UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
To Norman Lamb
From Mike Whitehead
Date 27 June 2012
Meeting with Alan Bates: Chairman of Justice for SubPostmasters
Alliance (JFSA)
Purpose
Meeting with Alan Bates (JFSA) on Thursday 28 June at his request to discuss the JFSA’s
claims its members are victims of endemic flaws in POL’s Horizon system which, over the
last 10 years or so have resulted in a number of subpostmasters having their contracts
wrongly terminated by POL, with many also prosecuted for false accounting.
Attendees
Alan Bates JFSA Chairman (and former subpostmaster whose contract was terminated by
POL in 2003).
Issy Hogg, partner at Coomber-Rich (Basingstoke based solicitors who have defended a
number of subpostmasters who have been prosecuted by POL in recent years).
Will Gibson (ShEx)
Mike Whitehead (ShEx).
Background to the meeting
Mr Bates wrote to you on 25 February requesting a meeting (Annex A). Your response
(Annex B) noted that the issues raised were operational and contractual matters for POL in
which Government, as shareholder, had no role, that legal action against POL by JFSA
members was under way and that any meeting would have to take place within that context.
The JFSA letter of 25 February also enclosed (Annex D) a ’Subpostmaster Survey’
undertaken among 100 ‘serving’ subpostmasters which purports to demonstrate how
extensive the ‘losses’ from Horizon are.
Since your meeting was fixed there has been a significant development following a meeting
between POL and with a small group of MPs who have ex subpostmaster constituents
claiming to be victims of faults with Horizon. The group was led by James Arbuthnot and
included Oliver Letwin, Mike Wood, Annette Brooke, Tessa Munt, Andrew Bridgen + 3 MPs’
(Graham Stuart, Jonathan Djanogly, Edward Garnier) researchers. At the meeting on 18
June, POL agreed to commission an independent external review of a small number of
individual cases. We understand the specific cases for review have still to be agreed
Interestingly, there was virtually no overlap between the MPs who recently met POL and
those who had previously contacted Ed Davey or his predecessors in the previous
Government about Horizon.
A further development of which we have become aware since this meeting was fixed is that
Shoosmiths, the solicitors acting for a number JFSA ex-subpostmaster members in current
legal action against POL submitted written evidence (Annex C) to the BIS Select Committee,
purportedly in the context of Network Transformation, but which is wholly focused on Horizon
and related contractual and training issues.
Following previous lobbying of BERR/BIS ministers over an extended period, Alan Bates met
Ed Davey in autumn 2010. This was in the context of reports that Channel 4 were planning to
1
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
run a news item on the JFSA campaign and we recommended offering a meeting in
response to this to avoid potential publicity playing heavily on Government Minister refusing
to meet them in the circumstances. The JFSA had also mounted a substantial lobbying
campaign with MPs, several of whom (George Osborne, Priti Patel, Keith Simpson, Valerie
Vaz, Alun Michael) wrote to ED or tabled PQs on behalf of constituents who are members of
the JFSA.
Our objectives
It is prudent to be aware that letters before action against POL were issued in July/August
2011 in 5 cases (1 case since struck out by the Court on POL application). Though there has
been no further action by the acting solicitors Shoosmiths, since December 2011, there are
‘sub judice’ issues to consider.
co Emphasise that the issues raised by JFSA are operational and contractual matters for
POL.
co Reaffirm that, as the shareholder, Government has an arm’s length relationship with the
company and does have any role in its day to day operations.
o Note that POL has committed to engage a firm of forensic accountants (Second Sight led
by Ron Warmington to undertake an external independent review of a small number of
individual cases.
o Make clear that JFSA would need to contact POL for information on which, and how
many, cases will be reviewed.
o Demonstrate that you are prepared to hear the JFSA’s side of the story (JFSA have
claimed in the past that both POL and officials are covering up the problems with Horizon)
but make clear that it you are not in a position to offer substantive comment.
o Avoid giving any government commitment to setting up a wider independent/external
review of Horizon ahead of the outcome of the case reviews which POL is
commissioning.
