POL00148049
POL00148049
Message
From: Belinda Crowe [IMCEAEX-
_O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=BELINDA+20CROWE79E
S69F-4526-A078-F5B4958A8917220@C72A47.ingest.local]
on Belinda Crowe <IMCEAEX-
behalf _O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=BELINDA+20CROWE79E
of 569F-4526-A078-F5B4958A8917220@C72A47.ingest.local> [IMCEAEX-
_O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=BELINDA+20CROWE79E
S69F-4526-A078-F5B4958A8917220@C72A47.ingest.local]
14/04/2014 10:19:58
Sent:
To:
ce: Belinda Crowe
Subject:RE: Post Office Mediation Claims.
Thanks Angela
{have spoken to Rod. He is not familiar with this but Andy Parsons is going to speak to Andy Wynn about it.
There are a few questions we need to answer, I think:
1. What is the explanation?
2. Has this statement been used publicly {in Court or otherwise)
3. Have the contents of this email been disclosed? Either:
a. through the ‘criminal’ disclosure process, or
b. to Second Sight through responses to Spot Reviews, or
c. as part of one of our investigations, or
d. to Second Sight in other misc material we have provided in the past
4. If this email has not been disclosed publicly, regardless of what our response is we need to consider how it came
into Howe and Co’s possession.
This is linked to the other issue arising from the Howe and Co emails ~ one formally to Chris and one that came to us via
Ron. That is the Helen Rose report.
Andy parsons is looking at the ‘appendix’ which was not disclosed and CK do not think was relevant for disclosure and
will revisit the advice and draft response he provided for Chris. I think we need to have dealt with all of this in advance
of the next WG call and so we can, if possible, put it to bed. I know that our view is that this is not an issue for the
Working Group but it will be raised and we need to be able to say that we have dealt with it. Another timing issue is
that Tony offered to look at the information and we agreed. However, what I sent him was the information as sent to
Chris originally, before we found the appendix. I would like, as a matter of courtesy, be able to go back to him before
the WG meeting.
All, please say if I have missed something.
Andy, would you be able to get a revised not to Chris which covers these points (insofar as possible) by CoP today?
Best wishes
Belinda
Belinda Crowe
148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ
POL00148049
POL00148049
From: Angela Van-Den-Bogerd
Sent: 14 April 2014 08:22
To: Belinda Crowe; Andrew Parsons; Andy Holt; Rodric Williams
Cc: Chris Aujard; David Oliver1
Subject: RE: Post Office Mediation Claims.
All,
[believe the attached is the e-mail chain referred to by Steve Darlington. In terms of transaction
corrections/acknowledgements we have explained these in the factfile so it should be clear that these need the branch to
accept the TC/TA on the Horizon system as it doesn’t automatically make any adjustments. It is the statement below that
does in my view require further explanation. Rod ~ do we already have this explanation logged somewhere? Andy Winn
infers that we have used this in court at some time?
“Fujitsu have the ability to impact branch records via the message store but have extremely rigorous procedures in place
to prevent adjustments being made without prior authorisation - within POL and Fujitsu These controls form the core of
our court defence if we get to that stage.”
Angela
Angela Van Den Bogerd I Head of Partnerships
© 148 Old Sin
=
©
t, LONDON, ECIV 9HQ
Confidential Information:
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact me by reply
email and destroy all copies of the original message.
From: Belinda Crowe
Sent: 08 April 2014 19:42
To: Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Andrew Parsons; Andy Holt; Rodric Williams
Cc: Chris Aujard; David Oliver1
Subject: Fwd: Post Office Mediation Claims.
Please see below. Not yet decided about whether to postpone this week's WG call but does anyone know anything
about the email being quoted below about remote alteration of figures in branch? I think that this isa new one on me.
Andy P, can we please chase CK for a response on the Rose report point.
Best wishes
POL00148049
POL00148049
Belinda
Belinda Crowe
A48 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ
GRO
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ron Warmingto:
Date: 8 April 2014 17:
To: ‘Belinda Crowe'
GRO
Subject: FW: Post Office Mediation Claims.
Agenda item for this week's WG call perhaps?
Regards, Ron.
From: Steve Darlington \.
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 1:50 PM
To: ‘Ron Warmington’
Cc: Post Office Group
Subject: FW: Post Office Mediation Claims.
Importance: High
Dear Ron,
As Priti has stated in her last sentence we are seeking a stay on the time limits on all cases under review due to the
implications of POL's non-disclosure of system-generated transactions and Horizon’s integrity issues.
The ‘Helen Rose Report’ is of critical significance to all cases. The information contained within it is a compelling case for
such a stay in its own right. When combined with the Andy Winn/Alan Lusher email in the case of Ward which explicitly
states that Fujitsu can remotely change the figures in the branches without the SPMs’ knowledge or authority, the case
for a general stay is overwhelming.
We ask that the Working Party considers this request as a matter of urgency In order that we do not prejudice our
clients’ cases by omitting what is clearly information of the utmost general significance,.
We also request that the Working Party demands that POL acts quickly to provide the information requested in Priti’s
email immediately so that the mediation process is not hindered further.
Regards
Steve Darlington BA (Hons) ACA
Finance Director
POL00148049
POL00148049
4010 Great West Road, Brentford, TW8 9BA
Se SA SION IONIIB RII II IIB IO IID I RII IIIA IIA IARI IO IIA IIA IAI
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient,
you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have received this in
error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views or opinions
expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.