WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Witness Name: Kevin Gilliland
Statement No: WITN10040100
Dated: 15 November 2024
POST OFFICE HORIZON IT INQUIRY
FIRST WITNESS STATEMENT OF KEVIN GILLILAND
I, Kevin Gilliland, will say as follows:
1. I make this statement in response to a Request for Information pursuant to
Rule 9 of the Inquiry Rules 2006, regarding matters within Phases 5 and 6 of
the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, dated 2 October 2024.
2. Iam truly shocked by what has come out of the Inquiry and have spent a long
time reflecting on what Sub Postmasters (“SPMs’”) had to endure. I can truly
say that I am horrified. I worked for the Post Office for most of my working life
and I was proud to work for such a trusted brand, with my father having been
a postman. With what has come out of the Inquiry, I now feel ashamed to
have been part of a business where so many lives were ruined. I hope that my
statement goes some way in providing answers.
Page 1 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
3. I can confirm that I have had the legal assistance of Ashfords LLP in drafting
this statement.
BACKGROUND
4. I left school with 5 O Levels and joined Post Office Ltd (“POL”) in 1979, where
I had an extensive career until 2016. I cannot recall the exact dates that I held
each role at POL, or the precise role titles, but from memory these roles were
as follows:
a. 1979 — 1982: Counter Clerk - I worked as a Postal Office Counter
Clerk at the Crown Post Office in Northampton.
b. 1982 —- 1844: Remittance Unit Postal Officer — I worked in a
remittance unit, checking and preparing cash and stock remittances
received from, and dispatched to, post offices.
c. 1984-1985: Temporary Revenue Billing Task Force Manager — At
this time, all Royal Mail business customers were billed manually. My
role involved going around head post offices to enter the manual
records of the business customers and setting them up on the
computer so that they could get automated bills.
d. 1985 — 1986: Assistant Regional Cash Manager — I was responsible
for collating regional overnight cash holding reports and producing
Management Information Reports so that cash in Post Offices was
managed and controlled.
Page 2 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
e. 1986 — 1987: District Customer Services Manager — I was
responsible for customer complaint handling and the monitoring and
production of the region’s service delivery key performance indicators.
f. 1987 — 1993: Client Services Manager — I was responsible for
introducing new products and changes to products in the Post Office
network working with the Royal Mail, Parcelforce and Bill Payment
account management teams.
g. 1993 - 1997: BT Account Manager — I was responsible for the
contract and relationship with British Telecom for bill payments and
sale and acceptance of savings stamps at Post Offices.
h. 1997 — 1998: Marketing and Partnership Development Manager,
Bill Payments — This role was established to defend POLs market
share in the bill payments market in light of rival competitive retail
networks being established. I had responsibility for marketing and
advertising campaigns and sales and awareness training for Post
Offices.
i. 1998 — 1999: Head of Network Banking — My primary role was to look
at the potential implications and strategy development if government
moved benefit payments from being paid through the Post Office, to
paying them direct to bank accounts, which it subsequently did.
j. 1999 - 2000: Head of Benefits Market — I was responsible for
account managing the Government Departments responsible for
benefits payments, for example the Department of Work and Pensions.
k. 2000 - 2004: Head of Business Requirements / Business Architect
— I was responsible for the development and implementation of Post
Page 3 of 109
42349433.1
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Office Card Account (“POCA”) and the associated contract with the
relevant Government Departments for the provision of this service.
2004 — 2006: Head of Franchise Relationships — This was my first
network facing role as previous roles were client facing. I was
responsible for the account management of the National Federation of
SPMs (“NFSP”), including annual remuneration negotiations and the
management of SPM contract policy.
. 2006 — 2007: General Manager Multiples — Multiples are large chains
who run Post Offices, such as Co-Op and One Stop. I was responsible
for the account management and sales performance of these partners
and had a team of Field Managers who were responsible for sales
performance for this part of the network.
. 2007 — 2009: Head of Agency Development — I was responsible for
developing strategic relationships with existing and potential network
partners, including the NFSP, Multiples and retail trade organisations. I
was also responsible for SPM remuneration and contract policy as well
as the implementation and development of business tool and sales
training to support SPMs grow and defend their business.