JFSA objectives can be expected to include:
o To press for a wider Government-commissioned independent investigation into the
reliability and integrity of the Horizon system citing their ‘Subpostmaster Survey’ findings
and Andrew Bridgen MP (quoted as saying that to be beyond reproach the review should
be at arm’s length from POL and suggesting Cabinet Office should pay for it though now
understood to be more relaxed following assurances of Ron Warmington’s integrity).
o To seek to broaden the focus beyond Horizon ‘faults’ to include lack of adequate training
and helpline assistance as significant factors in the problems JFSA members
experienced.
o Topress for Govt to require a fundamental change in the way sub post offices are
managed by POL.
co Topress for a new and fairer contract between POL and subpostmasters which reflects
the use of IT systems in sub post offices.
o To press for an ombudsman or independent third party to hear appeals in cases of
disagreement between POL and subpostmasters.
o Topress for the establishment of a new representative body for subpostmasters as an
alternative to the ‘cosy’ relationship between POL and NFSP.
Issues or elephant traps
We recommend that you should be primarily in listening mode on the basis that any
statements or comments made at the meeting may potentially be subsequently quoted
in any legal process involving the JFSA or its members.
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
Avoid any commitment to adopting any of the JFSA’s objectives in the terms these are set.
Substantial changes to subpostmasters’ contracts and the branch operating model are a key
element of POL’s 2011-16 business strategy.
A full-scale independent review/audit of the integrity of Horizon would be premature ahead of
the results of the forensic accountants’ review now commissioned by POL. POL's view
continues to be that the system is fully robust and if there were systemic integrity issues, as
claimed by JFSA, there would have been a higher incidence than is claimed and there would
have been instances of Crown offices being affected as well as sub post offices as the
identical system is used.
Subpostmasters are contractually entitled to be accompanied at appeal hearings by an NFSP
representative or friend. Appeals are heard by a senior POL manager not previously
involved in the case and legal avenues are also available if the subpostmaster continues to
feel his contract has been wrongly terminated
The NFSP is a recognised trade union subject to all relevant legislation. Subpostmasters are
free to form any other association they wish and a subpostmasters’ branch has been set up
within the CWU (and attracted c 100 members).
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
~ Issues to raise and points to make
= Have noted the JFSA concerns as expressed in Alan Bates’
letters.
= Emphasise that the JFSA’s concerns relate to operational and
contractual matters.
= Government has an arm’s length relationship with POL and
does not have any role in the day to day operations of the
network.
= Understand that legal action against POL by a small number of
JFSA members is continuing. It will be for the relevant legal
process to decide on these cases and any remedy. In effect
these issues are ‘sub judice’ and I am not in a position to offer
any substantive comment on them.
= POL is commissioning forensic accountants to review a small
number of individual cases raised with them by a number of
JFSA’s concerns MPs.
and accusations
= POL continues to express full confidence in the integrity and
robustness of the Horizon system.
= BIS will monitor developments in these reviews.
= If pressed for further detail of which and how many cases
will be reviewed and its full scope and timing: JFSA will
need to contact POL for further detail and would suggest you
write to Mike Granville, POL’s Head of Stakeholder Relations at
mikegranville”
= If pressed on . Government commissioning/insisting ona
wider review in the light of JFSA subpostmaster survey:
We will consider in conjunction with POL whether any further
action or investigation is appropriate in the light of the findings
of the case reviews which it is commissioning.
JFSA background
The JFSA was established in 2009 ‘to counter this Government approved corporate
oppression [by POL]’ by Alan Bates, a former North Wales subpostmaster whose contract
was terminated at 3 months notice by POL in 2003 following a total break down in the
relationship. Its website claims around 100 members but details only 9 specific ‘case
studies’.
More recently in legal action against POL, the ‘charges’ against POL have been somewhat
broadened beyond the core Horizon claims to include inadequacies in the training provided
to new subpostmasters and in the helpline service and advice when financial discrepancies
arise and ‘onerous’ conditions in subpostmasters’ contracts which are not properly explained.
