POL00327004
POL00327004
From: John Breeden __GRO
Sent: Wed 17/07/2013 10:49:04 AM (UTC)
To: i GRO i
Subject: FW: Urgent - FW: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen
Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
John Breeden
Agents Contracts Deployment Manager North
@ Upper Floors, The Markets Post Office,
6/16 New York Street, Leeds LS2 7DZ
@)
©
From: Nick Beal
Sent: 17 July 2013 08:46
To: John Breeden
Cc: Lin Norbury; Kevin Gilliland; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Michael Larkin
Subject: Urgent - FW: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case
signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Hi John
Please can you call me asap to discuss this and associated issues regarding suspension and termination process.
We need to review the processes and in the meantime introduce an additional step regarding authorisation of
suspensions. I have laid out the few thoughts that I have had on this as follows — please can we discuss.
1. From as soon as we can, any suspension needs to be authorised by either Lin or yourself (or presumably
Craig). The contracts manager will need to contact one of you to ensure agreement to the decision. We
should also consider whether we establish a process whereby you (or Lin or Craig) in these circumstances get
authority from a SLT manager — proposed list would be Kevin, Michael, Angela and I — initially I think this
would be appropriate in the immediate future for all cases so we can have visibility of this in the centre.
2. We also need to consider the appropriateness of suspension on the following basis:
a. If the amount is below a certain level (e.g. £2k) and the spm makes a commitment to pay back (say
within a certain period e.g. 1 week max) then no suspension — and these case should be obviously
recorded but not necessary to seek authority.
b. Can we review this amount on the basis of branch size — e.g. a sliding scale for larger branches
For my own benefit, please can you clarify the approaches we take with multiple and franchise branches — is there
anything in the processes we use with these that can be utilised?
POL00327004
POL00327004
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce,
copy or distribute the contents of this communication
If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system.
From: Kevin Gilliland
Sent: 17 July 2013 08:23
To: Nick Beal
Subject: Fwd: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory:
? Lin Norbury
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Susan Crichton <2
Date: 17 July 2013 07:48:55 BST
To: Kevin Gilliland < :
Ce: Alwen Lyons < eaneenesnnsneed
Subject: Fwd: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback
due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Kevin have you made any progress re looking at the process for suspension and termination?
Obviously if you have this hasn't filtered down the line.
Also Paula will be chasing for an update today
Susan
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Alwen Lyons
Date: 17 July 2013 07:45:23 BST
To: Susan Crichton
Subject: Fw: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna
Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Were we reviewing this after the David case
Thanks
Alwen
POL00327004
POL00327004
Alwen Lyons
Company Secretary
Sent from Blackberry
From: Lin Norbury
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 10:25 PM
To: Alwen Lyons
Cc: John Breeden
Subject: RE: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback
due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Alwen
No, the process at the time of this termination case and currently has not changed.
Suspension cases are progressed by the relevant Contracts Advisor who recommends the
case outcome eg re-instatement or summary termination and depending on the
geographical location of the branch (North or South) either John Breeden or I review the
case and give concurrence as appropriate.
Regards
Lin
Lin Norbury I Agents Contracts Deployment Manager - South
6-16 New York Street LEEDS LS2 7DZ
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 16 July 2013 19:26
To: Lin Norbury
Subject: Re: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen Feedback
due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Lin
In view of everything that is going on is there now a new process for signing off
terminations etc
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
Company_S:
On 16 Jul 2013, at 16:31, "Lin Norbury"
Hi Val
Case details entered below as requested. Account was taken that she had
repaid all the monies, but that did not out way the facts of theft, fraud, false
accounting and password sharing.
Let me know if you think you will need the hard copy file to be retrieved?
Regards
Lin
Lin Norbury I Agents Contracts Deployment Manager - South
6-16 New York Street LEEDS LS2 7DZ
POL00327004
POL00327004
From: Valerie Stanley On Behalf Of ECT
Sent: 16 July 2013 13:37
To: Lin Norbury; Pressofficeengland
Cc: Colin Burston; Kathy Sulley; Nigel Parry; Alwen Lyons
Subject: FOR ACTION: Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer name: Anna Skoczen
Feedback due: 19/7/13 Case signatory: ? Lin Norbury
Importance: High
POST OFFICE LTD
STAKEHOLDER CORRESPONDENCE
TEAM
INVESTIGATION & FEEDBACK
REQUIRED
ICASE REF NO: ECT 524/13
DEADLINE FOR FEEDBACK TO ECT:19/7/13
(CUSTOMER DETAILS: Anna Skoczen
SUBJECT: termination of contract
BRANCH NAME: Ammanford BRANCH CODE: 427642
FOR THE SIGNATURE OF: ? Lin Norbury
Hi Lin
Please find attached letter sent to Paula Vennells by ex subpostmistress
admitting to inappropriately "borrowing" funds.
