POL00106935
POL00106935
RS BILKHU
Particulars of faults with the Horizon System
DATE Description Amount Amount
System personally
required to I paid to POL,
be made up
04/02/04 IRB starts at Bowburn and is assisted by PO Trainer J Wilson for two weeks. This training 38.24
iwas considered inadequate and inappropriate. The trainer focused on being courteous to
customers rather than checking other essential tasks like checking end of day reports.
During this week Unusable notes were sent to Leeds Cash Centre. See entry under 31
March 2004, (Another trainer Dave took over for a day to cover JW’s absence)
12/02/04 — During this week we lost £1043.32.This was due to cheques being sent to the wrong 1043,32
processing centre. I was expected to settle this amount personally! After the intervention ofI
the Retail Line Manager (RLM) Lesley Joyce, the money was put into suspense.
48/02/04 715.77
26/02/04 (496.55)
03/03/04 911.79
10/03/04 751,55
17/03/04 622.53
24103/04 308.36
31/03/04} A ‘phone cail received from Leeds Cash Centre accusing me of sending £100 less in 622.52
Unusabie notes in W/c 4/02/04. I said I was new to the business but the notes were
checked by not just myself but two other trainers independently before despatch. The tone
was threatening: ‘You will pay’! I asked for video evidence. I was told camera was not
working that day! I asked what do you want me to do now? I was told ‘Just forget if.! Turns
out there was a thief about in Leeds Cash Centre. I found later I was not the only PO with
POL00106935
POL00106935
an alleged unusable note issue.
07/04/04 935.43 ‘I
14/04/04 843,32
21/04/04 772.26
28/04/04 I Lesley Wilson (RLM) visits to review progress-issues re; balance and training and Leeds 907.80
Cash Centre are discussed,
05/05/04 782.40
12/05/04 813.85
19/05/04 754.80
26/05/04 968.35
02/06/04 I David Round (PO Performance Advisor) attends the Wednesday Balance. He cannot find 434.61
anything wrong with the way I have been carrying out the balance. Advises to settle the
shortage and star with a clean slate. This is done.
09/06/04 816.22 816.22
16/06/04 278.64
13/06/04 135.21
30/06/04
07/07/04
14/07/04 133.05
21107104 812.58
28/07/04 26.50
04/08/04 1684.32
18/08/04 236.90
18/08/04 236,90
25/08/04 142.41
01/09/04 1410.30
08/09/04 IOn the 10" 11" and 13° September three cheques were fraudentely cashed at Bowburn 2278.54
PO by! Gro k. According to the PO we had accepted a Visa Electron card as a
POL00106935
POL00106935
cheque guarantee card, I was not told the difference at my training at South Shields and
ithe trainer never told me during the training at the PO. In addition, one of my assistants
clearly had no idea. Lesley Joyce (RLM) on one of her visits admitted she did not know the
difference between a cheque guarantee card and a Visa electron card.
18/09/04 IOn 16" September I was informed by Joanne from Chesterfield to keep a look out for;GROI 0.00
I told them I was being informed after the event that/~ ‘had already
cashed the cheques.
22/09/04 555.99
28/09/04 IOn 27" September I was asked to pay back the £300 cashed by GRO. I contacted 19.20
various people at Chesterfield and Lloyds Bank and the Police re: this issue. R Needham
contacted me on November asking for £300. I told him the matter was in the hands of the
Police. On 22" Novernber I was told that the £300 would be deducted from my February
remuneration.
06/10/04 232.83
13/10/04 I1 Patterson (Fujitsu Engineer) visits to upgrade the Horizon System. It may be coincidental} 319.76
but after this visit error notices (Charge or Claim) virtually stopped.
20/10/04 529.19
27/10/04 649.20
03/11/04 640.40 640.00
10/11/04 242.49
17/11/04 210.33
24/11/04 397.32
01/42/04 466.31
08/12/04 435.35
15/12/04 605.76
22/12/04 498.08
29/12/04 I have now paid a total of £3638.32 to the PO to settle error notices. Taking out the 93.23 498.08
legitimate error notices there is nearly £2000 out there owed to me which has not been
accounted for.
POL00106935
POL00106935
05/01/05 As 40(Joint)
12/01/05
19/01/05
26/01/05 261.17
02/02/05
08/02/05 208.97
Incident 1)___ Friday 11" February 2005 at 09:05 §7
Customer put A&L Card into pin pad and requested £100. Horizon system authorised
transaction on screen. Assistant paid money and handed over the receipt. (It has not been
jour practice to look at the customer's receipt when a balance is requested or after a cash
withdrawl).
A little later the customer returns and presents the receipt. The receipt shows the
transaction has been declined by the customer's card.
As the customer has the £100 cash, the card is swiped to settle the account.
IAt 10:21 a balance check for the customer indicates £2147-31. Customer says it should be
£2247-31.
At 10:23 09 £100 is deposited back inte the customer's account by swiping the card.
A balance check at 10:23 59 confirms the customers expectation of £2247-31.
At 10:29 R Bilkhu (RB) runs of transaction reports and On-line banking reports.
These confirm that no money left the customer's account at 09:05 i.e. value Of 0.0
is recorded. The second swipe of the card had registered a withdrawal of £100.
At 10:41 RB contacts Helpline on option 3 and explains the above to Lynsey Brook.
POL00106935
POL00106935
A reference number H13804619 is issued.
On Monday 14/02/05 Joan from A&L rings and confirms that someone will ring on
15/02/05. Sue Lincoln rings on 15/02/05. An explanation is offered to the effect that once
cash is requested, that sum is taken out of the account by the system to prevent a
duplicate transaction. Usually the system rights itself in 24 hours.
IRB was given various other telephone numbers e.g. Helen Hark at Chesterfield on!
L
On 18/02/05 the customer came in to collect his benefit and confirmed that he had
received a statement and everything appeared to be in order.
* Despite the transaction history, £100 had left the custorner’s account at 09:05 on 11°
February 2005
“*** Horizon generated receipts and transaction logs available for inspection.
16/02/05 L Redshaw (Fujitsu Engineer) attends to base station. 187.25
23/02/05 520.28
02/03/05 169.03
40/03/05 IIncident 2) Tuesday 22/03/05 between 12:00 and 13:00 (Terminal 3) 161.91
Customer requests £60 using his PO Card Account Card. Transaction is authorised as
normal on the screen and the Assistant hands over the cash. Customer then asks for a
receipt. Assistant then realises that the system had not generated a receipt. She presses
‘Receipt’ on keyboard but the receipt issued is of a previous transaction (sale of postage
stamps).
R Bilkhu was on holiday that day but on his return the following day he is made aware of
the incident and runs off transaction records. These confirm that this particular transaction
POL00106935
POL00106935
did not take place.
RB contacts Malcolm at helpline. Malcoim requests the number of the PO card so the
withdrawl can be confirmed. This is obtained _] from the customer and
passed over to Malcolm. Malcolm is able to co! ioney left the customers
account on that day.
Quizzed by RB as to how often does this sort of thing happen i.e. screen prompt displays
‘Transaction Authorised’ but in fact it is not registered by the system.
‘Not very often’ was the answer.
Quite separately RB had asked the customer to ring PO Card Account and request a
statement. This the customer did and a few days later came in to confirm that no money
had left his account and offered his card to settle.
16/03/05 743.43
23/03/05 293.69
30/03/05 _ 348.08
06/04/05 408.08
Contacted a Michelle on Helpline and highlighted Horizon issues. She asked me to insist
an engineer be called out and test terminals and pin pads etc. A reference number was
given ( E 0504060256) and asked to ring NBSC. I did and was told that that was the
wrong department. I had spent an hour on the ‘phone. Gave up in the end. Nothing
happened with Ref no.
Incident 3) 7" April 2005 @ 10:25 (Terminal 3)
POL00106935
POL00106935
Horizon Screen displaying normal Serve Customer icons. Customer puts card into pin
pad.The screen immediately changed over to page 2 of the Smart post screen.
Incident 4) 13" April 2005
At about 17:40. Lucy from Horizon rang to inform RB that one terminals had not been
transmitting transactions for some hours. She requested if the terminal could be shutdown
land rebooted. RB told her that he was in the middle of balancing and was not prepared to
interrupt the system.
Discrepancy (shortage) in balance of £95.00. Reported to the Helpdesk at 18:45
*** During the last stages of the balance on 13/04/05, the Gateway screen froze. Rang the
helpline at 19:30 and held the phone (listening to music) until 20:10. Gave up and went
home.
14/04/05
ncident 5) Continuing from Incident 4. Arrived back at the PO at 07:00 to reboot and
rollover. Rang the helpline at 08:00 and spoke to Sheila at 08:10. Explained the screen
freezing during balance etc. Also asked her to relay a message to the Retail Manger or
their equivalent. Sheila wanted to connect me to Service Support. I told her there was no
point as I had already spoken to them and nothing had been done.
Jeanette rang from Horizon-a lengthy discussion followed. I explained the issues and
lexpressedmy frustration that no one was willing to help. Jeanette confirmed:
a) that as the role of the RLM had disappeared no one else was available
b) but more alarmingly that there were ‘hundreds of issues with on-line
503.21
POL00106935
POL00106935
banking.
« Denise from Area Office rang later that day to confirm that there was no one available
to help.
Incident 6) 15" April 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 14:43 Operator pressed Smart icon on Serve Customer screen, screen flipped over to
‘Transaction Settlement’
Incident 7)_18" April 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 13:05 Operator in middie of a Transcash transaction. Screen flipped over to ‘Ask
Customer to Insert Card’
Incident 8) 19" April 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 16:50 Customer put card in pin pad and entered number. Message on screen ‘Error
occurred on pin pad transaction not declined’.
20/04/05
Incident 9) 21% April 2005
At 11:25 Lynne from NBSC rang and confirmed that the £60 withdrawl (re incident on
22/03/05) had not taken place. Explained to her that I knew that but what was she
prepared to do? She confirmed that she could not do anything and that I should make a
formal complaint against Horizon. This was done Ref: H13931345,
536.75
POL00106935
POL00106935
Incident 10) 22°° April 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 12:06 Message on screen: ‘Going into standby’ for no apparent reason. System
switched off and had to be rebooted using Memory Card. At 12:24, message on screen
‘insert memory card’. After putting the card back in again and typing in the code, nothing
happened. Rang helpline on Option 2 and spoke to Rob.Said he would arrange for an
engineer to come out. Switched off by itself again at 13:05 and had to be rebooted.
In addition, the smartcard reader on Gateway (Terminal 2) developed a fault.
Incident 11) 25" April 2005 (Terminal 3)
Customer ( Mr SH Thomson Card } inserted card in Pin
Pad and entered his number. Number did not register. Tried on other Pin Pad worked OK
land transaction carried out successfully.