The Subpostmaster Survey conducted by JFSA earlier in the year seeks to extrapolate from
a small sample of (100) ‘serving’ subpostmasters within a ‘closed’ online forum. POL
considers the small sample to be self selected and notes that the survey asks questions only
about ‘losses’ and not about any ‘gains’ (POL branch records flag both) which may have
been experienced (1 respondent considers gains cancelled out losses). Despite the nature
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
of the questions and unsupported conclusions and extrapolations, the respondent’s
comments do include some that are positive.
The NFSP are dismissive of the JFSA’s claims about Horizon. They have suggested that if
there were systemic faults with Horizon as claimed, there would be incidents of ‘overages’ as
well as ‘shortages’. NFSP are also of the view that in some of these types of cases the
subpostmaster genuinely is not to blame but that a member of his/her family or other
employee is. Contractually however the subpostmaster is personally liable and aware of this
in signing their contract with POL.
Horizon system and POL process on accounting irregularities
Integrity of the Horizon system
The Horizon system has been in place for over 10 years. In a typical month the system
conducts around 80 million customer sessions with 230 million transactions across the
system. This is delivered through around 35,000 counter positions in around 12,000 Post
Offices which perform weekly and monthly accounting balances. Around £175m per day is
settled to over 700 client companies who use Post Office Ltd — a substantial flow of data to
and from organisations with regularly audited accounts. Over its extensive period of
operation the system has proved robust.
The cases identified by JFSA where there is some kind of allegation in respect of the system
are a miniscule proportion of the many millions of accounting events that subpostmasters
have done within the system. Furthermore around 15% of POL’s transactions have been
conducted over Crown Office terminals which run exactly the same system yet no issues
have been identified. If there were any systematic integrity issues within the system they
would have been evident over the past 10 years. NFSP and CWU continue to express full
confidence in the system.
The system was recently updated to ‘Horizon Online’ to achieve benefits in running costs and
change management. It was not because of any doubts about the robustness of the original
Horizon system.
The integrity of both Horizon and Horizon online is built on tamper proof logs, real time
back ups, and absence of ‘backdoors’ so that all data entry or acceptance is at branch level
and is tagged against the log-on ID of the user. Ownership of the accounting is therefore at
branch level and it is impossible to make changes to branch accounts remotely.
Horizon creates a separate audit file of every transaction done, recording every key stroke
made, with every record written to the log having a unique incrementing sequence number.
This is retained remotely for seven years and cannot be altered in any way. Therefore, in
any legal case relating to the system or allegations that data was missing, this audit log can
be produced to identify exactly what was recorded onto the system in the branch
concerned at the time concerned.
Subpostmasters are trained on the system with classroom and onsite tuition and helpline
support is also available. If an error occurs through a user mistake — there is a full system
in place for investigation and error resolution through the Helpline and error notice
processes. If there is a local disconnection of the system at a branch for any reason, IT
controls detect the power outages and raise recover alerts to the branch to check and
update the accounts.
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
As with any large organisation, POL has a range of mechanisms whereby accounting
processes and outputs are regularly reviewed to ensure ongoing accuracy.
Action taken with subpostmasters for accounting irregularities
POL has a regular system of auditing subpostmasters’ accounts. If irregularities are
discovered, then a formal, thorough investigation is triggered and, if necessary, action is
taken in accordance with the subpostmaster’s contract. Subpostmasters have the right of
representation throughout internal disciplinary procedures. If the case leads to summary
termination of contract, there is the right of appeal to an appeals manager who considers
the case. Again there is a right to representation through this process — this role is often
undertaken by the NFSP.
In certain cases, following consultation with legal advisors, POL may decide to pursue a
criminal case. To date, no court has ruled that there have been problems with the Horizon
system. As there is a legal contract between the subpostmaster and POL, if a
subpostmaster believes that his/her contract has been terminated inappropriately; he/she
can also refer the process into the legal system.
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
ANNEX A
PANY AQT VA Ene
Justice For Subpostmasters
I I
Mr NormanILamb MP
Minister forIPostal Affairs
Department for Business, Innovation
1 Victoria Street
LONDON ——
SW1H OET I
25" February 2012
Dear Mr Lamb
Tam yarting to you on behalf of the Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA), as I did with
the former Minister for Postal Affairs during May 2010.
