POL00401657
POL00401657
Lenton-Smith Col "keith.k.baines’ "GRO
“+, "Keith Baines
07/05/2003 07:33
Purewal Pam
< >
Subject: RE: Charges for Changes to AP Client take-on and Token Verificati
on services
Keith, thank you for accepting the new prices I proposed, and this is
confirm that we have agreed to deal with this as part of the anomalies
process.
Regards
Colin
Senti thursday, Way O77
To: Lenton-Smith Colin
Cc: Forrest Hilary; Keith Baines (E-mail) ;
‘nicholas.samue ; Purewal Pam
Subject: Re: Charges for Changes to AP Client take-on and Token
Verification s ervices
2003 12:24 PM
Colin,
Post Office will agree to the new prices that you are proposing. However I
suggest
we do deal with this as part of the anomalies process. The reduction in man
day
rates was applied to relevant charges for all the other CCNs in the table
but the
charges from CCN 807 were not adjusted and there is no reason why this
particular
CCN should have been excluded. Therefore now that the new price is not in
dispute I
believe it can reasonable be dealt with in the omnibus CCN to clear up the
agreed
list of anomalies.
Regards,
Keith
Contract Manager
Post Office Ltd
IT Depatrment
2nd Floor, Calthorpe House, 15-20 Phoenix Place, LONDON, WC1X 0DG
Phone: ]
External Emai
POL00401657
POL00401657
I To: "Keith Baines (E-mail)"
I ce: "'nicholas.samuel]
Forrest Hilary
Purewal Pam
I Subject: Charges for Changes to AP Client take-on and Token
I Verifications ervices
Keith,
I am responding to Nick Samuel’s email to Pam Purewal of 22 April.
We have considered this issue again and do not consider it to be an
"anomaly". The concept of "anomalies" was introduced to recognise mistakes
and which both parties agree took place during the process of moving from
the Codified Agreement to the new Agreement.
Our records show that the charges for Changes to AP Client take-on and
‘Token
Verification services (the "Services") in Annex C of Schedule 10 were
introduced at version 4.0 of Schedule 10 (dated 11/11/02). These figures
were presented on the basis of moving from T&M to fixed price charges and
that is the basis upon which we checked and agreed them. The fixed price
was
calculated d directly from the T&M charges in Schedule A12 of the Codified
ges for the Services in Schedule 10
the schedule to the final agreed version.
from version 4.0 0
We do not want to, nor do we think we should, set a precedent of re-opening
approved CCNs particularly when they have actually been rolled in to the
contract baseline. In the case of the CCN807 it was rolled in to v4.0 in
June of 2002 and we have agreed 3 new contract baselines since then.
Whilst we do not consider the charges for the Services to be an anomaly, we
are prepared to apply the principle in the letter from Liam Foley to Alan
Barrie of 11 June 2002 to the charges. On that basis the offer below still
stands but is our sole offer in this regard.
Client Take On Facility £2296.00 MINUS 25% =
£1722.00
Client Take on (regression) Facility £919 MINUS 25% =
£689.25 Total Reduction of £803.75
Both these rates would now be subject to the 2.9% uplift taking them
to:
Client Take on Facility £1722.00 +2.9% RPI =
£1771.94
Client Take on (regression) Facility £689.25 +2.9% RPI =
£709.24 Revised Total: £2481.18
Please let me know whether Post Office wishes to accept this offer and I
will arrange for a CCN to be raised to amend Schedule 10 accordingly.
Regards
Colin
Colin Lenton-Smith
Director, Commercial and Finance
Post Office Account
Fujitsu Services
Forest Road,..Felth
Tel: H
Fax: I GRO
Middlesex, TW13 7HJ
i INT:
INT:
Mailto:colin. lenton-smith¢
vvvvvvy
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents
are
subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu Services
does not guarantee that this e-mail has been intercepted and amended or
that
it is virus-free.
POL00401657
POL00401657