RB rang Horizon at 13:05. Spoke to Tony. Tony suggested a Pin Pad test be carried out.
‘This was done and was unsuccessful. Tony then arranged for an engineer to come out.
in addition Terminal 1 kept coming up with ‘Disaster Recovery’ messages and several
times both of the screen kept logging off by themselves.
The engineer arrived and serviced the Pin Pad.
In addition he also changed the keypad on the Gateway terminal.
12) 26” April 2005 _13:40 (Terminal 3)
During a postage transaction the system printed a receipt without giving the option of ‘Print
Label’ or ‘Sell Stamps’.
POL00106935
POL00106935
27/04/05
Incident 13) 3° May 2005 (Terminal 3) (S Qwens serving)
Mr & Mrs Plews came in at 15:30 to withdraw cash using their PO Cards. Mrs Plews’s
transaction carried out successfully. Mr Plews put card into pin pad and requested £100.
He put his pin number in as instructed by S Owens. Transaction authorised on screen BUT
ithe screen returned to Serve Customer screen i.e. did not allow S Owens to make
payment and clear the stack. S Owens asked Mr Plews if he had removed his card. ‘I
haven't touched the card pet’ he said. We could have easily handed out £100.
The receipt issued was that of the previous transaction-that of Mrs Plews.
3" May 2005
Alison, Area Support Manager (Darlington) rang re: my request for shortages to be put into
Suspense Account. She reminded me of my ‘contractual obligations’ of making good any
shortages. I reminded her about the PO's responsibilities as well. It became quite clear
from the conversation that Alison did not have a compiete picture of my problems. She
terminated the call by saying she would have to come back to me.
[never heard from Alison again until 17" February 2006. She asked if she could help. I
responded that the matter was now with my solicitors.
738.20
04/05/05
Incident 15) 4" May 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 11:10 Operator pressed Smartpost icon and entered weight of an item on screen.
Screen flipped over into Transaction settlement.
580.57
19
POL00106935
POL00106935
Incident 16) _6" May 2005 (Terminai2)
Message on screen (after a postage stamp had been successfully printed) ‘Printer error
occurred’
D Smith (Fujitsu Engineer) turned up to change keyboard. { did not report a problem with t
and changing it did not make any difference,
41/05/05
Incident 17) 12" May 2005 (Terminal 3)
At 08:50 Message on screen ‘Continue recovery’ for no apparent reason. No other terminal
affected.
Incident 18) 16" May 2005 to 18" May 2005 (Terminal2)
Problems with printer throughout the day —rejecting labels, then printing blank receipts.
Reported to Horizon on Option 2. As instructed cleaned out printers. Worked for a few
times and then the same problems restarted. Swapped over printer from Terminal 1.Same
problems.
Fujitsu engineer sent by Horizon. Engineer brought with him a new printer but when the
problem was explained his view was that it was not a printer problem but more likely a
software(smart post) issue. He did not replace the printer. Rang the Helpline again.
Another engineer sent out but a misunderstanding with the time.
Various Ref no: £0505160366; E0505160438 and E0505170341.
e* Received a letter from Linda Rodwell (Customer Relations Officer) based in Barnsley
in response to my ‘phone call to NBSC on 20" April 2006 re: losses.
708.03
W
POL00106935
POL00106935
Ref: Hi3931345, She said an Area Intervention Manager will investigate. Unfortunately her
letter arrived after the AIM had already been. The AIM (Rachel Oysten) attitude and
conduct was despicable and a formal complaint was lodged via the NFSP on 15" May
2005. A letter to Linda Rodwell with a copy of the complaint was sent on 22” May 2005.
Linda Rodwell replied on 15" June 2005 to say that Lesley Joyce will investigate and reply
ito my concerns. To date I have not heard from Linda Rodwell or Lesley Joyce.
48/05/05 G Wilson(Fujitsu Engineer) turned up to change printers. 541.57
25/05/05 Iincident 19) _26" May 2005 925.02
Rang Helpline @ 08:55 to report cash shortage following the balance and again seeking
help, Ref: H14000199.
Darren rang @ 13:10 to say there was no help available.
Incident 20)_ 3 June 2005
Rang Helpline to report the issue re: Telewest cards. Told Christine that I had never
received the RS1 forms for sending these cards back. She admitted that there had been a
‘problem’. Ref: H1408383.
20) 16" June 2005
Rang Helpilne and reported the cash shortage issue. Ref H14046942. Emma returned the
call and again just gave me the options available viz. close the PO etc.
iThe cash shortage has continued since this time and I regularly have to ask for extra on
Wednesdays to ensure I stay open!
cP
POL00106935
POL00106935
21) 21% June 2005 (Terminal 3)
Serving customer in Smartscreen. A receipt printed without the system printing a postage
label or giving the option to sell stamps.
01/06/05 1646.30
08/06/05 1679.78
15/06/05 IIncident 21) 15" June 2005 1712.53
Ran out of cash (in part due to reduced rem deliveiries from twice a week to once a week).
Rang Manchester Cash Centre and spoke to Richard. All blamed on the computer! Told
him don’t blame it on the computer-the man sitting behind it is supposed to be watching
that Bowburn is running out of cash and he/she should be doing something about it! Asked
Richard what should I do now. He said I should close the PO down! I reminded him that
the PO carries out one single core activity and that is it handles cash-we give cash out to
customers and take cash from customers. If we can’t get that right we might as well lock
up and go home. It was up to people like Richard (and his subordinates) to ensure the
cash deliveries were managed competently and all other factors like larger demands for
cash since the introduction of the PO card account and the fact that we have lost some
business customers should be taken into account. We are trying to get customers into the
PO and Richard is asking me to close and ask the customers to go elsewhere!
Needless to say, I now have to ensure that I have sufficient cash — I check the planned
delivery and every week I have increase the amount they have planned.
a3
POL00106935
POL00106935
incident 22)16" June 2005
Rang Helpilne and reported the cash shortage issue. Ref 114046942. Emma returned the
call and again just gave me the options available viz. close the PO etc.
The cash shortage has continued since this time and I regularly have to ask for extra on
Wednesdays to ensure I stay open!
Incident 23)) 21st June 2005 (Terminal 3)
‘Serving customer in Smartscreen. A receipt printed without the system printing a postage
label or giving the option to sell stamps.
22/06/05 1824.57
29/06/05 1929.45
06/07/05 4970.55
13/07/05 1971.87
20/07/05 2785.19
27107/05 2110.36
03/08/05 2073.20
10/08/05 2068.35
17/08/05 2371.15
24/08/05 2510.72
31/08/05 2558.69
07/09/05 2528.95
14/09/05 2898.43
21/09/05 2912.06 3501.59
i4
POL00106935
POL00106935
Incident 24) 21° September 2005
Rollover Issues
Two ‘phone calls made to Helpline as follows:
On Option 2 @ about 18:40. Spoke to Sandra. Explained to her that I had got so far in the
balancing but could not rollover into TP7. She said because of the discrepancy I was in
breach of contract. I should close and go home and would not be able to serve tomorrow. [
‘told her that the discrepancy was an on-going issue and there was currently a dispute with
the POL and was being dealt with via NFSP and as a result I did not see how I was in
breach of contract when there was clearly a dispute.
I said, whilst the dispute continued, I wanted to continue serving tomorrow and in order to
do so could I stay in TP6 or BPO1? She said she would contact me in the morning and
asked when I was available. I said I was available as and when required.
‘A time for her to ring me was arranged for 0800. I was on the premises at 07:15.
She never rang.
Qn Option 3_@ about 19:30. Spoke to Joanne and explained the rollover issues and
asked to consider putting the shortage in suspense so I could continue serving the
following day.She said she could not authorise that and her superior would contact me by
2200. I gave her my home phone number as I would be leaving as soon as the
Lottery termina! closed (about 20:00).
No one rang that evening. Ref: H21881466
Is
Incident 25)_22"° September 2005
‘Auditors arrived at 08:20 and shut the PO down to carry out an audit. I was asked almost
immediately that they would ask me to settle the outstanding discrepancy to allow the PO
ito open again. I said I would not as the matter was in dispute and was being handled via
the NFSP. Unknown to me at that stage, Rachel Oysten (Area Intervention Manager- the
lone that I had made a formal complaint about) was waiting in the car outside. As soon as
ithe auditors finished RO came in and gave me two options: pay up or else she would have
fo suspend me and put some one else in charge at my expense. I made a call to Tony
Carpenter (Local NFSP Rep) and he advised me to pay as that was the most practical
course of action. I told RO that I did not have any money at that stage and the money
iwould simply have to be deducted from my salary. Subsequently, £3501-59 was deducted
from my October and November salaries. Needless to say RO relished every moment ~ at
lone stage even saying ‘well I am offering you this advice but last time I did that you made
a complaint about me’
At the meeting I asked RO that I wanted a meeting with Lesley Joyce. She said that she
iwould be filing a report and would arrange that.
The only letter I have had re: the above episode is from Lesley Joyce on 23 September
2005 which merely details deductions from remuneration.
26) 26" September 2005
Message on Memoview accusing me of not complying with instructions re: destruction of
old D1's.
POL00106935
POL00106935
16
POL00106935
POL00106935
Rang the Helpline and told them that not only had I complied-I had destroyed the D1 as
instructed but had also put them on Horizon as instructed.
Ref. H14259423.
Furthermore the instructions on Memoview to put on Horizon are wrong.
Incident 26) 26" September 2005
Customer put card in Terminal 3 pin pad @ 09:08 for cash withdrawl. System declined.
Same customer put card in Terminal 2 pin pad at 09:10. Transaction authorised. Why?
28/09/05
185.92
05/10/05
12/10/05
19/10/05
26/10/06
02/11/05
D Ogilive (Trainer) came in to oversee balancing. Could not find anything wrong with what
I was doing.
27.47
2747
09/11/05
62,39
46/11/05
183.19
342.24
23/11/05
On 28" November 2005, I received a statement from ‘Current Agents Debt Team’
Demanding £500 for the issues in September. When I told ther that the money had
already been debited from my remuneration I was told to ignore the letter!
Still continuing to incur losses for no apparent reason and having had no success at all
with the local representatives of NFSP, I contacted the NFSP headquarters [ Evelyn.
Heights, 22 Windeshaw Gardens, Shoreham-on Sea_BN43 5AZ Tel! GRO jland
i?
POL00106935
POL00106935
expliained my problems.
On 25" November, I was contacted by Jeff Simpson, the North East representative who
was sympathetic to what had to say but I never heard from him again.