On that and Subsequent occasions, I wrote to draw his attention to the plight of
subpostmasters at the hands of Post Office Limited. The reference number 213102 was given
to the correspondence and it will Provide an outline of our concerns, During November 2010 1
met with him at his office to raise many of the issues which have been causing devastation
and distress in the subpostmaster community. Following the meeting I understand he queried
a number of points with Post Office management and he seems to have taken them at their
word, I
I write to youl on this occasion to request a meeting to discuss this matter further with you,
As you will see from the Previous correspondence, solicitors are Now acting on behalf of a
number of victims of Post Office Limited, but the law moves slowly and in the meantime many
more subpostmnasters will suffer. Whilst JFSA very much reflects the views of those who have
fallen victim to the failures of the Post Office Limited Horizon system, I want to draw your
attention to the enclosed Survey which has just taken Place. As you will see, it has been
completed by berving subpostmasters, with their anonymity ensured to safeguard them from
Post Office reprisals. I am sure you will find the results disturbing and in total conflict with the
assurances given by Post Office Limited to your Predecessor and no doubt to yourself if you
were to raise our concerns with them.
Previously we bffered to work with your department to assist with uncovering this major
scandal, and IInow extend that offer to you. In the meantime should you require any further
information, please do not hesitate to ask.
J look forward to meeting with you in the near future.
~XeRsGhcerel — :
“hia
Chairman, Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
ANNEX B
Department for Business
Innovation & Skills
BIS
Norman Lamb MP
Minister for Employment Relations.
Consumer and Postal Attairs
Alan Bates. ‘Our ref: 286370
GRO “
¢© ppt 2012
Shes 14, thls
Thank you for your letters of 25 February and 20 March seeking a meeting
with me to discuss the concerns of the Justice for Sub Post Masters Alliance
(JFSA) about Post Office Ltd’s (POL) Horizon system and the survey of
serving subpostmasters recently conducted by your organisation. I apologise
for the delay in replying.
As you are aware from your contacts with my predecessor, Ed Davey, the
concerns raised by the JFSA relate to operational and contractual matters for
POL and, as the shareholder, Government has an arm’s length relationship
with the company and does have any role in its day to day operations. I also
understand that legal action against POL is under way in behalf of a number
of JFSA members.
Taking into account that any meeting would take place within this overall
uld ask you to contact my Diary Manager, Marzena Bujalska, on
tif you would still like to arrange a suitable date.
NOAMAN LAMB MP
Approved by the Minister and Signed in hig absence
1 Victoria Street, London SW1H OET
www.bis.gov.uk
Enquiries.
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
ANNEX C
Post Office Network Transformation
Written evidence submitted by Shoosmiths
SUMMARY OF ISSUES AFFECTING SUB-POSTMASTERS
1. Sub-post offices make up the vast majority of the Post Office Network. A sub-
postmaster or sub-postmistress ("SPM") is a self employed manager of a sub-post
office. They contract with Post Office Limited ("POL") to provide this service.
2. Access Legal from Shoosmiths, a national law firm, have been contacted by
almost 100 SPM’s who have suffered losses they cannot explain and have been
subject to disciplinary measures by POL. All are adamant that they or their staff have
not stolen any money. They claim that the Horizon system (by which we mean both
Horizon OnLine and its predecessor Horizon), an electronic point of sale and
accounting system POL require them to use, has caused the errors or not enabled
them to work out why the errors have appeared in the first place. They claim there
has been no real investigation by POL as to the cause of the losses that have
appeared — SPM’s are expected to pay it back regardless of how it was caused.
3. POL are adamant that the Horizon system has no faults.
4. Those SPMs have told us that:
HORIZON & THE BALANCING OF ACCOUNTS
5. All transactions in a sub-post office are processed through Horizon. At the end of
a trading period (a 4 or 5 week period) a SPM must balance his accounts and send
a declaration, plus any related receipts, cheques and cash to POL. The Horizon
system will produce figures based on the transactions that have taken place as to
what he cash and stock total at the sub post office should be. The SPM will then
have to count the stock and cash held to check it matches up.
