checks carried I Stephen
out by Eleanor
Kimberley at
P&BA
T have looked at this
office for Cathy, but have
not found any areas of
concern, they are at the
moment showing a surplus of
£1,853.13
The only thing we can
suggest is that someone
goes through his paperwork
and events.
I Eleanor
I Branch Control Manager
POL00105719
POL00105719
Gt Staughton - no to
defund. pdf
22/01/2010 I Critical a
closure form 2)
sent Gt Staughton -
Critical Information. di
27/01/2010 I Confirmation ay a
of attending .
4 ‘ Great Staughton -
interview wil attend interview.
29/01/2010 I 2 defund a Did not go
request I ahead
Great Staughton 2nd
defund arranged. .dor
03/02/2010 I 3** Defund whe Did not go
request “I ahead
I BAU - Gt Staughton
defund v2 110210.de
03/02/2010 I Letter to Mrs a)
0’ Deil I
loss Gt Staughton with
enclosing call NBSC call log.doc
log
th oe Ae
18/02/2010 I 4° Defund #)
request
Defund Proforma -
Gt Staughton (22823)
19/02/2010 I Termination of a
Contract i
termination19Feb10.
doc
22 - Email #1) Letter to
23/02/2010 I regarding confirm date
Great Staughton -
defund Emails 22022010,doc of defund /
a) I
defundietier23feb.d
oc
25/02/2010 I Details from IHi All, /
defund I'm pleased to announce
that the defund of Great
Staughton is now complete.
Thank you all for your help
in this.
POL00105719
POL00105719
Appeal 30 April 2010 at
Peterborough Mail Centre
21/05/2010 I Appeal a 5} [~
decision oe
Appeal decision Appeal 1318.xIs
Appeal 1318 fetter - Jennifer O'De!
has a number
of documents
imbedded I
Completed case q
summary has ie
do cument a ee
imbedded
01/06/2010 I Letter a
enquiring sa
about future futureofbranchJune2
010.doc
of premises
30/06/2010 I Letter a)
regarding
Premises and Sloceowaeeed
vemovai of kit
16/07/2010 I Letter a) wr
regarding aon}
removal of kit crear Seuohton Tetieter tenner De!
and enclosing
a copy of the
Appeal
decision
letter
23/07/2013 I No access to Anita, *
remove kit See the email below from a)
Property Projects Team who Mike J Ball Email
have been refused access to I —Sreat Staughton 28
the current site for
removal of PO equipment — i
can you advise how the i
legal process works and
copy all parties into any
further correspondence sent
to Mrs O'Dell.
Regards
Mike
02/08/2010 I Removal of kit; Anita & NSA,
Please hold fire with this
POL00105719
POL00105719
per CG
How the debt is made up?
The debt of £9,616.66 is made up of a branch discrepancy settled centrally of
£1,853.13 credit on 30/12/2009 and £11,469.79 debit from the Final Account
deficiency on 06/01/2010.
Mrs O’Dell was not declaring cash losses of £1,000.00 a month that she claimed only
started occurring from May 2009 instead she was inflating the cash on hand to cover
the losses.
The first call she made to the helpline regarding any loss in the PO was in August
2009.
Mrs O’Dell continued inflating the cash on hand to cover the losses still continuing at
£1,000.00 up to December 2009.
From Novy 2000 — Jan 2010 Mrs O’Dell was an outstanding performer, receiving only
11 transaction corrections from 2005 (4 of these cancelled each other out) therefore it
is felt she knew exactly what she was doing regarding accounting and balancing.
Only two branch discrepancies were ever declared.
Before she was employed her history shows she had a computer qualification and she
was computer literate however in 2009 she claims to know nothing of how computers
or the horizon system worked.
Mrs O"Dell has also blamed the Pin Pad for the losses as well as Horizon.
Have we got all the evidence to support our side of things?
Idocs checked and confirmed - no problem.
Incident Log from the Helpline detailing all calls made and why.
Cash declarations made.
Credence data — Non Sales 26/03/2007 — 06/01/2010
Sales 26/03/2007 — 06/01/2010
Interview notes x 2 admitting false accounting and multiple cash declarations.
Signed Certificate of Appointment paper.
Office copies of some cash declarations, stock on hand figures.
History of previous excellent balancing, performance transaction corrections.
CV showing computer literate can be obtained from the file in storage.
Are we confident of winning the case / or can fully validate the error?
Only Mrs O’Dell, her son who was employed at the post office when not at University
and her husband (not a PO employee) had access behind the counter or to the safe.
The loss in the office did not occur as a result of “errors”.
We can validate that cash was not in the office when the audit was carried.
We can that Mrs O'Dell did not declared cash on hand correctly to cover up
escalating shortages of £1,000.00 every month, discrepancies arising were not shown
or made good and the initial loss in May 2009 was not brought to the attention of the
helpline until August 2009, even after this Mrs O’ Dell carried on false accounting up
to Jan 2010.
Mrs O"Dell did not have any issues with her Horizon system prior to the losses
commencing in May 2009. The system had not been changed or amended since it
was installed.