On the same day I heard f
NF: i
Gareth Hail who apparently ‘mediates’ between the PO and
GRO i
i sent him ail the documents with a cover note on 28" November 2005. Other than
acknowledging the receipt (and suggesting that losses may be due to theft by staff) I never
heard from him again!
30/11/05
07/12/05 25.51
14/12/05 _. (117.26)
21/12/05 (1112.03)
28/12/05 (17.94)
04/01/06 130.27
11/01/06 444.42
18/01/06 217,99
25/01/06 Branch Trading Period 10 Shortage (217.99) settled in cash 217.99 217.99
01/02/06 Iinformed Sarah on 2" February re: continuing losses Ref: H1450768 215.99
08/02/06 Iinformed Helpline again re: losses. 317.20
15/02/06 IJohn rang from NBSC-told him matter now in the hands of the solicitors.
Sheila from Customer Relations rang on 15" February re: losses. Told her that the matter
was now in the hands of my solicitors.
22/02/06 Branch Trading Period 11-shortage (348.85) settled in cash 348.85 348.85
01/03/06 48.42
08/03/06 400.26
t8
POL00106935
POL00106935
15/03/06 4.88
22/03/06 Branch Trading Period 12 Shortage (285.46) settled by cheque 285.46 285.46
29/03/06 0.56
05/04/06 0.30
12/04/06 240.77
19/04/06 109.48
26/04/06 IReported cash loss of £162.84 to Robert on Helpline at 19:05. Paul rang at 20:00. Said I -162.84 “I
was reporting the cash loss
03/05/06
40/05/06
17/05/06 I Cash loss of £337.77.Reported to Martin on Helpline.Richard rang at 12:00 the following 337.77
day. Told him that I was reporting it as a matter of concern.
24/05/06 Branch Trading Period 01. Cash loss of £323.45. Settled via cheque. 323.45 323.45
The following day (25" May 06) { rang the helpline to inform them of my concerns re: cash
loss and the fact that I had settled via cheque. I sought advice to ensure the cheque and
its settlement via Horizon had been carried out correctly (my cheque would not appear
under the Daily cheque listing but I had to ensure that It was correctly accounted for when
it was despatched to the EDS centre. I was informed that I had done everything correctly.
At close of day, I was devastated to find that I was another £328.00 short. I and my
colleague recounted the cash, and coins and couid not find anything different. I reported
the loss to Kirsty on Helpline at 17:55. (Ref; H22099331). I was told that someone would
ring in the moming. Kath rang the following moming. Advised that I carry out a Balance
report in the evening. Mysteriously, at close of day on 26/05/06 ,the daily cash declaration
now indicated a shortage of £37! How is that possible? What is going on here?
34/05/06 15,89
07/06/06 ICarried out the normal end of day reports on Wednesday. The balance snapshot indicated
a cash loss of £55.68.Contiunued with the balance. The Balance report indicated a cash
loss of £74.00 and a massive gain of £668.90 on stamps. Shirley (my colleague) happened
to recall how in the moming she had remmed in cash and stock. However, she did
ie
POL00106935
POL00106935
remember being distracted by a customer could not say for certain that all of the stock had
been remmed in. All the advice notes from Hemel Hempstead and Horizon generated rem
in slips were checked. It appeared that Shirley had remmed in 7 of the 9 items .The 2
missing were £1000 of £1 stamps and 400 50p stamps. So, in total, it appeared that £1200
was not accounted for but the gain on stamps was only £668.90.All coin, notes and stock
was rechecked. No discrepancies were found. The £1200 worth of stock was remmed in
and the balance report now indicated a loss of £1290. I rang the Helpdesk and explained
the problems to Karen Conway (Ref: H22114370), She asked me to run a REM in report
and confirm exactly what had been remmed in. This was done. Karen could not help
further and said that she would refer the issue to someone else and they would ring in the
morning. I explained to Karen that I was not prepared have a loss of £1290.56 because
once in the system it would disappear in a black hole and { would never see it again. She
agreed and I finished the balancing process and moved into the next Balance Period with
ja net gain of £578.34.
‘The following morning (08/06/06), I received a call from Annette Caddick. I explained ail of
the above and also the background regarding other issues I had had with the Horizon
system. In summary, she confirmed that she was aware that other Sub-Postmasters were
having Horizon problems. She accepted my argument that if I remmed in the £1200.00
worth of stock I would be sitting on a loss as described above and it would be unlikely that
isum would be ever recovered. She advised me to sit on the gain and put the money to the
side. She also advised me to explain my problems to Alan Cook the CEO of POL. I
explained to her the recent sequence of events viz. the initial losses which I put down to
new starter learning mistakes which then escalated to £3500+.This sum I was forced to
pay to continue trading. Annette offered to arrange for an Area Intervention Manager to
help but when i recounted my experience with Rachel Oysten she was horrified and could
not believe that POL would have the stupidity of sending the same person to reprimand me
as the one who I had made a formal complaint about. I also mentioned the NFSP and
Gareth Hall, With losses now approaching £10,000, and nobody prepared to help, It was
with great reluctance that I had chosen to file a court action against POL. Annette was very
sympathetic but in the end it did not explain or resolve the stock rem in issue.
26
POL00106935
POL00106935
44/06/06
On 12/06/06, { noticed on several occasions that when I was carrying out a Recorded
Delivery transaction on Terminal 2, the Horizon system had not printed a certificate of
posting. Instead, it had It had flipped straight on to the stack and completed the
transaction. Initially, I thought perhaps it was a user error but on checking with Ivy
(Terminal 3) she had experienced exactly the same and like me thought perhaps she had
pressed the ‘Label Printed OK’.
I reported the issue to Horizon Helpdesk on Option 2 (Technical Issues) and spoke to
Imran.He said I should talk to Option 3 (User issues). I said to him that this was a technical
issue- not a user issue. He did not seem interested. I then rang Option 3 and spoke to
Barbara-she said it was a technical issue! Ref: H22118262.
Sara rang at 14:15 on 14/06/06 and said that Recorded Delivery transactions should no
longer generate a separate Certificate of Posting. On 29" June 2006 reported the problem
Again to Christine because the system continues to print CoP at random. It is not
consistent. Either it should be printing a CoP every time or none at all-not when it feels like
it. What else is it doing randomly? I have had no response from Christine.
Gateway Issues
On 13° June 2006 at about 16:30 a thin yellow line appeared at the bottom of both
screens: ‘On-line banking unavailable’. Shirley Owens rang the Helpline and was advised
to reboot. This proved to be successful. (Ref: E06061403)
On 14” June 2006 at 09:00, same message again. System rebooted and appeared to be
OK. At 11:30 the same message re-appeared. Tried to reboot the Gateway terminal but
ithe system kept asking ‘insert card’, The card had already been inserted. Rang Helpline.
They suggested to switch off the power off to the modem under the counter. This was
done. It appeared to work on the Helpline side but not at Bowburn. Eventually was able to
reboot without turning the power on at the modem.
Helpline admitted that the reason why On-line banking was not available was because the
Gateway at Bowburn kept switching it self on and off. They send an engineer within 4
hours.
2t
POL00106935
POL00106935
The engineer arrived at 13:30 and immediately changed the Gateway terminal. It took
several hours and we lost several hours of business. The engineer admitted that there
were considerable problems with the system.
CoOp Customer Issue
(On the same day at 10:30, a CoOp customer requested to withdraw cash. After going
through the sequence, the customer was advised by the Pin-Pad to remove the card as
ithe transaction had been successful. The transaction successful message appeared on
the screen but did not appear on the stack i.e. did not authorise payment-it just
disappeared off the screen altogether. Tried to run a receipt. No receipt for the £100. The
receipt generated was that of the previous transaction at 10:23.
Transaction had to be repeated (with an embarrassing explanation to the
customer).lf we had acted as per messages on the screen we could have paid out
ithe £100 and be sitting on a loss of £100 at night.
21/06/06 IAfter end of day reports, the balance snapshot indicated a cash loss £760. Reported to ~4.44
Melanie. She suggested to continue and run the balance report. This was done and the
loss now stood at £284.41. Reported to Martin at 19:45. Said his colleague will ring within
the hour. Further investigation revealed that 28 PO phonecards (value £280) had not come
off the system. Stock was adjusted and the loss was £4.41
28/06/06 0.00
05/07/06 IPeter rang fron NBSC re: Recorded delivery slips issue. (See entry under 14/06/06) -82.44
Said it was a Horizon problem. Its amazing-nobody wants to take any responsibility!
12/07/06 IOur cash loss today stands at 203.72. -203.72
19/07/06 IReceived an amazing letter from a M Surmon from ETS Cheque Team (Ref CHX TO ~£257.24
EDS). The letter is effectively asking me to fork out £1552.82. The background to this is
that we processed 4 cheques (total value £1552.82) on 06/04/06. These were then placed
in the EDS pouch and would have been physicaily collected (and signed for) by the
postman on 07/04/06 at mid-day. Now somewhere along the line this pouch and/or the
22
POL00106935
POL00106935
cheques have been lost after leaving my Post Office. I am expected to make up the loss!
I rang M Surmon and told him that my responsibility in terms of EDS/Girobank and indeed
any other pouches finished the minute they have been collected and signed for by the
Postman or the Cash Delivery Team. The responsibility then lies with the Post Office. He
then said that it was not POL but EDS. I said I was not interested- It was not me! By this
time I had retrieved the transaction history and told him that I would fax him the details. I
made it clear that I would not be settling this amount. I had to accept the Transaction
Correction to move on but I accepted the option to ‘settle centrally’. It will be interesting
see whether it allows me to rollover into the next Trading Period on 26/07/06. [All details
were faxed to M Surmon on 19/07/2006 at 16:29]
26/07/06
Cash loss of £374.32.Had to pay up in cash to continue trading. Have no idea where the
money has gone. There have been no Transaction Corrections in my favour.
In a separate development, A&L have changed the design and procedure for despatch of
Giro pouches. [Up till now they have been picked up by the Postman] The pouches now
have ‘First Class’ printed on them-suggesting that they are to be posted. To clarify I rang
Claire at helpline. She was puzzled as well. In view of the Transaction Correction above
lre:EDS pouche { made it clear to Claire that I had no intention of despatching these
pouches by post-if they must be sent by post then it would have to be Special Delivery and
POL will have to bear the cost. I could not possibly despatch thousands of pounds worth of
paying in slips and cheques via ordinary post. Ref: H22168601 was given and later
someone rang to confirm that I could send by post or via the current procedure i.e.
Postman signing for them.