. 2009 — November 2010: General Manager Commercial Agency /
Agency Sales Programme Director — I originally went into this role as
General Manager Commercial Agency but shortly after I took on the
role, Alan Cook (Managing Director at the time) gave me the objective
of restructuring the Agency Business Development managers to deliver
a savings target of £4 million. This changed the nature of my role and
my job title changed with it, to become Agency Sales Programme
Page 4 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Director. I originally applied for the role to gain experience of running a
large network field team but the change in the focus of the role meant
that this development was limited.
. November 2010 — 2016: Network and Sales Director — I was
responsible for running the day to day operations of the network across
11,500 branches. However, it was the Network and Crown
Transformation programmes that took up the majority of my time and
attention. I was also given responsibility for the supply chain (the cash
logistics operation) and Property from around 2012 — 2015 when Mike
Young (Chief Operating Officer) left POL. When Pauline Holroyd (HR
Director) left in 2012, responsibility for the Communication Workers
Union (“CWU”), Communication Managers’ Association / Unite was
transferred to me (in addition to my responsibility of the NFSP). In 2014
responsibility for these relationships was transferred back to HR
(including the NFSP) when Neil Hayward (the new HR Director) joined
POL. In 2015, Supply Chain and property were transferred from me to
Al Cameron (the incoming Chief Financial Officer).
. 2016 - 2017: Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) Retail — I was
responsible for product development, delivery and client account
management for Royal Mail, Government services, payment services,
retail and lottery. I was also responsible for the Network and Crown
Transformation programmes, the network development programme,
NFSP, the Crown network and line management and, agency sales
field support. This role came about a result of a reorganisation whereby
my previous role no longer existed and I stepped into the position until
Page 5 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
a suitable external replacement with retail experience could be
recruited. This happened in December 2017 at which point I was put on
gardening leave until June 2018 when I left POL.
5. Since leaving POL, I have carried out two pieces of consultancy work and a
Non Executive Director role. I fully retired in 2022.
THE HORIZON IT SYSTEM
6. When the Horizon IT System (“Horizon”) was first introduced to the business
in 1999, I was working in a Commercial Business Unit as Head of Benefits
Market, responsible for the production development and introduction of Post
Office Card Account (“POCA”). I can recall that POCA utilized the Horizon
system with pin pads being rolled out as a key component of POCA and
therefore my first experience with Horizon was on a practical level when trying
to introduce POCA.
7. All Head Office Managers, including myself, were required to work on the
counters during the Christmas period to help with the Christmas pressure. In
order to carry out this role, I received training on how to use Horizon, which
would have been either a half or a full day, delivered from a classroom. The
training was specifically delivered for people assisting with the Christmas
pressure and so it would not cover the full use of Horizon, but on how to
conduct the most common and standard transactions. For example, I think
that the training included daily individual cash and stock check, but not whole
Page 6 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
office balancing procedures. Should a more complicated transaction arise
during our shift, we would defer to the more experienced staff. I think that I
would also have received refresher training but I cannot recall when or how
often this would have been.
8. The first time I became aware of any bugs in Horizon was when two bugs
were reported in the Second Sight (“SS”) report in July 2013, POL00099063.
However, I remember being reassured that these had not caused any
detriment to any SPM as the bugs had been identified and corrected and I
was told that no SPM was out of pocket. I cannot remember who told me this
but I think that it was likely to have been delivered in an update at an
Executive Committee (“ExCo”) meeting.
9. Prior to this, I knew that Horizon went down from time to time and when I was
Network and Sales Director, I would receive complaints from SPMs, which I
have discussed in further detail below. However, these complaints never
appeared to be to do with something fundamentally wrong with the system,
but due to an individual issue, such as a faulty lead, as shown in
POL00145179 (email chain dated 4 July 2013), or a telecoms issue, as
shown in POL00105625 (email chain dated 11 December 2012). I have
discussed these documents in further detail below.
10. My understanding was that there would always be things that would go wrong
with computer systems but that these problems were minor (although could
Page 7 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
be very frustrating to the SPM) and would always be picked up and rectified
by the IT team.
11. It was only after I left POL, when I saw the High Court judgment and the
subsequent findings from the Inquiry that I became aware of the lack of
integrity of Horizon. These findings have completely shocked me as although I
was aware of cases where SPMs were attributing losses to Horizon issues, I
was always reassured that Horizon was robust, with this reassurance
reinforced by the fact the issue was being looked at by a dedicated team,
including IT and legal experts.