6. When an SPM has completed a cash and stock check and discovers that there is
less cash or stock than Horizon believes there should be, the SPM must make good
this loss if it was caused by his/her error or that of an employee. It is also the case
that if the SPM has more cash than the Horizon system believes there should be,
the SPM is entitled to take the surplus money from the system. At the Crown offices,
the larger post offices run by POL, the managers do not have to repay these losses
as they are written off by POL — these losses are reportedly in the millions per year.
7. If the SPM is ever faced with a loss when balancing, the SPM is presented with
two options on the Horizon system: "Settle Centrally" or "Make Good Loss". Settle
centrally means that, according to POL, the loss can be investigated. However the
description of this from SPMs is that it just means the loss will be taken from the
SPMs remuneration either as a lump payment or in stages. If "make good loss" is
selected the SPM must make good the loss there and then out of their own pocket.
One of these options must be selected otherwise an SPM will not be able to trade
the following day.
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
8. Some of the SPMs have told Horizon that they have made good the losses when
in actual fact they haven't. The reasons they do this vary, but are typically related to
an inability to pay (often due to have made various repayments previously) and a
desire to keep the post office open for their community. When doing the above an
SPM is committing false accounting, albeit not to enrich themselves, or deny POL
what is rightfully theirs.
9. If a SPM, over a period of time, settles centrally lots of losses or appears to POL
to making good lots of losses they will be audited. If discrepancies are found at
audit, a SPM will be suspended and all the accounts papers at the post office will be
taken away for investigation. The SPM will not be allowed to go behind the post
office counters in their shop. The losses at this stage have been between £6,000.00
and £150,000.00.
10. The SPM then has, according to POL, an opportunity to explain the losses but
without access to the papers or the post office system the SPM’s ability to do this is
extremely limited. Typically the SPM’s contract will be terminated and POL will
request that any losses are repaid under the Contract.
11. POL will ask an SPM to repay all losses that occur and as such there appears no
distinction between losses that may be the fault of the SPM and those which may
have been caused by something else. SPMs have no opportunity to investigate the
reason for the loss, nor do POL seem inclined to do so either. It is far from clear
whether when there is a loss in a sub post office that POL have actually lost any
money.
12. If the loss is not repaid POL will prosecute the SPM for false accounting. SPMs
are typically advised by their legal advisors to plead guilty to false accounting, as in
the above circumstances they will have committed it. Many will be charged with theft
or fraud but these charges are typically dropped in these circumstances. SPMs have
been imprisoned as a result of convictions for false accounting.
OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES.
13. Interview — At interview for the position of SPM most are not questioned about
their accounting or computer literacy skills. Very few of the SPM’s had any
experience or qualifications in accounting before taking on the role of SPM, although
even those with accounting qualifications have struggled with Horizon. The SPMs
are then expected to take over the full accounting and balancing procedures upon
their appointment as SPM without even basic knowledge of the same.
14. Contract — The contract with POL is a standard form 100 page contract that was
drawn up in 1994 when a paper based accounting system, with a full paper audit
trail, was used. SPM’s are routinely not provided with this contract for services until
they have purchased the sub-post office and completed the interview and training
process. The SPMs are typically not made aware of the onerous sections of the
contract, specifically those sections relating to repayment of losses, termination of
the contract and lack of compensation for loss of office.
15. Training — POL provide training for SPMs on how to use the Horizon system
which is undertaken prior to an SPM commencing their contract. This tends to vary
between 2 days and two weeks. The training typically focuses on sales technique
with very little focus on accounting skills. When an SPM starts they are typically
10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
accompanied by a trainer for their first week who shows them how to use the
system, in their own post office. The majority of SPM’s believe that their training was
not adequate, in particular in relation to the accounting and balancing procedures
and what to do if a loss occurs. Requests for further training are denied and there is
no possibility for a SPM to obtain further training on the Horizon system without it
being provided by POL. The support provided by the Helpline POL operate to assist
SPMs is reported to be inadequate.