364.32
02/08/06
On 3° of August I was informed by my local Councillor that Royal Bank of Scotland were
proposing to install a free cash machine in Bowbum. He wondered if that would be in my
Post Office. I said I had not heard anything and besides all the cash was dispensed free of
charge to the customer in the Post Office. He said that perhaps the machine could be
installed in the local library or the community centre. I said that it would be a further nail in
the coffin for the Post Office. I rang the Helpline to clarify and was told that my Contracts
Manager would ring me. Still waiting.
33.53
23
POL00106935
POL00106935
09/08/06
-75.60
46/08/06
-67.24
23/08/06
Although the discrepancy indicates a cash gain of £476,this is a mistake on our part. This
is due to a transaction for foreign currency for £500. which was not entered on
Horizon. The result is actually a loss of £24,
23/08/06 Message on Memeoview: A workstation in you PO has stopped
communicating. .....
The system was re-booted.
'24/08/06_A workstation disconnected again. Rebooted
25/08/06 _Workstation disconnected at 09:15, Rebooted.
25/08/06 __ I have received a threatening letter from POL's Debt Collection team to settle
ithe £1552.82. [See entry under 19/07/06] A discussion followed between myself and R
Needham (Debt Collection) who then asked me to ring M Surmon. I had to explain again
that this particular issue had nothing to do with me. If cheques have left my Post Office and
they have been lost between leaving the Post Office and EDS centre then it is not my
responsibility. M Surmon denied getting the fax sent to him on 19/0706. I refaxed all the
details.
29/08/06 __I Gardener reported that the Gateway computer was making a funny noise.
-24,00
30/08/06
-41.33
06/09/06
The balance was carried out as normal with a loss of £80.93.The system closed down as
normal at 19:30. I (RB) do have concerns about the system failing to complete Cash
withdrawl transactions on at least three occasions this morning at 09:24, 09:37 and 10:10.
~80.93
+
-120.90
on 13/09/06
24
POL00106935
POL00106935
OnLine Banking Problems
07/09/06 At start of business today, On-line banking was not available. (Failure of On-line
banking means customers cannot withdraw cash, or check their balance using their PO
Card and customers from partner banks are similarly affected. In addition, we cannot sell
lor encash postal orders or top up or issue mobile vouchers and cannot sell Travel
Insurance. in short, vast majority of our business comes to a halt-also has a major impact
ion retail side of the business as customers withdraw cash to buy lottery, scratch cards,
cigarettes, confectionery etc.).
Contacted Helpline immediately (09:00) on Option 2 (Horizon Technical] and spoke to
Jimmy. RB was told to go through the usual procedure i.e. re-boot the system whilst
Horizon checked their side. This was done without success. Call Ref: E0609070162.
Jimmy did not call back but RB rang at 16:00 for an update and spoke to Rick on Option2.
Rick said they were still investigating. Rick said it could take a few days if it was a BT fault.
Also today at 13:30, RB spoke to Jane on Option 3 (NBSC Business Policy) re:
compensation for loss of business. Jane did not know but would relay my message to a
colleague. Call Ref: H14928067.
08/09/06 Rang Option 2 at 09:00 and spoke to Joe. Investigation ongoing - nothing to
report.
Rang Option 3 at 14:00 and spoke to Barbra re: compensation. She said ‘there was
something in place’ for these types of incidents but was not sure about the details. She did
Inot offer to find out or refer the call to someone who might be able to help.
it was becoming quite clear even at this early stage that POL was not really bothered if the
system goes down. It was left to me (after all it is my business, my livelihood and my staff
lwho still have to be paid even when we have no business) to do the chasing every few
25
POL00106935
POL00106935
hours for an update.
Spoke to Darren on Option2 at 15:10. He said that it was a BT fault and BT was
investigating.
09/09/06 Rang Option 2 at 09:00 and spoke to Trish. Nothing to report.
11/09/06 Sarah rang at 14:00 to discuss the issue. I expressed my anger, frustration and
concerns at the fact that by now (4 days into the problem) I had probably lost some of my
customers forever. Some customers I had to send to a local PO over 1.5 miles away-not
easy for customers who are 90 years old! Others went to Durham city fo the banks-
precisely what we do not want. My retail side had suffered considerably. Needless to say
Sarah was very sympathetic but unable to do anything as it was a technical matter!
12/09/06_No update from Option 2
13/09/06 Some local customers who clearly consider Bowburn PO as their PO and want it
ito remain in business contact their councillor, Mike Sayer. Mike contacts me and I give him
as much information as I can. He in turn contacts the local MP Roberta Blackman Woods.
The representative form RBW’s office tries to contact POL but POL will not talk to her.
Clearly POL could not be bothered to update me so I rang Option 2 at 15:20 and spoke to
a David. Davis reported that last update from BT was on 12/09/06 and it was apparently a
BT Broadband fault but could not say how long it would take to sort out.
At about 14:00 a Fujitsu engineer tured up at Bowburn PO. I asked him why was at
Bowburn. ‘To change the Gateway base station’ he said. I said that I had been told it was a
BT fault., I allowed him carry on. After spending about 30 minutes he confirmed that it was
not a local fault i.e. base units were OK. His ‘Consignment completion note’ noted that
‘Gateway Multiple... has been non polling for 5 days’. He commented that BT never admit
it is their fault.
26
POL00106935
POL00106935
\14/09/06 It is now exactly 7 days since we lost On-line banking and we are no further
forward,
Rang Option 2 at 09:40 and spoke to Joe. No change, no update from BT. Later spoke to
Ken on Option 2. Now being told it is a ‘3% Line BT fault’. BT were still looking.
Rang Donna on Option 3 re: compensation. She said that ‘it kicks in after 48 hrs’
l rang NFSP at Shoerham office and spoke to Linda. She said she would contact someone
on the technical team at Horizon. Linda came back later to say that the man she spoke to
was surprised that on line banking had been down fer so long. She said that a GSM unit
will be instalied later that day (it was nearly 16:00 at the time) but more likely the following
day. [GSM modem is similar to a mobile phone and connects to the network when the
primary connection is down].
15/09/06 Rang Option 2 at 10:30 and spoke to Mark as there was no change and no sign
of a GSM unit. He could give any further information and said he would ask a supervisor to
ring. Sara the supervisor rang at 10:45. She could not give any information and could not
help further. Also spoke to Rob on Option 3 Ref: H22213312. No update.
I rang Linda at NFSP again and explained that nothing had happened and had now lost
another half a day. She came back and said an engineer would be with us by 12:00. The
engineer turned up about 13:30 and installed the GSM unit.
John rang at 17: 00 from NBSC and tried to help. I outlined the problems to him and
essentially left him with the following comments:
e The customers that I had lost-some probably forever.
« Howdol explain to customers who are in their late 80’s upwards and for many the PO
2?
POL00106935
POL00106935
card account is their only source of income?
e Why have I not been kept updated?
¢ If the problem lay with BT (POL admitted on the second day that it was a BT problem)
then why in this day and age does it take BT 8 days upwards to sort out?
*® IfM&S or Tesco’s tills had gone down and the fault lay with BT then the fault would
have been sorted out within a few hours.
* If On-line banking had failed in any of the Crown Offices, would it have taken 8 days ?
*® POL has consistently taken the SubPost Offices for granted. What they do not
understand or appreciate is that they (the SubPost Offices ) are the backbone of their
organisation.
« Why did it take the intervention of the NFSP to arrange a GSM to be installed in my
PO, Clearly this little gizmo was available-why was it not offered to me in the first place
for example within 24 hours?
« Other things went wrong as well. The Cash Management team at Leeds clearly do not
manage cash. Do they ever look at the Cash Declarations and adjust ? Clearly not.
Whilst on Line banking was down, they knew we had not been communicating did it
not occur to them to ring up and find out why? They continued to send cash with the
result that we were sitting with over £80,000 cash in our safe. At one stage I could not
physically get any more into the safe’s drawer! When I queried, Richard said it was up
to me to ring up and cancell
John was sympathetic but could not offer any help. One thing he did advise me to do was
to write to Adam Crozier CEO Royal Mail. I said but that is Royal Mail- we are talking
about POL.
i said to John, that the issues I was talking about were relatively simple but they smacked
of gross mismanagement at the middle levels of management. Clearly there are
employees within POL who are still stuck in the 1960's pre-privatisation era and who think
they just have to turn up for work without any responsibility or accountability. I am sure
Adam Crozier has far more serious things to worry about then a simple On Line banking
issue at Bowburn.
28
POL00106935
POL00106935
20/08/06
20/09/06 A Mandy rang from Customer Relations at 14:20 to offer her sympathy.
No further forward.
She rang again at 11:00 on 25" September 2006 to say Fujitsu were aware of the
problem.
-170.96
Settled via
cheque
27/09/06
+ 45.47
28/09/06 Fo
wauu..GRO___} And guess what I have been informed by a John from Horizon that BT
Broadband is back! I am now re-connected to the ‘Primary ADSL'! And can they have their
little GSM back.
Well it only took three weeks to sort this one out.
On 1° October 2006, I decided to write a letter to Adam Crozier re: On-line Banking issues.
On 9" October 2006, I received a reply from Helen Clayton (High Profile Case Officer) and
then on 1* November 2006 and 7" November 2006 I received two letters from Michele
Graves. These letters clearly explained the result of their investigation. A modest sum was
paid as a goodwill gesture. It is a pity one has to write to the Chief Executive to achieve a
successful outcome.
04/10/06
I have today received a Transaction Correction for £75.00. This is for a CooP Business
cheque encashment carried out on 21* December 2005! This I find really irritating. I have
already dealt with this issue back in March 2006. I faxed + sent by recorded delivery a
copy of the Daily Summary Sheet which shows that we cashed the cheque and we would
have despatched it along with all the other Alliance & Leicester paperwork. This is similar
ito the lost cheque issues detailed under 19/07/06 and 25/08/06. I rang the Giro Team and
have reiterated that once paperwork leaves my office via the Postman, I cannot be held
responsible. it is highly likely the paperwork is being lost at the EDS/A7L processing
centres,
-52.48
11/10/06
Cash loss of £261.64. Reported to a Peter at Helpdesk.Ref: H14990226
-264.61
18/10/06
~152.81
a9
POL00106935
POL00106935
25/10/06
Cash loss of £152.81,Settied via cheque
152.81
182.81
01/11/06
Continuos problems with Pinpads on Terminal 3. Messages ‘Customer has made an
unsuccessful attempt to insert card’. Nothing wrong with the card and nothing wrong with
the insertion of card into the reader. Card worked fine on the other terminal. Reported to
Horizon helpdesk 2 on 3% November 2006. Ref: £0611030845. Problem persists Reported
lon 6" November 2006. Engineer sent out to replace the whole unit. Ref; E0611060405.
~24.36
08/11/06
30.44
14/11/06
[An error in inputting 1" Class and 2™ Class Xmas stamps has resulted in a gain of
£128.00.