12. The Inquiry have asked me to lay out my understanding of ARQ data. It is not
a term that I was familiar with and from memory, the only time that I would
have had experience of it would have been in the Ferndown case (discussed
in further detail below). Here, I was shown by Helen Rose how data from
Fujitsu could highlight what happened in a branch, including the time and date
that transactions took place. It was my understanding (and still is my
understanding) that ARQ data is keystroke data which shows every entry that
someone has made into Horizon and that this data could be used to look at
the history of all transactions, stock and cash and identify each interaction
with the system by user and stock unit. To the best of my knowledge, the only
time this term came up was in the Ferndown case meeting when Helen Rose
walked us through the relevant branch data to show us what transactions had
taken place in that particular branch and who had conducted them.
Page 8 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
13. Throughout my time at POL it was my understanding that there could be no
remote access by Fujitsu employees to alter transaction data or data in
branch accounts without the knowledge or consent of SPMs.
14. I knew that transaction corrections could be made by the central POL team in
the Chesterfield office but that SPMs were always aware when these were
issued as they had to accept them.
15. This message is in line with POL00294728, an email from Tracy Marshall to
myself, Angela Van Den Bogerd and Helen Rose in the late afternoon of 5
January 2011 which states that:
“Fujitsu can remotely access systems [but] the authority process required and
the audit process are robust enough to prevent this activity from being
undertaken fraudulently...so although changes could be made remotely, they
would be spotted and the person making the change would be identified.”
16. Similarly, the briefing note for the meeting, POL00142625, states
“Any technical changes by Fujitsu that impact the system have to go through
clearance processes which would prevent any amendment to existing data”
17. Itis clear that the documents state that Fujitsu did have access but that there
were strong controls in place which prevented Fujitsu from remotely
Page 9 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
accessing and amending any transaction data. This is not in line with my
recollection on remote access prior to these documents being disclosed.
From my recollection, until 2016 I believed that Fujitsu did not have any
access. This changed around 2016 when Jane MacLeod informed ExCo that
Fujitsu did have access, but that this was controlled. I can recall myself and
others being shocked at this change in message and it is clear to me now that
the information provided on remote access in January 2011 (referred to in the
paragraphs above) did not register with me. I am confident that if it had, I
would have questioned the message that Fujitsu did not have any remote
access and this would have been investigated straight away as I understood it
was in 2016.
18. Since leaving the business and following the findings of the Inquiry I now
know that Fujitsu did in fact have uncontrolled remote access to Horizon. At
no point during my time within the business did I ever know this.
19. The Inquiry have asked me about POL00041564 which is a Computer Weekly
article entitled ‘Bankruptcy, prosecution and disrupted livelihoods —
Postmasters tell their story’. The article is dated 11 May 2009 which was
before my time as an executive team member of POL and I was not party to
any discussions about it. Indeed, I cannot remember seeing it or even hearing
about it at the time of its publication and I think that the first time I read it was
when it was provided to me in my disclosure pack by the Inquiry.
Page 10 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
20. The Inquiry have also asked me about POL00026572, which is a report
written by Rod Ismay, Head of Product and Branch Accounting entitled
‘Horizon — Responses to Challenges Regarding Systems Integrity’ dated 2
August 2010. Again, this was before my time on the executive team and I am
not copied in as an original recipient of the report. Whilst I cannot remember if
I ever read the report, or my original reaction to it, I believe that if I did it would
have strengthened my confidence in the Horizon system as it makes clear
that “Horizon is robust”.
OPERATION OF POL AND HORIZON
21. I have been asked to summarise the nature and extent of my involvement
with, or oversight of, POL’s provision of advice and assistance to SPMs in
respect of disputed shortfalls in branch accounts. In answering the Inquiry’s
questions on this topic I have reviewed the documents listed below, which
date from 2004 — 2013. Please see the section ‘POL’s response to complaints
from 2014 onwards’ for concerns with Horizon that were dealt with after this
date.