16. Faults with Horizon — It appears that there are numerous ways in which these
losses could have occurred, whether it is as a result of system errors, human errors
when entering data, faults with cross system communication or electrical faults. The
technical reasons why the errors are occurring is not the main issue that needs to be
addressed, instead it is that the Horizon system does not allow SPMs to find where
an error has occurred and rectify before having to repay losses.
17. National Federation of Sub-Postmasters — The NFSP are the trade association
for SPM’s. They negotiate with POL on behalf of SPM’s and provide representation
at disciplinary meetings. They state publicly that there are no issues with Horizon.
Many SPMs report that they receive no useful assistance from the NFSP when they
have accounting difficulties. The Communications Workers Union, the relevant union
for POL employees, have recently set up a branch to assist and represent SPM’s.
This has been set up by former executive members of the NFSP. Many SPMs are
now seeking assistance from the CWU as opposed to the NFSP.
5 May 2012
©Parliamentary copyright
Prepared 7th June 2012
1
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
— POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
RESTRICTED -— PO! ANNEX D
ll ats:-a-7-,/,7,/,££:£:::¢......)
Subpostmaster Survey
Post Office Limited has continually refused to acknowledge that any problems
subpostmasters have experienced have ever been the fault of the POL Horizon
computer system. Furthermore POL has refused to allow access to or answer
questions about the accuracy of the system to substantiate their claim. So
during February 2012, a short survey was undertaken of serving
subpostmasters in order to gai luge the extent of the losses from Post Office
Limited’s Horizon system.
The survey's existence was made known through a closed forum for
subpostrhasters and remained online for 8 days. To encourage frank and
honest ahswers from a cross section of subpostmasters, no information was
requested that would identify those responding.
The survey used the free online version of SurveyMonkey, which only allows
for 100 responses but does not include any analysis tools, The information
submitted from all the responses was entered into an Excel spreadsheet which
was thenlused to generate the results. The majority of the survey forms were
fully completed, but occasionally a person did not complete every question. In
such instances the dataset was amended to reflect the actual number of
responses to that question.
The answers provided made it possible to establish how wide ranging the
extent of the annual losses from the Horizon system probably are, as well as
suggesting what is the order of cost to each subpostmaster. Of particular
concern is the response to the first question, which has provided a revelation
as to just how serious the problem really is, and how well POL is managing to
hide the facts from being known.
‘SPMR SurveyI JFSA February 2012 Page 1 of 10
12
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
Survey Results
Q- Dolyou have regular balance shortages that you have to put
money in to address?
Had.
Losses
77% No Losses
23%
When this information is combined with the answer to:-
Q.- If YES, what have you had to add over the last 12 months?
it suggests that the average office loss during the last 12 months was in the
region of £1200.
Therefore to estimate the income 8ained by Horizon through system declared
losses, the following formula can be applied:-
number of offices using Horizon X 1200 X 0. 77
re, this calculation can offer a total amount gained from Horizon
declared losses since its inception by replacing each of the years’ number of
offices using Horizon, with the appropriate number since the initial launch of
the system to 18,000 offices.
Then by using the declared Average size of losses during
stated logs figures it was the last 12 months
found that the majority of £1000 -. Over
losses were up to £500, but £5000 £5000
over a third of offices had 26% 8%
suffered Ibsses in the £000’s
during the past 12 months. £500 0 - £500
£1000.
29%
37%
JFSA February 2012 Page 2 of 10
13
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
To ascertain as to whether there was any obvious trend in the way these
losses Were occurring due to the way an office operated, the following
question was asked:-
Q- Dolyou use individual till balancing or office balancing?
The ‘Office’ balancing is often perceived as being the easier to Operate, as
the stock is generally pooled, but it is thought to be more susceptible to
error because of the pooling. This was clearly the most common balance in
use.
Type of Balance Used
Individual
19%
Office
81%.