128.00
22/11106
RB on holiday. S Owens carried out the balance. Even before she started the daily cash
deciaration indicated a shortage of £428.68, (Daily cash declaration for the previous three
days were OK at +/-£10.00). She and I Gardener carried out a stock and cash check. No
difference. Asked for advice from Helpdesk. Told to re-declare stock (Wrong advice given
by Helpdesk! You do not declare stock, you adjust stock. This was at 19:30 and then again
lat 20:30, S Owens spoke to a Carol and then Anne and Gwen.The only way to trade the
following morning was to put in £428.68. Upon RB's return checked all receipts etc.
‘Nothing out of order, So where has this money disappeared to? This loss was reported to
Pat @ 14: on 30/11/06 on NBSC Helpline.
~428.68
£428.68
29/11/06
A new trading period and we are already £41.01 short.
£41.01
38
POL00106935
POL00106935
31
POL00106935
POL00106935
Pat @ 14:00 on 30/11/06 on NBSC Helpline.
29711106 IA new trading period and we are already £41.01 short. -41.01
06/12/06 -117.76
43/12/06) ~10.63
30/12/06IAll week we have been running OK yet on Wednesday we are £74 short on daily cash ~78.95 £78.95
declaration. Final balance I have had to put a cheque in for £78.95 No idea where the
money has gone.
37/12/06 Start of the week and we are already £43.12 short A312
03/01/07
10/01/071At 12:29 on 16/01/07 and for no reason, the counter printer on Terminal 2 started to print -128.73
receipts for totally unrelated products e.g. Kleenex, Ritz, Chips Le. none PO products. S$
Owens reported the incident to a Dwain on Helpline (Option 2) and then to an Eileen at
44:35, Helpline informed S Owens that it was probably a printer test and not to worry.
47101107)
34/01/07 IHave finally received a Transaction Correction in my favour for £75.00. This refers to an ~169.03 #169,03
issue involving a Co oP business cheque encashment. This transaction and the
subsequent despatch of paperwork is simple and straight forward. The incident allegedly
loccurred in December 2005 when POL claimed that paperwork had not been received and
I was forced to pay £75.00. I had faxed and sent by post (recorded delivery) photocopies
of our records (the yellow under copy) proving that we had processed the transaction. The
top copy would have been sent along with ail the other Giros to Alliance & Leicester. They
(A&L) have now admitted that we were right all along.
31/01/07, -14.36
07/02/07 Second week into the TP and we are £85.37 short. No idea. Reported to Paul on Helpline -5.37
Ref. H15214367.
Received a letter from Alan Cook (MD POL) dated 8" February 2007. The letter detailed
business results and ongoing strategy. The only problem was that the letter had my name
but the Post Office as Sturton Le Steeple!
a ett Ul
31
POL00106935
POL00106935
On 9" February 2007 2 message via the Horizon offered an explanation : ‘Due to a
problem with our database, the branch name in each address did not match with the
subpostmasters name, address and postcode’.
I consider this to be quite a serious issue. At this time there is considerable uncertainty
about closures of Post Offices. Can you imagine the fiasco if this letter had been any other
than a business statement!
if they cannot get the simple task of getting a letter from the MD of POL to the Sub
Postmasters right then what hope is there for the Horizon system getting the sums right!
74/02/07IOn 19/02/2007 @ 15:10 Ivy Gardener serving. Customer wanted to make £200 cash
deposit. Deposit authorised on screen. When icon for ‘Continue’ or ‘Cancel’ appeared on
screen, IG pressed ‘Continue’, Receipt issued indicated ‘Declined’. Sequence repeated
and was successful.
~106.80
34102/07\Cash loss of £188.78.Reported to Kirsty on Helpline Ref. H22313239 at 19:50. Discrepancy
settied via cheque.
Received an interesting ‘phone call from my brother who also manages a Post Office in
Birmingham. He had remmed out 2 bags of £1 coins (£1000). The first recipt issued by the
Horizon system was correct (2 X £1= £1000). This is the receipt given to the Collecting
Officer on Delivery/Collection day. The second receipt (Branch Copy- which we retain for
two years) stated ‘1 bag @ £500’. My brother immediately ‘phoned the Helpline and was
told that there had been a problem with the Horizon system and there had been several
repOrts that day. He was told to rem one more bag again out again. He told them how
could he do that The system already registered the fact that only one bag had been
rermmied out..
Tuesday 27/02/07Received our Planned Order for cash to be delivered on Wednesday.
Planned delivery is insufficient so have tried ringing Cash Management Team without any
success. Phone line constantly engaged. This is a regular occurrence and I have reported
£188.78
£188.78
toe bk 2
32
POL00106935
POL00106935
it previously. Finally, reported to Shaun via the Helpline. Ref: H15248144.
[The following day I received a letter from Julie Haywood (Customer Relations Officer)
loffering an explanation about ‘inconvenience caused over the last few days’. This letter is
typical of the way the complaints are addressed. I rang the Helpline and said to Gemma
stated that this letter was just a farce. How can anyone carryout an investigation within a
few hours? It seems to me that Julie made a few ‘phone calls and then closed the chapter.
Reported the farcical investigation to Sheila Ref H15251567. Later received a ‘phone call
from Julie Haywood enquiring why I was not happy! I told her that cash management
problems were are not isolated incidents. They happen on a regular basis. No particular
joy with Julie so left it that!
22/02/07 a ‘phone call from a Rosemary Clayton (SPSO) of a PO on Isle of Wight. She has
had similar problems with Horizon system as ourselves. It is apparently a husband and
wife team and Rosemary herself previously worked at Nat West-so no stranger to
computers and banking system. Tel” “]
26/02/07 Problems with PinPad on Terminal 3. Despite going through the tests,the system
kept displaying message ‘Disaster Recovery’. PinPad was eventually replaced several
days later.
28/02/07IThe lowest loss we have achieved! -0.40
07/03/07 +33.62
74/03/07 \For some reason on Thursday (15" March 2007) we have a cash loss of £102 according to}
the Balance snapshot. It was particularly disturbing because we were not busy that day.
Recounted cash-no change to figure. On Friday ae® March 2007), the difference remains
virtually the same at a loss of £96.00. Checked through retained counter receipts for bath
days-no reasons to suspect. On Saturday 47° March decided to run a trial balance
(Balance Report), This indicated a loss of nearly £330. (cash an stamps). Reported to
Helpline Ref, H22332347. The conversation continued on Monday (20" March 2007) with
Maureen. Sandra also rang (from a higher level on Helpline). She suggested the usual-
33
POL00106935
POL00106935
theft by staff and advised that I fit cameras etc. She then sent me guidance notes on
Internal Fraud/theft.
She further confirmed that:
i) the paperwork submitted by Bowburn was ‘squeaky clean’ and there were no errors
outstanding.
ii) There were no issues with Horizon
Problem with the barcode scanner on 17" March 2007. Had to use Terminal 1. Scanne
replaced by engineer late on Maonday20th March 2007.Ref: £0703170305
34/03/07I The loss above of £328.71 was settled via cheque.
328.71
28/03/07IWe appear to have recovered £280 (above) due to an error in counting 50p stamps.
+33.62
04/04/0714/04/07 Message from Horizon @ 21:27 : Workstation disconnected — A workstation in
your PO has stopped communicating with the network.
10/04/07 @08:40. Shirley Owens and Ivy Gardener noticed that there had been a power
interruption overnight. All three Terminal had to be rebooted. Terminal 3 would not reboot.
Message: ‘Insert memory card’, even when card was inserted. At 0845 SO called the
0704100149. Message @ 09:06 via Memoview: ‘workstation disconnected’.
Engineer did not arrive until 11:30 the following day on 11 April 2007. This caused
considerable disruption within the PO regards serving customers. The engineer changed
the keyboard.
Helpline on Option 2 and spoke to a John. He said an engineer would call. Helpline Ref no:
44/04/07I11/04/07 A customer was served by Shirley Owens at about 13:35. He had his BT
prepayment card topped up. SO took money from customer, completed the transaction,
cleared the stack and printed a receipt.
Mr Allinson wanted his Tesco mobile card topped up with £10. SO swiped Mr Allinson’s
card. It appeared on the stack as a BT payment card, SO was able to bin this successfully.
She swiped Mr Allinson’s card again and successfully completed the transaction at 13:41.
This incident is probably related to the one described below.
10,34
( odt
a
as
34
POL00106935
POL00106935
Incident 11" April 2007 Helpline Ref: 16327843
foun
Most of the transactions carried out on the Horizon system are reversible. For example, if a
Icustomer purchases postage stamps, tops up a’prepayment card (BT, British Gas,
Northern Electric etc.) and then changes his mind then the transaction can be quickly and
easily reversed.
There are some transactions which:
a) Are not reversible e.g. Smartcards. These are usually British Gas prepayment type
cards, Once these are credited —they have to be paid for. If the customer does not have
the means to settle we would withhold the card.
b) Only allow a few minutes to reverse the transaction. Mobile top ups are such
transactions. Once a Mobile card is swiped and topped up or system generated
voucher issued, only few minutes are available to reverse the transaction.
inal3. Counter Clerk: Shirley Owens
J p
The screen was in Serve customer mode. The stack was cl
was the sole customer in the Post Office. R S Bilkhu witnessed the sequence of events.
Customer gave card to Shirley Owens. Shirley Owens swiped the card. Immediately,
iobile Pay As her for £10.
“IMobile N
This incident happened at 17:03. Shirley Owens (SO) immediately started to bin the
transaction. The system would not allow this. SO then started the process of trying to
reverse the transaction. While she continued, RSB rang the Helpline on Option 3 to seek
35
POL00106935
POL00106935
help in reversing this transaction. (RSB realised that although it was a software error ~the
priority at this stage was to reverse the transaction-hence the reason to contact Option 3
and not Option 2 (Technical issues).
SO’s efforts to reverse the transaction failed. The message on screen stated :
‘Refund Declined Card was for a different card/product’
From about 17:05 RSB and SO were continually on the ‘phone to Helpline until 18:00
seeking advice
RSB spoke to Sean on Option 3 (Ref: H16327843). We had already done what Sean
suggested so I was transferred to Option 2 to speak to Gary. it was 17:20 and by this time
lwe had lost the £10. It was too late to reverse the transaction. Gary's immediate reaction
was that it was a software issue. He then proceeded to talk to his manager who was.
overheard to tell Gary to tell us that it was not a software issue-which Gary repeated to us.
SO then spoke to a Suki ( she would not give her second name because ‘she was not
obliged to under her contract’) who was apparently Gary's superior. Suki absurdly
suggested that we had ‘incorrectly carried out the transaction’.SO explained to her exactly
what she had done but Suki was not prepared to listen.