I'm not sure if this is on the back of the interim report regarding Horizon
integrity as she does mention the lack of support by POL and any
management visits. She does also states that the NFSP advised her she
shouldn't have admitted her actions and blamed Horizon instead. Were
Mrs Skoczen's efforts to repay the money taken into account at all and is
there anything that can be done at this late stage to review the case?? - it
does look like an appeal has been unsuccessful so I wonder whether we
have the full picture.
I'm happy to pull a draft together for your signature once I have the full
background to this case, including the appeal and any correspondence
already entered into with Mrs Skoczen.
Kathy/Nigel
I have copied this to you as there does seem to be a possibility that we
may lose the service given the comments to the end of the first para on
page 3.
Alwen
I know that Donna has already sent you over a copy of this - but have
included you so you have a copy of all feedback.
pressoffice
Ihave put you on copy due to comments in penultimate para - threat of
taking this further and letting public know how we treat our agents.
Kind regards
Val
Valerie Stanley
Stakeholder Correspondence Team
P/L}
(See attached file: ECT 524-13 Skoczen Anna .pdf)
POL00327004
POL00327004
Flag Case Fact Sheet: —I<image002.gif>
The information contained in this sheet
POL00327004
POL00327004
[will be used to prepare the final
response and will be shared with the
signatory. It may also be recalled in any
FOI enquiry.
Background information I<image002.gif>An audit was performed at Upper
& actions taken Brynamman Post Office on 6th December 2012 which
This should include details relating to resulted in a shortage in the branch of £3,198.73.
jcustomer complaint.
(what went wrong/why it went wrong/ . .
what has been done about it) IThe charges were not keeping the account in the form
prescribed by Post Office Ltd and not making losses good
without delay, Section 12 paragraphs 4 & 12 of the
ISubpostmaster Contract refers.
At the conduct interview on 16/01/13 Mrs Skoczen said that
her problems started around July/August 2012 when she
lhad problems paying her bills for the newspapers from her
Isupplier and the mortgage on the business. Because of the
lhours she was working following her divorce she employed
someone to open up at 05.30am for a couple of hours but
this turned into more hours and she found that her
lexpenditure was more than her income. To overcome this
problem she made deposits into her business account but
did not actually put the cash into the Post Office account.
I\When she completed her branch trading statements she
then inflated her cash to hide the losses. This continued
until November 2012 when she decided that she had to do
something about it as she was not happy with what she wasI
Idoing. On the 28/11/12 the account was between £7k-£8k
Ishort and she settled £4,698.85 centrally as she could pay
this off using a credit card and as her husband had said he
Iwas due to receive £3k from a job he had done she inflated
her mutilated notes to hide this as she intended to put the
Imoney into the account when her husband collected the
money owed to him. On the day of the audit Mrs Skoczen
stated that her husband was in Birmingham collecting the
I3k he was owed and that he was coming back to the
branch to put it into the account. However at the conduct
interview Mrs Skoczen stated that although she believed
lher husband when he said it was money due to him he had
in fact borrowed the cash from his daughter the day before
land was on his way to London when she called him. All
monies owed have now been repaid.
Mrs Skoczen lodged an appeal which was heard by Shirley
Hailstones on 7 March 2013. Shirley upheld the original
\decision to summarily terminate the contract for services.
\This case was pursued by the POL Security Team; she was
interviewed under caution and admissions of theft of Post
Office cash of £7000 was made during interview. There
lwere also admissions of fraud, false accounting and money
laundering relating to the cash loss. Admissions were
made that PO cash was deposited into own personal bank
laccount. Sharing of Horizon username and passwords was
lalso confirmed by offender during interview.
POL00327004
POL00327004
\There is an entry on the EFC which shows a branch visit by
Sarah Williams on 12 Sept 06 in respect of the planned
refurbishment but cannot see any other entries to suggest
further face to face contact. Her appointment date in 2003
predates the EFC by about 3 years so there could be
levidence of post appointment visits etc in the hard copy file
I- do you want this retrieved from Iron Mountain?
I have requested the NBSC call logs but do not expect themI
to reveal anything of any significance.
it is likely that this contact now from Mrs Skoczen is driven
lby her recent request and our refusal to consider an
lapplication from her husband for the subsequent Operator
lvacancy.
(Additional Information: I<image002.gif>! am not sure that I am the correct person to
Please supply any additional information sign off the response as I authorised the termination
lincluding any In Commercial Interest or at
lin Confidence, which may assist in decision.
completing response or provide a better
lunderstanding to the background. Also
ladvise if information can be used in
response.
Information supplied by: Kimage002.gif>Lin Norbury
<ECT 524-13 Skoczen Anna .pdf>
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.