Yet when comparing the offices by type of balance, with those offices that
have stated losses during the last 12 months, this was not found to be the
case.
‘Office’ Balance with Losses during f .
the last 12 months ‘individual’ Unit Balance
Losses
Losses
100%
No Losses
So by applying the results of these losses by type, to the question:-
Q- How many serving positions does your office have?
It became clear that of those undertaking ‘Individual’ balances and stating that
they had suffered losses during the last 12 months, 50% were single terminal
offices.
‘SPMR Survey JFSA February 2012 Page 3 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
14
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
What does this survey really show?
dust from this random sample it is abundantly clear that the majority of
subpostoffices using Horizon are suffering losses. Problems with Horizon are
Not the jexception, they are the norm.
Could these problems be due to lack of Operator skill?
The experience of operating Horizon ‘at the front end’ is in abundance as the
response to the following question showed.
Q- How many years have you been using Horizon?
Years experience of using Horizon
40% 60%
Have been ‘On average
using Horizon have used
since it t Horizon for 6
was firs
ars
introduced
By asking a further question of those who had used other methods before
Horizon was installed, the result is a damning indictment of a system meant to
improve @ business. No truly commercial business would find such results
acceptable, but Horizon being a government IT Project has gone the way of so
many others i.e. costing billions and not fit for purpose.
Q- If you were a serving postmaster before Horizon, have balancing
problems become more problematic since Horizon or has Horizon
made balancing simpler and more accurate?
Use of Horizon
More
Problematic Simpler
61%. 39%
SPMR Survey, JFSA February 2012 Page 4 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
15
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
Postmaster’s Comments
Further to the survey, a box was added that would afford any of those who had
experience prior to Horizon, the Opportunity to add a short comment. A
number did, and all of those comments are included below,
For information, contained within these comments are references to HOL
which stands or Horizon Online, the latest version of Horizon rolled out over
the last 18 months. The ‘Richard Jackson’ comment refers to a trade name of a
standalone pc software package that subpostmasters could buy privately to
produce POL balance returns prior to Horizon. Another similar product from
that period was known as Capture, and POL would accept documentation from
either of these systems,
“You would think that over the years, as you get more experienced,
when only you and your wife operate the counters, that more often
than not you would balance to a few pence on a daily basis. This
NEVER happens. What we need to have is a forensic audit - with
CCTV recordings of all transactions, HOL screens and payment and
change. Over a day, on a multiple counter system, run by a
professipnal audit team. Happy to eat my hat if they don't find
anything untoward.”
“Horizon lacks accounting reports”
“Although I haven't had regular problems ! have an instance ( of
which I have full documentation ) where Horizon ‘lost' several
postage transactions, all were either RSF or Int! SF and horizon
printed labels and individual proof of, posting but did not add them
SPMR Survey JFSA February 2012 Page 5 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
16
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
into the overall total. Only picked up when ISF's didn't show on the
Priority items postage printout.”
“We haven't had any noticeable problems since the arrival of Horizon
OnlineIbut under the old Horizon system we experienced problems
whereby we would often encounter £100 shortages. ! was able to rule
out staff dishonesty as this was a problem that occurred on more
than one occasion on days when staff were absent or on holiday. We
also had two occasions where there were £1,000 gains that have
never Been explained. Fortunately for us the two £1,000 gains
probably covered the many £100 shortages. As with any computer
system I believe that Horizon is NOT infallible as POL tend to suggest,
nor is it particularly robust as has been demonstrated by the more
recent outages.”
“tts quitker, but not more accurate.”
“I canndt honestly say whether my regular smallish shortages are due
to a technical/accounting error within Horizon or the design of
Horizon'making it too easy for user errors to be made without logical
warnings at the time of entry or being able to trace them
afterwatds.”
“I've had Horizon ever since being here but went to HOL in July 2010
and ever since had unexplained losses. Could it ‘just be me? Maybe.
Could it be HOL? Maybe. Can it be proved that there's problems with
SPMR Survey JFSA February 2012 Page 6 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
17
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
HOL? Probably not. Once again, we seem to bear the brunt of
issues.,....