[By this time the queue was forming in the PO and as we only had one functioning terminal
I grabbed the ‘phone from SO],
I put it to Suki that how was it remotely possible for us to carry out the transaction
incorrectly? Other than swipe the card we had not done anything-the system did not allow
lus to do any thing-it generated the voucher automatically. We did not touch the screen-we
did not even tap a key on the keyboard.
Suki then suggested that it was a previous transaction. I explained to her that as we had
ino faith in the systern, we always ran off a counter printer receipt even if we sold a stamp.
This we have done for the last two years. For the record the previous transaction was
icompleted at 16:58 and was postage labels a series of parcels-not remotely related to the
36
POL00106935
POL00106935
issue in question.
Suki then refused to accept that it was a technical issue and then transferred me to
Option3. It was now approaching 18:00. I then spoke to a Lisa who after listening to the
problem said that it was a technical issue! I said to Lisa that I knew that and she knew that.
lAt 18:00 I decided to terminate the call as clearly we were just going around in circle.
At 18:03 we had to settle the transaction on Terminal 3 to for the terminal for balance
purposes. This meant that someone now had £10 credited to their mobile at my expense.
** Mr Allinson (Tesco mobile incident described above) came on 19" Apri 2007. I wanted
to confirm that it was his card that was topped up again at 17:03. I made a ‘phone call from
his mobile to my mobile to log his number and sure enough it was his mobile:
H This is the mobile which was topped up using another customer's Barclay
‘Debit Card.
2/04/07 Terminal 3 Kathleen ley Servi 40:25
Customer put card in Pin Pad KH put her hand on the printer. The screen flipped over to
Fujitsu logo. The system had to be rebooted causing considerable disruption in the PO at al
busy time. Reported to Horizon Helpdesk Option2 -Advice reboot-which we were doing
anyway. Ref:
£0704 120346.
13/04/07 Terminal 2 Shirley Owens serving.
SO started to serve customer for a Transcash payment. After the account number was
entered, the screen presented the Trancash fee as £220-00. This amount is always preset
to £2.20.
SO changed the fee to £2.20 and completed the transaction. RSB witnessed this incident.
Why did the system generate the Transcash fee as £220-007
37
POL00106935
POL00106935
13/04/07 @17.00 R Bilkhu serving.
For no apparent reason, the screen (which had been in Serve Customer mode) locked.
It would not aliow the option of ‘Home’ to allow navigation to other areas e.g. reports menu.
Rang Helpline on Option 3 and spoke to a Sarah. Told that perhaps Horizon was waiting
for a receipt to be printed from a previous transaction. I explained that we always printed a
receipt after each transaction and in fact we already had a receipt for a Lloyds bank cash
withdraw! for £60-00 @ 16:46. The receipt was printed again. The reprinted receipt clearly
istated that it was a duplicate. The screen unlocked itself. Sarah could not explain-it was
just one of those things!
16/04/07 Kathieen Hedley Caught side of base station with a bag of coin. Computer went
loff-had to be rebooted.On screen message : ‘Lost PMCC’. Had to ring Helpline. Spoke to
Ahmed Ref, E0704160756.
46/04/07 Message on memoview @ 13:40. ‘One of your Worksation has stopped
communicating with the Network’
17/04/07
Terminal 3 S.Owens serving. Middle of printing Postal Order for £21.99. Message on
screen: ‘Printer off line’. Checked power-OK. Not out of paper. Rang Helpline and spoke to
Kayleigh. Ref: E0704170661. S Owens asked Kayleigh what to do. Kayleigh was not sure.
Eventually S Owens had to take to cash, spoil the PO and reverse the transaction.
18/04/07 Throughout the week we seem to have been running OK with our daily cash declaration
(+/+ < £5.00) then suddenly on Tuesday for no apparent reason we are £34-00 short. On
Wednesday the Balance Report indicates a cash loss of £40+ and a stamp loss of £184.
iCombined with the figure from last week the loss now stands at £70.17.
70.17
38
POL00106935
POL00106935
A Geoff Simpson (NFSP Te: I _) representative informed of the Tesco Mobile
incident. This done on advice ubPostmaster. Frankly I do not expect anything
ito happen because they (NFSP) have not done anything re: losses.
23/04/07 @ 13:08 Terminal 2 R Bilkhu serving. Smartscreen. Put weight of parcel (200g).
Screen displayed icons for Special Delivery By 8 @ £10.95, Std Parcel @ £3.85,
Parcelforce, Special Delivery By 1.00 @£4.75 and an icon for BFPO. These bear no
resemblance to prices for the weight in question and no 1“or 2" class option displayed.
Same problem as above at 16:20.
24/04/07 Same problem at 13:15. Reported to a Sean on Option3. Ref: H15349667
25/04/07I 27/04/2007 Terminal 3 Screen froze for 45 minutes. From 09:00 onwards. Cash loss of 82.44
82.41.
02/05/07, +8.34
09/05/07 [Terminal 3 IG serving. Label for postage stamp printed OK but system printed a rejected -22.05
label receipt. Then a different receipt came out of the printer with no weight of parcel put in
after the rejected label receipt.
46/05/07] 16/05 2007 Rachel Oysten rang @ 13:15 re: Tesco mobile voucher incident. Rang in -§4.08
lagain on 22" May 2007. Arrived in the afternoon to obtain further information. Also
suggested that we go over to individual stock unit. I said I would welcome anything that
stopped the losses, Planned for wei fending but then changed due unavailability of
trainers. Up to End of August 2007 I'have not heard from Rachel Oysten
23/05/07 ~76,01 76.01
30/05/07I£2500 in coins were despatched but the figure still appears in our Suspense Account
report as ‘Brought forward’. I contacted Michelle on Helpline Option 3 at 18:10. She said
nothing to worry about as sometirnes the bar code reader does not scan the despatch
pouch card and should right if self the next time. Otherwise we should get a Transaction
correction in our favour.
39
POL00106935
POL00106935
06/06/07
Still concerned about the issue re: £2500 coins despatch. Contacted Lisa on Helpline
44:05 on 6" June 2007. Told her that the figure was still there despite scanning the card
lagain. Lisa said to wait tit Transaction Correction arrives. Told her that that could be
several months away and in the meantime we could have the auditors turn up and start
demanding money (as they had done before in September 2005).
-60.82
13/06/07
+20.16
20/06/07
Balance day today and at 18:25 on 20/06/07 we are stuck. We have done alll the reports,
declared the cash and the stock and press the button for Balance Report. The system will
not let us advance. Message: ‘You may not balance as one of the sessions is suspended’.
‘Tried all we know i.e. ensure we have done alll the reports etc. but keep getting the same
message. Rang the Helpline. Had to listen to music for about 15 minutes and then spoke
ko a Richard. Suggested what we had already tried but went back into the system-tried
lagain no luck, Then back onto the Helpline and spoke to Linda. She said try selling a 1p
stamp and then print a receipt. That did seem to work. Linda said that it is ‘glitch’ in the
system.
27106107
29/06/07 Terminal 2 Counter printer for some reason has started to print zeroes with a line
lacross. This is quite serious because it can be read as figure 8. Reported to a Tom on
Option 2 Helpline at 16:40. Julie returned call on 3” July to say that it was configured
lwrong. I did not even want to get into a discussion because very soon the printers were to
be replaced with new style. Ref: £0707030250.
At 14:34 on 26/06/07 a customer asked for an 02 voucher. Customer waived 4 £20 note
land gave every impression she wanted a £20 voucher. After it had been printed she said
she only wanted a £10 voucher. RB immediately rang the Helpline-this was constantly
engaged. in the meantime Counter Clerk S Owens tried reversing the voucher in every
way conceivable e.g. ‘Existing Reversal’, ‘New Reversal’, obtaining the Transaction
reference etc. Message : Refund Declined. By the time we were able to get through to the.
Helpline Message on screen was: ‘Time expired’.
101.97
04/07/07
116.42
44/07/08
~75.65
40
POL00106935
POL00106935
41/07/08 -75,.65
18/07/08 “ -87.21
25/07/08 : ~105.99 105.99
01/08/08 [Bowburn PO had one customer who for about 2 years purchased postage stamps ~44,46
averaging £500 per week. This naturally made a significant difference to R Bilkhu's sallary.
For several months the customer stopped. After contacting the customer it bécame
apparent that Roydl Mail had actually poached the customer from Bowburn. Whilst the .
customer enjoyed dealing with Bowburn PO, she was given such an offer by Royal Mail (a
pack costing £1-60/at Bowburn was offered for 68p by Royal Mail) that she could not
refuse.She asked for the discount to be offered at Bowburn PO but was refused. Royal
Mail and POL are Suppdsed to be one business. A complaint was filed Ref; H15542416.
08/08/08 -20.28
15/08/07 -89,64 __I
22/08/07 IA John Day rang on 20° August 2007 from Lottery Section at Chesterfield and spoke to ~75.80 75.80
Shirley Owens. He was complaining about discrepancies.about scratch cards with
amounts running fo several hundred pounds, The dates go back to September antl
October 2005. R Bilkhu rang the Helpline and filed a complaint to Sandra (Ref.
H224 14275), This on the basis that about 18 month-2years ago R Bilkhu had contacted
Camelat and POL and Confirmed with them as to how long Lottery records néed to b
kept. Camelot’s view was that after 6 month they would not entertaif any claims so records
need not be kept beyond 6 months. POL’s view from Chesterfield was exactly the’ same
i.e. if Camelot'weré happy then POL did not have an issue, So why’ now start generating
4
POL00106935
POL00106935
Bowburn Post Office
Lottery Scratchvards Discrepandies
Ba un
Bowbum Post Office is among the s¢lected Post Offices which can carry out National Lottery
transactions on behalf of Camelot. It can also sélls National Lottery Scratchcards.
The incident below (under ‘Sequence of Events’) refers specifiéally to Scfatchcards.
Seratchcards (in £1, £2, and £5 ‘dendminations’) are delivered via a courier, Upon delivery, the
pack is opened and checked so that the contents agree with the barcoded delivery slip. The value of
each pack is £120. There are 120 cards on £1, 60 on £2 arld 24 on £5 packs, ;
The delivery slip is scanned into the Camelot Lottery Terminal (situated on the retail side of the
business). The packs of scratch cards are then stored in a secure area behihd the PO Counter,
‘When a pack of scratchcards is required for salé, it is scanned on the Camelot Terminal to ‘activate’
it, The number of cards activated is then remmed into on the Horizon System (PO side) If for
some reason, the pack is not activated or remméd into Hotizon System, then Shirley Owetis
(Counter Clerk-20+ years experience) ‘adjusts stock’ on Horizon systern on a regular (weekly) basis
so the number of cards currently active (on sale on the retail side) matches what is oh the Horizon
system. That is what we were ied to believe-as we adjust stock with bther PO items ¢.g, stamps
stamp books etc. we did not think adjustirig scratchoards this way would create problems. No
training has ever been given to us on the Lottery side.