a. POL00444612 (Email chain dated 29 July 2004)
b. POL00363086 (Email chain from Victoria Noble to me on 4 July 2005)
c. POL00326693 (Email chain dated 25 July 2005)
d. POL00015020 (Email from Maureen Moors to me dated 20 May 2010)
e. POL00403835 (Post Office Ltd Internal Review of Agents Processes in
Managing Suspected Financial Irregularities, dated 17 January 2011)
Page 11 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
f. POL00434015 (Email from Christina Wood to me on 25 February
2011)
g. POL00405605 (Email chain dated 17 May 2011)
h. POL00338648 (Email chain dated 20 February 2012)
i. POL00105625 (Email chain dated 11 December 2012)
j. POL00184326 (email chain dated 13 December 2012) and attachment
POL00184327 (letter from Ronnie Campbell MP to NFSP dated 6
December 2012)
k. POL00316792 (Email from Jane Hill dated 5 June 2013)
I. POL00145179 (email chain between myself, branch investigator and
others, dated 4 July 2013)
m. POL00099179 (Email chain between SPM David Woodrow, Paula
Vennells, myself and others, dated 12 July 2013)
n. POL00298435 (Emails between SPM Pervez Nakvi, dated 21 August
2013)
22. Prior to my role as Network and Sales Director (from November 2010) I only
had very peripheral involvement with concerns raised about Horizon, with the
documents listed above only showing my involvement on three occasions.
23. The first of these, POL00444612 shows me copied into an email chain dated
29 July 2004. I cannot recall this email chain but reading it now, it appears
that Mandy Talbot (Royal Mail Group Legal), has asked John Legg (Agency
Contract Manager) to suggest someone who is able to produce a statement
compiling a list of the types of goods and services supplied by SPMs. John
Page 12 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
suggests to Mandy that the people best placed to supply this information
would be someone from the retail line or audit manager. However, he states
that he is about to go an annual leave for two weeks and suggests a number
of people who may be able to help in his absence including Chris Howard
(Agency Pay Manager). I assume that he has copied me in because at the
time I was Chris and John’s line manager. Neither John, Chris or I were part
of the retail line or audit teams. I do not recall what happened following this
email chain.
24. The second of these, POL00363086, is an email chain from Victoria Noble
(Head of Product and Branch Accounting), forwarding information on what
was known as the ’42 day issue’. The email explains that this is an issue
where the transaction correction process means that instead of an error
notice, a branch will receive an electronic transaction correction at the branch
which the SPM will be expected to ‘action’ before they are able to roll over the
monthly branch trading. The SPM will be given a number of options and if
they do not action any of these options, then they cannot roll into the next
period. As Horizon only holds data for 42 days, this means that there is a
“slight risk” that the SPM may find Horizon becoming unstable and unable to
maintain service (hence the 42 day issue). I am copied in because a meeting
was going to be held with the NFSP about this issue and, at the time, I was
responsible for the relationship with the NFSP and so would have facilitated,
although not necessarily attended, this meeting. I believe the meeting would
have been led by Victoria Noble. I also had responsibility for the NFSP as
Network and Sales Director and so from time to time the NFSP would bring
Page 13 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
relevant documentation and correspondence on Horizon to my attention for
information or action as seen in POL00184326 (email chain dated 13
December 2013) and attachment POL00184327 (letter from Ronnie Campbell
MP to NFSP).
25. POL00326693 is an email chain dated 25 July 2005 where my advice is
sought as to the contractual arrangements around what happens if a branch
fails to roll branch trading at the appropriate time. At this time, I was Head of
Franchise Relationships and had responsibility for SPM contracts. The
contracts were already in place, but my role was to advise on what was
contained in them from a business point of view. This question was about the
Franchise Agreement with my advice sought as to what the contract said
about SPM responsibilities in respect of disputed shortfalls. I cannot recall this
discussion beyond what is contained in this email chain.
26. When I became Network and Sales Director I started to be more involved with
concerns that were raised about Horizon although I recall that from around
2010 onwards, when the pre-litigation started, there was a process in place to
centralise all Horizon-related concerns, which were dealt with by Group Legal,
POL Legal and subsequently Project Sparrow and the dedicated teams that
were set up to investigate and review cases.
27. Although I was not aware of all concerns raised, I would be informed of high
value / high profile concerns. For example, I was notified when an audit
revealed a shortage of £38,477.70 as at POL00015020 (email from Maureen
Page 14 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Moors to me dated 20 May 2010) and when an audit revealed a shortage of
£46,314.48, as at POL00434015 (email from Christina Wood to me dated 25
February 2011) because the losses were so large. I cannot recall if there was
a threshold loss amount above which I would be informed. Similarly, I am
copied into POL00105625, an email chain dated 11 December 2012
concerning an ongoing issue with Horizon crashing multiple times a day over
the Christmas period due to an issue with ‘Talk Talk’. If a concern was
particularly important, Paula Vennells might ask me to have oversight of it, as
shown in POL00099179 (email chain dated 12 July 2013) where Paula asked
Susan Crichton and myself to look into a complicated case concerning
payment of Scottish ATM rates. Similarly, I was blind copied into
POL00298435, Paula Vennells’ emails to SPM Pervez Nakvi dated 21 August
2013, who contacted her directly about a Horizon issue. I would have been
copied in not to take action but so that I was aware of the issue.
