WBON0000889
WBON0000889
Bond Dickingow
Initial Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme
Issues analysis
Case Ref M113 Applicant Doreen McQuilliam
BD Lawyer I Andy Pheasant Date of analysis I 24/07/2014
Key Issue
In Old Colwyn branch there was a loss of £40,000. The Applicant says that this was caused by:
i. Problems associated with the ATM at the branch;
ii. Horizon terminal freezing and needing to be recalibrated;
iii. Lack of training;
iv. Inadequate support.
Is the Applicant correct or, if not, what was the cause of the loss?
Issues to investigate
Issue raised Suggested points to investigate
ATM The Applicant states that problems began to occur
following the installation of an ATM at the branch in or
around June/July 2007. They training was inadequate
and there were problems with rejected notes.
- Who installed the ATM?
- What training was provided?
- Who provided the training?
- Who is responsible for providing further training in
relation to the use of the ATM? (ie is it Post Office
or the ATM operator)
- Were there any further training requests in
relation to the use and operation of the ATM?
- The training was provided to the Applicant's
husband as she was on relief work. Should the
training have been provided to the Applicant's
husband? Should training have also been
provided to the Applicant directly?
- What calls to the Helpline were made concerning
the ATM?
- What advice was provided by Bank of Ireland?
- What problems were reported to Post Office?
- What was the response?
- Were any engineers instructed to inspect the
ATM? If not, why?
The Applicant highlights that there were a large amount of
rejected notes (£35,000).
- Please explain why notes are rejected.
- Why was there such a large value of rejected
notes?
- What was the cause of this problem?
- Were Post Office made aware of the large
number of rejected notes?
The Applicant admits to using these rejected notes within
4A_29125519_1 1
WBD_000759.000001
WBONO000889
WBON0000889
Bond Dickingow
the ATM and within the branch when cash supplies were
low.
- Is the Applicant permitted to do this?
- What is the correct procedure for dealing with
rejected notes?
- How would the Applicant have been aware of the
correct procedure?
- Were Post Office aware that the Applicant (or her
husband) were going to do this?
- What calls were made to the Helpline in relation to
the use of rejected notes? In particular, were any
calls made in October 2008 (including calls
relating to cash shortages)?
General queries / areas to consider.
- The Applicant says that up to £60,000 cash was
removed from the ATM within a few days. Is this
considered to be a reasonable amount to be
removed in this time period?
- Was there the possibility of theft taking place from
the ATM? Please consult with the securities team
about a known engineer who had been
committing thefts.
2 Inadequate cash supplies The Applicant says that they requested cash on a regular
basis.
- How often was the branch supplied with cash?
- What amounts were these?
- Was the branch considered to have a high need
for cash?
- Did the Applicant make request for more cash?
- What is the procedure for requesting more or
increasing the regular cash deliveries?
- Could the lack of cash deliveries have caused the
loss?
3 Lack of training The Applicant makes a general allegation that the training
was inadequate.
- Is the Applicant's training record available?
- What training did the Applicant receive?
- Was this in accordance with Post Office
requirements and guidelines?
- What requests were made for additional training?
4 Inadequate support The Applicant makes general references to contacting the
Helpline for assistance.
- What calls were made to the Helpline?
- What did they relate to?
- What advice was provided in relation to the ATM;
rejected notes; requests for additional cash; and
foreign currency?
- Was advice consistent with Post Office policy and
procedures?
- If calls were frequent could Post Office have
intervened to assist at an earlier stage?
- Was there any contact with the Applicant's
regional manager or other managerial support?
4A_29125519_1 2
WBD_000759.000002
WBONO000889
WBON0000889
Bond Dickingow
5 Sharing passwords The Applicant says that Post Office claim other people
used the Applicant's password.
- What is Post Office policy on password sharing?
- Howis this made clear or communicated to
subpostmasters?
- Were all of the staff working at the branch
approved and authorised to be working in the
branch?
- Did any of them have their own user codes and
passwords?
- Did this factor in a decision to terminate the
Applicant's contract?
- Is there any evidence to show Post Office were
aware this was happening?
6 Foreign Currency issues The Applicant refers to numerous occasions when
Horizon recorded foreign currency incorrectly.
- Is there any record of this occurring?
- Was this reported to the Post Office by the
Applicant?
- Could this have caused a loss?
7 Hardware problems / Horizon breaking The Applicant makes reference to Horizon terminals
down freezing and breaking down.
- What records are there of problems with the
terminal?
- What calls were made to the Helpline in relation to
hardware problems?
- Did this result in any engineers having to attend?
- If yes, what was the outcome?
- Were repairs undertaken to any other hardware?
- Could the problem with the terminal have caused
the loss?
8 Losses and audit In 2008 there was an audit of the branch which showed a
shortfall of £40,000.
- Why was the decision taken to audit the branch?
- The Applicant says the loss was initially £48,000
but this was reduced to £40,000. What is the
explanation for this reduction?
- What did the losses relate to?
- What do you consider was the cause of the loss?
- What Transaction Corrections were issued?
- Were there any losses connected to the Applicant
or the Post Offices in which she worked prior to
2000.
- Was the Applicant's long service with the Post
Office and the fact that she had been used as a
relief/emergency cover taken into account during
the investigation process?
- Were there any discrepancies associated with the
Applicant's Conway Road branch? Specifically,
any similarities with the losses suffered at the Old
Colwyn branch?
9 Helen Rose Report The Applicant makes reference to the Helen Rose Report.
The report does not appear to be relevant to the
Applicant's case and has been included as a standard
request. In light of this we would suggest not responding
to the request and dealing with the substantive issues.
4A_29125519_1 3
WBD_000759.000003
WBON0000889
WBON0000889
Bond Dickingow
4A_29125519_1 4
WBD_000759.000004