42
POL00106935
POL00106935
As the Lottery Terminal is situated dn the retail side, all cash taken on the retail side is placed into a
common till on the retail side, At the close of business everyday, two reports are gerferatetl: one for
On-Line Lottery and one for Scratcheards.(see Appendix 1). A simple calbulation is cartied out to
separate the cash due to the PO'(.e. Camelot) dnd that duc to the retail side. The money owed to the
Post Office is transferred every day at close of business.
We have nevet knowingly had any problems with Lottery or Seratcheards and cannot recall
any Transaction Corrections in thé past.
Sequence df Events
On 20" August 2007, Shifley Owens (Counter Clerk) wad contacted by John Day from Lottery
‘Team stating that they had been looking at our Lottery records for the last two years and there were
disctepancies ih scratchcards aétivated vs. remmed in. He insisted that it was simply a ‘stock
adjustment’ thdt was required. :
S Owens informed RS Bifchu the followihg day and RSB immédiately rang John Day and stated
that for a start of it was unacceptable for POL to go back 2 yeats betause RSB had checked and
confirmed with BOTH Camelot and POL over two years ago that Lottery records need only be kept
for 6 months. Why row were they dragging in Transactioh Corrections for whith RSB would not be
able t dispute.
John Day insisted again that there was no money involved-that it was merely a “stock adjustment’.
RSB said ‘send me the paperwork and I’ll have'a look at it’.
On 28" Septemiber 2007, a 17 page report (mainly listing) arrived from John Day. RSB looked at
the final figure on the last page which stated 4317.
IRSB rang J Day immediately and quizzed him about this figure and whether this wa’ the amount in
pounds that RSB was expécted to pay. J Day replied again that no it was merely a stock correction
and at the most the cost would be a penny.
43
POL00106935
POL00106935
[Discussions continued ovér the next few days betwetn 5 Owens /RS Bilkhu and Johh Day to ensure
that we all understood clearly bow this discrepancy might have ariset.
it is possible, at times, scratchcard pack may have been ‘activaled’ but not ‘remmed in’. However,
whether a pack had been femmed in or not, the Post Office (and Canielot) received what was die to
them each every day as described above. Nobody has lost out.
And also as described above § Owens keeps a check to erisure the numbed of scratchivards' on
Horizon matchts what we have physically on sale. It is not often ‘stock adjustment is required
because S Owens is in three days pet week and keeps a check on stock.
Now, whether there was a stock discreparicy or not, the fact remains that the correct amount due to
Camelot/PO was trahsferred AND loggedon Horizon with details of the scratchcards sold and
prizes paid out etc. (Appendix 1 refers). This has to be the case because:
a) we cannot recall having any TR’s re: Lottery
1b) we should have had an increase of £120.00 on out Balance Snapshot every time a scrattheard
pack had gone astray. We have not. In fact, as Appendix 2 (this is surnmary of the 17 page repott
that J Day sent but only picks up the dates in question) ilfustratés, on the dates in question Bowburn
PO balance Snapshot figure is 4 negative in all but four cdses.
‘Transaction i
John Day finallly sent the TR oft 11" October 2007.RSB did not accept it until the 12" October due I
to uncertainty in what effect it might have on the balance. By abcepting the TR, it indrease the
number of scratchcards held by the Horizon system (515) to 4832!
44
POL00106935
POL00106935
IRSB was horrified by this and this is exactly what RSB had been trying to explain to J Day. This
now mearit thal on Balance Day, stock would be adjusted and the by adjusting the scratchcards to
ithe physical level ic. about 500, the system would be looking for £43171 That is what RSB would
be expected to put in to rollover to next Trading Period! This was all explained to J Day but he
continued to insist that it was just a stock transaction. John Day said that the only way to address
this was to ‘reverse’ the original adjust Stock increases.
Helpline Discussions
IRSB rang the Helpline on 16" October 2007 at 12:40 (Balance Day-Branch Trading Period) to seek
help and advice to address what was now clearly a serious problem-if RSB corrected ‘the Horizon
held stock of scratchcards-Bowburn PO would close the following day.
‘At 12:40 RSB Spoke to a Sandra on Option}. She said that as it was a ‘credit’ TR 1 should simply
take £4317 out and keep it! I said to Sandra that it was not as simple as that. She said she would get
someone to ring later.
RSB rang later and spoke to a Neil, Neil explained that as it was a credit it would increase the stock
value and I wolild be expected to pay £4317.
Maureen from Helpline rang later and initially agreed with what Sandra had said Le, ‘take out cash-
it’s yours’ but when I explained the implications of the Balance Report, she agreed that I would
have to pay.
IMy final discussion (also with S Owens participating) took place with Paul Smith ( John Day’s Line
Manager. This discussion went on for a good hour and all of the above points were explained to
Paul viz. trobody has benefited from this, all parties concerned have had the cash where due as all
scratcards sold are accounted for at the end of the day and cash transferred. If there had been a
surplus, it would have been highlighted by an increase in cash on our Balance Snapshot.
45
POL00106935
POL00106935
I suggested to him that all accounting systems had to have a debit/credit. All they had given me was
the debits. To address this correctly, what the Lottery team needed to do was to obtain the bales
figures and match them with the cash declared and transferred by Bowburn PO.
‘Paul said that they were unable to get those figures! RSB was astounded by this statement.
In the end Paul did say that he would investigate further but iti the meantime it was agreéd that the
figure on Horizon would temaih unchanged so that it would allow RSB to rollover to thé next
perigd,
IRSB. was bontanted by a Rebecva from the Lottery Team on 24" O¢tobet 2007 After abdut five
minutes Rebecta declared that she was not supposed to rifig mie shé was to ring some other Post
Office but my number had popped up on her screen!
* Also on 24" October 2007 RSB rang Camelot and spoke to Eleni, Eléna wap able to
confirm RSB"s query on 10° March 2005 re: how long Lottery records need to be kept.
She confirmed that they had ativised RSB that records heed aly be kept for 6 months as
tlains by customers were not entertained after that period, made the same query to
POL at Chesterfield on that day (10 March 2005) and they said if Camelot were happy
so were they.
¢ An audit was carried out on 22™ September 2005 when I was foreed te pay £3503-59 to
POL to stay in business. Why did not the audit team pick these up?
29/08/07
83.42
04/00/07
Monday 10/09/2007 Horizon screen (Terminal 3) froze at 09:15. Possibly the worst time on
a Monday motning morning for this to happen. Shirley Owen rang Helpline (Option 2) @
{09:30 after having tried the ysual remedies-switching off, cleaning the soreen etc. Not put
+26,12
POL00106935
POL00106935
in queue-just a continuous high pitch drone then cut-off. Rang again @10:10 and ended upI
in queue. Answered by a Kyle @ 10:26. Told to reboot. (which Shirley had already done).
SO explained what was on the screen (just an arrow on a blank turquoise screen).Still told
to raboot, This went on until about 11:00 am when system was back on line.
12/00/07 -22.73
19/08/07 +6.92
26/08/07 ~44,02
03/10/07 -30.73
40/10/07 -49.36
17/10/07 IThe reason for a gain this week (nearly £185) Is that we have made a mistake. Atustomer) = 452.30
paid’ for a bill (BT) but we inadvertently missed scanning her BT bill. This was sorted out on
24" October 2007 when the customer returned to the office. .
24/40/07 426,24
31/10/07 28.04
07/14/07 “12,47
44/11/07.
24/11/07 ~125.81 125-84
28/11/07 I 28/11/07 @ 10:33 Terminal 2 RB setving. Customer paid Northern electric bill. Bill was
scanned. Printer just stopped. Tried switching on/off, replaced cartridge. Finally got it to
print but it did not print the customers teceipt. It printed the branch copy, A photocopy of
the branch copy was stapled to the customer's bill.
29/11/2007 A Paul rang from NBSC to chack if we activated slips the same day. RB
replied yés.
08/12/07 (8° Gecember 2007 around mid-day. Received a ‘phone call from Rachel Oysten (BDM)
requesting if she could come in and look at Branch Trading statements. R Bilkhu agreed
and she arrived at 14:00. RB gave her access to all Branch Trading statements. She said
that due {o the legal action, she had been asked by Lesley Joyoe If she could remove the
Statements, RB refused. RB said that whilst he realised they were the property of POL, the
47
POL00106935
POL00106935
act that there was now lagal action, those statements were effectively his ‘@vidence should
it be needed by hig legal team and besides POL already had the statements Via Horizon.
Rachel also queried (on behalf of Lesley Joyce) whether the outstanding Transaction
Correction for Lottery issue had been settied. RB said NO for the simple reason that we
havé a dispute over the TR and besides I do not have £4312 to settle. Rachel said that it
would simply be taken out of my remuneration,
On the issue of Branch Trading statements, it was agreed that she would return on
Tuesday 11/12/2007 and accompanied by RIB would photocopy the statements.
On 11/42/07 RO returned, took the BTS’s to the Crown Office for copying. I was left with
the copies. She kept the originals. On return she said there were a few which were missing
(4 . I said they were probably filed in the weekly reports and I will dig them out in the next
few days,
POL seem to have chosen a particularly bad time to ask for these statements-the busiest
period imaginable when they have had the whole of last year.
Re nse to Andy Wi ; Lot Si
The following letter was sent to Andy Winn on 6” December 2007.
Dear Mr Winn,
icratcheards Issues
‘Thank you for your letter dated 15 November 2007 re: above. My apologies for the delay but I
have been awalting a response from NFSP.
In the absence of a response from NFSP to date and in view of the impending legal action, 1 now
igive the following response to you letter.
appreciate the time you have taken to investigate and report my concerns but the key questidn still
remains ubanswered,
48
POL00106935
POL00106935
‘It seems’to me that POL, the Lottery Team and others are getting themselves tied in knofs over
Horizon technical jargon and accounting terminology.
The issué is very simple}
Scratcheatds are received at Bowburn Post Office and as and when required put into dispensers for
sale,
‘This activity is no different to goods being received into a Tesco warehouse and then put onto
shelves in the‘retail area for sale.
Up until'the point 4 customer purchases and pays for the goods, no sale is made and ne income is
getierated, .