201001920
POL00105719
POL00105719
Branch: Great Staughton
Office FAD; 288/230
SPMR’s Name: Mrs Jennifer O'Dell
Debt Break Down:
Final Account Deficiency £11,469.79 Debit
Settled Centrally Amounts £1,853.13 Credit
Total £9,616.66 Debit
Branch History
Mrs O'Dell was employed from 20/11/2000 - 06/01/2010 in this time she had an exemplary record with only
11 transaction corrections (4 of these cancelled each other out) and two branch discrepancies.
Mrs O'Dell contacted the helpline on 04/11/2009 reporting a loss of £7,000.00 that she refused to make
good, she reported loosing around £1,000.00 a month since May 2009 but had not shown the losses on
Horizon.
In September 2009 Mrs O'Dell reported a problem with her pin pad, this was rectified immediately.
Convictions from Previous court cases
At the audit Mrs O'Dell insisted it was the pin pad that had caused the shortage, the pin pad was also initially
blamed at her interview under caution but when it was pointed out to her that she had received instructions
on the pin pad and this was proven not to be the case she then blamed Horizon.
Mrs O'Dell has stated that she cannot prove the loss was down to Horizon but is convinced that because her
son declared cash on 17/12/2009 that showed a gain of £5,000.00 and then on 21/12/2009 Mrs O'Dell
looked at the discrepancy without doing a cash declaration and Horizon then showed a £7,000.00 gain that it
is the Horizon equipment that is at fault. The office paperwork shows that Horizon only showed the gains of
£5.000.00 and £7,000.00 as multiple cash declarations had been done on different terminals.
Mrs O'Dell never reported problems with the Horizon system and did not have any balancing issues prior to
May 2009.
Any Other Extra Information
Mrs O'’Dell’s CV shaw she had a computer qualification and claimed to be computer literate however in her
interview under caution Mrs O'Dell claimed to have no computer knowledge and knew nothing of how the
Horizon system or any other computer worked. Also In the interview Mrs O'Dell did admit to 2 counts of false
accounting and doing multiple cash declarations. Mrs O'Dell was issued with an Adult Caution but refused to
accept it.
The case was flagged up to the Exec Team as Mrs O'Dell clairned storage charges of £290.00 and legal action
for the POL equipment kept on her property, no Horizon issues were mentioned by Mrs O'Dell to the Exec
Team. The storage charges were paid by POL to avoid action in the small claims court.
Only Mrs O'Dell and her son, a student at the time, had access to Horizon although her husband did have
access to the secure area but he was not a PO employee.
201001922
POL00105719
POL00105719
Actions taken by Former Postmasters Accounts Team
A 1" letter and the statement of debt was sent to Mrs O’Dell on 01/06/2010 by
recorded delivery, this was received and signed for by “ODELL” on 03/06/2010
9.21am.
As no reply was received, a 2" letter was sent on 29/06/2010 and a reply dated
01/07/2010 was received from Mrs O'Dell.
;-in.resnonse.to.Mrs.O"Dell’s Jette. she was contacted by phone on 19/07/2010, tel.
I IRRELEVANT as a courtesy to inform her that a reply to her letter
the fact that her training was an issue as well as the horizon system was
malfunctioning.
The helpline call log was obtained.
A history of Mrs’s O’Deli’s transaction corrections was obtained, this showed only 5
transaction corrections issued in 2009, had training been an issue the number of
transaction corrections issued would be far greater than 5 in a year, Mrs O’Dell had
been postmaster for 9 years, was very experienced and had not brought training up
before this.
Horizon was also checked to see if there had been any problems and there had not.
On 23/07/2010 a “Letter before Action” was sent and a very short reply received from
Mts O’Dell, dated 27/07/2010.
Mrs O’Dell was sent an in depth explanation of why she was being held responsible
for the loss of £9,616.66 on 28/07/2010accompanied by :- (This was all in the case so
not copied again)
the audit report,
statement of debt,
19/02/2010 letter by Sue Muddeman,
statement of all transaction corrections issued showing only 5 issued in 2009 and the
text of these transactions,
a copy of the helpline call log,
the letter of contract termination of 21/05/2010
Mrs O’Dell’s signed contract.
A reply was received from Mrs O’Dell dated 29/07/2010 and a further letter
explaining the facts was sent in reply, dated 02/08/2010.
Another letter was received from Mrs O’Dell, dated 05/08/2010 now referring to an
issue over Christmas stamps and a telephone call she received from a department not
known to this office, as neither of these issues related to the case in hand a reply was
sent on 06/08/2010, stating this and informing her the case would now proceed to
legal.
201002076
POL00105719
POL00105719
RATIONALE TO SUPPORT DECISION
Insert the rationale to support the decision
Mrs O'Dell had rang the Helpline during 2009 alleging losses at the branch of around £1k per month
— there was no evidence of any losses shown on the BTS or settled centrally. . The calls to the
Helpline were on
4/8/09 — PM says ongoing discrepancies where to look for them
7/9/09 — Pinpad malfunctioning
23/10/09 ~ Problems with Pinpad thinks this is causing office discrepancy
4/11/09 — office has loss of £7k carrying since May refused to make good as says not her loss
emailed NSA team PM wants call back from Tier 2
5/11/09 — Spoke to Mrs O'Dell explained loss needs to be made good she refused
5/11/09 — SPMR losses of over £7000 refuses to make good as she blames the system for the
losses ~ SPMR done many checks and not had any corrections, SPMR insisting on escalating...