“I have not had problems personally with Horizon so far.”
“Assuming we are talking about Horizon Online, then the balance
procedure is more efficient and quicker. The differences that other
Postmasters seem to have could be attributed to their lack of
understanding of the system. The Helpdesk has, in my experience,
always been helpful. Perhaps it's the way people ask the
questions!!!”
“I have argued and stated the system has a problem. All I get is if 1
don't pay the short fall they will take it from my remuneration. Which
they have on several occasions. I have incident that showed the
system equipment to faulty and kept all the relevant information. My
base unit was changed and shown to be faulty and yet they still
charged me approx £1000 which I refused to pay and it was removed
from my remuneration. I still have everything relating to this and the
ref No from POL if it is any help.”
“I have serious doubts about the accuracy of the system. My staff feel
the same way. Overnight and over weekend changes seem to occur. I
hate theIway in which the Paystation accounting works - you never
know where you are and there is no way of checking what has gone
through.”
SPMR Survey, JFSA February 2012 Page 7 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
18
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
“Cancellations/reversals procedure far too difficult and irregular as is
the totalling procedure therefore difficult to keep track of the way the
system is working and to have confidence in the end result,”
“Since becoming a SPMR in 1995 POL's policy from a manual balance
to an electronic balancing format has deteriorated. There is little to
no controls when losses occur ‘for the SPMR to investigate and even
when rio material loss is established POL still charge the SPMR for
what they allege is a loss.”
“ find that balancing is quicker and on the whole accurate but what I
don't like is that during the week a Shortage occurs which cannot be
explained but can disappear when balancing on Wednesday. The
access of daily transactions doesn't allow you to look over everything
that you do every day.”
“Used both Richard Jackson and the POL version to balance pre-
horizon. I Both software packages allowed you to ‘see’ where any
errors were and make the necessary adjustments. Any adjustments
made were carried through to a new balance ‘figure so the effect of
any adjustment was immediately available. You had control of the
whole process unlike Horizon which largely functions as a Black Box.
You do get used to Horizon but are never in control.”
“Horizont is a strange system as there appears to be no way that you
can find errors for missing amounts of cash. I have tried to do cash
declarations on an hourly basis and try to balance this against
‘SPMR Survey, JFSA February 2012 Page 8 of 10
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
19
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
transactions but this has proved to be a difficult exercise. I truly
believe that there is a fundamental problem with Horizon.”
“Balancing is quicker, but if there is a problem there is very little you
can do\about it because of lack of evidence in paper form or on the
system itself. It seems worrying that the transaction log facility only
enables you to track transactions that have taken place in the last
two months. I recently had a query from a customer about a
transaction done in November 2011 and the system would not allow
me to go that far back.”
“Started in 1995.Couldn't believe the archaic ‘big books’, got Capture
and never regretted it, we like Horizon but cannot understand it and
think same more training is warranted. And pigs might fly!”
“Get me out of this insanity.”
“The situation has gone so serious since HOL introduction with losses
escalating that I am now selling up hoping to escape before
bankrupted by POL.”
‘SPMR Survey JFSA February 2012 Page 9 of 10
20
RESTRICTED — POLICY AND COMMERCIAL
in Contlusion
Whatever is the cause of all the problems with Horizon, whether it is the bugs
in the system, the lack of training and support, the failure of management to
be able to deal with these issues, the unwillingness of government to face its
responsibilities or a combination of all. There is little doubt that at some level
POL is fully aware of the extent of the issue, yet has taken the decision to stand
firmly behind their continual denial that a single problem has ever occurred
with Horizon.
If nothing else, this snapshot survey has highlighted the need for others to
seriously question the standard one line response from POL that ‘Horizon is
robust’, It has to be asked why POL or government has never ever
commissioned an independent survey of subpostmasters’ views of Horizon
after all these years of the system in operation. It could be conducted with
anonymity assured by an external organization, and if POL are so convinced
about the ‘robustness’, be used to support their claims.
SPMR Surv JFSA February 2012 Page 10 of 10
ey
UKGI00000065
UKGI00000065
21