I have already explained in my previous correspondence how, at close of business, a simple
calbulation separates the cash due to POL (Camelot) and what remains for the retail side,
(Our retuil sidle is relatively small-daily takings average £63-00. We know front experience thet aver
80% of the cash accumulated in our retail till belongs to POL(Camelot) for the lottery. If we find the
takings are uhusually high e.g. £150-00, we know q mistake has been made in our calculation. This
may be simply due to an error in reading the seratchoard number (numbers arg upside down on the
tf side)! Even if the mistake is carried over, it will correct itself the following day when the number
is re-read and as already explained, Shirley Qwens (Counter Clerk) keeps a meticulous check an the,
catds at least 2-3 times per week ahd compares to what we have and what the Balance Snapshat
states. Any dixcrepancy is made good in cash).
al
Camelot’s management systems and their ability to access information are excellent.
IAt any given time, Camelot id fully aware of :
* The number of packs of sotatchcards we have in our secure atea
© The number of activated packs and the names of the games ih dispensets on sale
© ‘The pumber of lottery (Lotto, Thunderball, Buromillfons dtc.) tickets we have sold
le The pumber of prizes on-line and sctatchcards we have paid out
The information that Camelot lacks during the day is the actual number of soratchoprds that we have
sold, As‘alrearly explained, we calculate the number of seratchcards sold using a simple spreadsheet
@
POL00106935
POL00106935
(Appendix Ya and 1b). This is the ikfomntation we give to POL via the Horizon systém at the close of
each day between 17:30 and 17:45,It is usually the last transaction carried out on Horizoh, Due to
early closing, Saturday's {information is input on Monday motning before opéning anid is usually the
first transaction carried out of Monday.
These transactions are no different to any other transactions we carry oul on Horizon-be it the salé
ofa stamp, bill payment, Giro's, cash withdrawals, cash deposits ete. it is exsentially cash in-
cash out.
Tt does not matter, therefore, how many packs were feceived, remmed in, remined oat,
activated or not activated-the key question which you, Paal Sniith, Johh Day and others in the
Lottery Team refuse to answer is the number of seratchcards sold. J find it diffiewlt to adeept
John Day/Paul Smith’s answer that sales figures are not available,
IA very simple way to address this issue is for POL, to obtain the sales figures from the dites it
question, equate them to the number £1, £2, and £5 s¢ratch cards sold and theb compared with
the figures supplied by Camielot. A competent person should bé able to do this exercise in a less
than two hours. All information should be available at the press of a button.
I now make comments on ottiet parts of your letter:
Paregrabh 9
The fact that the Lottery Teatn had a backlog is Kankly of little interest to the, All it tells me is the
levels of mismanagement and incompetence within the organisation. If the system was not reddy
why on earth did POL move over to Branch Trading?
Making mistakes regularly seems to be part and parcel of POL’s'culture, You only have to look at
the Methos sent to SubPostmasters via the Horizon system. Practically every other remo isan
adnission of incorrect informiation supplied or incorrect instruction.
Paragraph 10 . . ,
There was absolutely no confusion on our (Myself and Shirley Owens) part. All cohversitions took
place with both of us present. The details of the conversation are already documented in previous
correspondence and demonstrate quite clearly the contradicting advice given by Lottery Team and
50
POL00106935
POL00106935
~ [Helpline. .
if there is any doubt, then please obtain the transoripts.
Pavapraph Lt .
The £120 surplus should have appeared in the Balance Snapshot. The losses indicated are due tb
faults with thé Horizon system for which the legal action is being putsued, If you ate suggesting that!
the losses on the weeks in question does'not indicate the expected surplas is not insorporated within
the net logs figure, then the issues with Horizon are thuch mote serious than previously thought,
Paragragh 12° .
On the basis that I folldwed preceduré and instructions from POL and Cainelot and disposed
of Lottery records after 6 months the current claim (if at all valid in the first place) is null and
void and Iam not prepared to consider the claim any further,
Lam prepared to consider albeit very reluctantly (because it will mean going through Horizon
slips for every single day for the lavt six months) siny claint for the last six months a9 {will havd
the records and that only om the basis that you supply ine with the actual breakdown of every
single sdratchcard sold (which we would have deciardd on Horizon and the number of
iscratchéards supplied by Camelot,
Pati 14
The Transaction Correction was not cortect to have been issued, Not énough thought or
understanding went into prior to the note being issued. Time and time again we were told there was
no money involved-it was merely a stack vorrection.
IAll monjes due to POL (Camelot) have been paid. There is no money whatsoever due4o POL in this
instance,
Tf there is a need for stock adjustment xhent that is between POL and Camelot NOT between POL
and Bowburn PO.
A further iransaction correction now needs to be issued to reverse out the 4312 to take us back to
what we physivally hold in dhe braach.
Yours sinterely,
_IR.S Bilkhu
Si
POL00106935
POL00106935
TaMaI07
72/12/07 Rabhel Oysten (BDMy'rahg to confirnh if I had gettied thé TR re: above. I said NO
bebause it hed agreed that! pending further investigationss,it had been agredd with Paul
Smith that the figure within'Horizon would be infiatad until sales figure were obtained from
POL arid Geinalct. a.
+ 9742/2007 Lefla message fof Rachel Oystén to come and collect thie missing 4 Bratch
Trading: Statements (they Nad been filed ih thé weekly reports).“Caill nef returned to date.
t2h210¥ @ 10:00 and 18:60 Términal 3 $0 operating, Baseistation shut déwn for no
lapparent reason. Hacitobé re-tiogted. THis happetied at the'worst possible time. Rang
helpline just to register the problem Call Ref: 76074.
47M207 09:30. terninal 4 Printer would not print. This at orie of the Busiest periods! Tried
all sorts-chahging cariridgés, switching on/off. Réported’to Helpliie. She requested dn
engineér for the following day.
Issues. Rang Carnelot and spoke to Clive:Ellis-at théit Security’
and alsé his colleague Maria. -THey confirhred that Camélot had ne
sheet blank i.e. there was no evidericé of
witht Retailer Accdunts and confirmed nothirig
: oc
lwas owed ‘by Bowburt PO} (Tel a
ToAw0T
A Fé recaived fot £860 00 This reteis to Curréney orders. Upon investigation we find this
was a thistake on our part-eashiwas taken for Foreign currericy order but'ndt put on
BeAZIOT
Horizon, Dates ii question 23/08/06 and 19/0/07.TC eecepted and settled'via ghieaue’ _
02/01/08
52
POL00106935
POL00106935
Ge/d1708 [OFITGS @ 10-16 terminal 8 Computer crashed. Screen blank with Fujitsu Loge. Had to” I 382.14
rebdot. Took 38 fhins to get back to normal. ;
09/01/08 Méssage on Horizon ‘Workstation Disconnected’ at 20:30.
10101108 14:33 Terminal 3 System Grashied again a8 atiove, oo
16/0108 thee otal "I 10862,97
33/01/08 [Gash discrepancy £306,63:seltied via cheque. No idea where theicash has disappeared I 808.83
to, Upan rollover the system displayed ‘Rollover to TP11 2007’. Rang Helpline to query
Why 2007 and vot 2008. Ref: H18835742. :
30/01/08 I —— I
og/o2/08I eS rn — “3.82
18/02/08 14102106 @ 22.51 Teiminal 3 . This lermainal disconnected igelf and continuied'ts “38.71
disconriect whenever it was rébooted. This went on until I february wher it was finelly
replace” by a Fujitsu éngirieet. The backgroufid fo this is as tallows: First I spoke toa
Michael on Horizon option 2 at 14: 30 oh 14" Feb (Call ref: 127561 and UK 938762) I
explained to Michael that I did riot want the old base station rémoved as I believed fhatiit
was pobsiblé thai the base station may have iéd to cash discrépancies. He passed trie
massage to his guparvisor. A Danny called @ 42:10 and said the base station will not be
left as if was a part of the agreement with Fujitsu. I refused. Anottier supervisor Katrina
rafig later and-wtien I expidined the badkgrourid, the issue was escalated to BDM Ratchel
Oysten ahd A Garret based I Barnsley {Live Serviges). Quite lengthy conversations took
place batween myself and Rachel Oyster. It was finally agreed that the base’ station would
be replaced but the olf ong would be sealed and transfgrred fo a secure unit at Fujiteu’s
Bracknell site. THis was cohfitmed-by Adam (Fujitsu) at 40:00 on 22" Feb 2008.
taiso tdok the parti fo remind Rachel Gysten abdut tHe’ Lottery issud and the need
for a meeting to address this issue. To date( 3° March) { haye not heard fram héir, I iso
asked her_about the Tesco Mobile top Up voucher incident. She did not regal anything. I
53
POL00106935
POL00106935
had ta temind het thet dhe came in épetifically on 22° May 2007 to ifvestigate this
incident. She denied all knowledge of it iritially. Whien I reminded het that she tdok countér
printer feoeipts, he said they were copies. ( had photdeopiéd' thé original ¢ p receipts in
her).
2602/08
“ai ba
-44.94
27402108
08/03/08
O6/03408 [Gardener rloticed thé F7 Icon (HMRC Gashdequés) of Girobank Sereén was
differant of Terriina! 3 (Node 3) coniparéd to Terminal 2. OF Terminal 3 the icoh displayed
eon édming goon’ with a paint tan and brush..On terminal 3, it displayed a crdWn‘with a
ring akdund the crown against a greerbackground, This was alsd chetked on Terminal 4
(Gatewey) and was the saime.as terminal 2. Thisahomialy. was reported to Horizon
technical Option 2 te A Danny ( Call ref: 148307) Danny suggested reb ting. This was
idbne with nd éfféct. Spoke to a Grade on 7" MaréH 2008.Shé did not appear to havé any
knowtedge:and passed rné on to Jarnie. Jamie drifirméd that it was a system efror ~
prabably a software isete. He transferred the tall to NBSC because he felt it was not a
tedhnival iddue. I was puazies by this Bul spoke to a Li8a @ 16.45 (Rat: 115886299). She
suggested we'drop all 3 systems, I said it was a'pieak tithe int the PO andl was hot
praparéd’to dé that at this stags but will do so after close of Sffidd. Thig 1 did but therlt wad
nochange. a . .
Jamie fang on 08/03/08'@ 11:20 arid’said he would get ‘software people to fix ty
Kevin rang from NBSC @ 12:40 saying it was not an NESG issue arid I should go'batk to
Horizon Technical. I said I was not réally interested whose yesponsibility it Was I just
waited! it sotted out.
To date 12" Marth néthing had ben done. en
Aldo digcoveréd that 6n’the Stampbdck sefeen all the cons for Ist and 2nd claps ;
stimbooks:are'different! ort Tertnihal 3. On Tefminal 1 & 2 they are cbloureg. OF Tertninal
4
POL00106935
POL00106935
3 there is no background colour.
42/03/08
5S