The message was relayed to the NSA team and I wrote to her on 9 December 2009 re the alleged
losses. In the letter I stated that as no losses were showing in the accounts I assume that if any
fosses had been occurring they had been made good at the time of the loss. Also if she is saying
that there is a problem with Horizon then can she send me any proof.
On 21 December Mrs O'Dell replied stating that there was a loss of £8506 by 16 December, she
also indicated that the branch has been losing around £1k per month. On 17 December her son
declared cash and it came to over £5k gain. On 21 December 2009 she says that she took a look
at the discrepancy without doing a cash declaration and it showed a £7k gain.
On 31 December 2009 I requested an intervention visit to the branch. I asked for the
subpostmaster not to be made aware of this visit.
The visit was conducted on 6 January 2010 by Lesley Frost, Field Support Advisor assisted by
Keith Skelton FSA and from the findings during this visit it developed into a Tier 2 audit.
The discrepancy at the audit was £9616.66. This was made up of
£15412.52 shortage in the cash
£3906.90 plus in the stock
£35.83 plus in the currency
£1853.13 plus settled centrally.
The surplus was settled centrally during the BTS on 30 December 2009 ~ Mrs O'Dell told us that
someone had told her to do this but could not remember who. _I think it was probably within my
letter sent to her in December 2009.
Discovered at the audit
Up to 16 December 2009 only one cash declaration made Till 01
17 December 2009 — ID DOD001 made actual cash declaration in Till 02
18 December 2009 — 1D JOD001 made actual cash declarations in Till 01 and Till 03
From 18 December there were 3 cash declarations on the system thereby increasing the cash
figures in the accounts.
30 December 2009 — BTS completed — actual cash declarations made ID JOD 001
201001993
POL00105719
POL00105719
Since the termination of the Contract for Services I have re-looked at the BTS statements and
analysised the declared cash on hand figures to ascertain if there was any pattern to the figures. I
concluded : -
BTS 4/3/09 — cash on hand c/Fwd £3738.73
BTS 1/4/09 ~ cash on hand c/ fwd £1546.64
BTS 6/5/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £4256.36 — Mrs O'Dell indicating loss started in May at £1k per
month
BTS 3/6/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £4296.73
BTS June/July not in file - but cash on hand b/fwd on 5/8 statement £4731.12
BTS 5/8/09 ~ cash on hand c/fwd £7788.46
BTS 2/9/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £4075.12
BTS 30/9/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £4630.12 — call to Helpline 9/9 stating pinpad malfunctioning
BTS 4/11/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £8125.03 ~ call to Helpline indicating loss of around £7k (4/11)
and pin pad malfunctioning (23/10)
BTS 2/12/09 — cash on hand b/wd £12463.20
BTS 30/12/09 — cash on hand c/fwd £20734.28 (reprint from the FSA)
If we take the figure declared on 1 April BTS there was an increase of around £3k declared in May.
The amount of cash on hand deciared remains at around £4k until there is a sharp increase in the
cash on hand figure 5/8 of around a further £3k this then returns to a cash on hand figure of £4k for
August and September.
in October (BTS 4/11) the amount of cash c/fwd increases from £4.6K to £8.1k an increase of £3.5k
(as comparison 3/11 cash declaration - £4102.00 compared to 4/11 of initially £1600.50 rising to
£8125.03 an increase of £4k on the previous evening — or if the cash on hand was £1600 an
increase of £6.5k)
In November (BTS 2/12) — the amount of cash c/fwd increases from £8.1k fo £12.4k an increase on
the previous month of £4k
(as comparison cash declared on 1/12 of £6352.30 compared to 2/12 of initially £3414.94 rising to
£12499.52 an increase of £6k on the previous evening — or if the cash on hand was £3414.92 an
increase of £9k)
Therefore up to December there appearsto be a total cash shortage in branch of £10.5k approx
During December additional cash declarations were added to the value of £12394.24. The cash on
hand figure c/fwd rose to £20734.28.
During the audit on 6 January 2010 there was a total cash discrepancy of -£15412.52 but a stock
and currency increase making the shortage in the branch -£11469.79. There was also a surplus
settled centrally of £1853.13 making the total shortage in the branch of £9616.66.
In conclusion to the BTS statements as above
— there appears to be an increase in the declared cash BTS 6/5 of £3k approx.
~ the cash on hand figures remains at around £4k, although there is an increase in July
of approx £3k, it returns to around the £4k on hand level
- on 4/11 the cash on hand figure increases by a further £3.5 approx.
- on 2/12 the cash on hand figure rises from the previous months cash on hand figure
by approx £4k
—_ additional cash declarations added in December
201001993