28. I took a hands on approach to my job and as often as I could, I would attend
SPM meetings and NFSP branch meetings where any members could attend.
At these events I would often give out my mobile phone number so that SPMs
could contact me direct if needed, for example if they wanted to escalate a
problem to me because they were not getting the response they needed from
the business. I found it to be a really useful way to receive early warnings of
any potential problems within the network and how these were affecting
SPMs. Such an example of a SPM contacting me is shown in the email chain
dated 17 May 2011, POL00405605, where a SPM raised a concern with me
Page 15 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
about a LINK issue and I was able to forward it to Rod Ismay for resolution
(Head of Product and Branch Accounting).
29. Another example of a SPM contacting me direct to raise a concern is in the
email chain dated 4 July 2013, POL00145179. From what I recall, the SPM
contacted me because she had an Outreach kit which kept failing and for a
long time, it was not properly fixed. Every time that she contacted Fujitsu and
they thought the problem had been resolved, they would close the call log
meaning there were no records to show that this was a recurring issue. In the
end, the problem ended up being a faulty lead in the SPM’s equipment but I
fed back the problem of the call logs to Lesley Sewell (Head of IT) so that a
new process could be put in place to prevent call logs being closed so that
Fujitsu had better visibility of ongoing problems.
30. I would also go out on branch visits where SPMs could raise issues with me
that I would report back to POL, as shown in POL00338648 (email chain
dated 20 February 2012). I think it is important to stress that most of the
concerns SPMs raised with me were operational issues, not issues with
losses on Horizon which, wrongly and to my deep regret, reinforced my belief
that the system was working as it should.
31. Anyone within POL could escalate a problem with Horizon. The primary route
for problems with Horizon was through the NBSC (POLs helpline) or the
Horizon service help desk. The help desks had a tiered system for escalation
and if a SPM was account managed, they could escalate issues through their
Page 16 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
field manager. Other forms of escalation included SPMs writing direct to a
Director in POL. Names and job titles of all Board members and the Executive
were published on POL’s website. In some instances SPMs would write to
their MPs who would contact POL on their behalf. My understanding was that
any problems concerning Horizon would ultimately be reported to the IT team
who would involve Fujitsu as required.
32. Prior to the publication of the SS report, I do not recall being made aware of
anything which made me concerned that the advice and assistance available
to SPMs was not adequate, although there may have the occasional ad hoc
complaint which would be usual in an operation of this size.
33. It was only when SS published their interim report that issues with advice and
assistance provided to SPMs came to light. I felt that POL took this very
seriously and set up the Branch Improvement Programme to look at all of the
recommendations from SS. I have discussed the Branch Improvement
Programme in further detail below.
34. I was not involved in any of the development, delivery or oversight of the
Horizon training, either for its initial roll out or for any later versions. However,
as Network Sales Director I had oversight of training and from memory, this
was delivered by Field Support Advisors (“FCAs”). Separately, there was also
a team responsible for general classroom training which also sat in my
directorate. Although I had oversight, I was not involved in training on a day-
to-day basis. If there were any issues that needed bringing to my attention, I
Page 17 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
would expect these to be escalated to me by my direct report. Similar to
above, I cannot recall training ever being raised as an issue at any of the
events I attended with SPMs and I cannot recall it being raised by any of my
direct reports. It was only when SS published their report that I became aware
of the issues.
35. When I became Network Sales Director in November 2010 I had oversight of
the Branch Audit Team. Angela Van Den Bogerd (Head of Network Services)
had direct responsibility of the team until August 2012 and she reported to
Sue Huggins (General Manager Network, Sales and Transformation), who
was a direct report to me. Following a restructuring of the SPM field support
teams around December 2012, Michael Larkin (Head of Agency Network)
who was another of my direct reports, took over responsibility for all the
agency support field teams including the Audit team, with Sue Huggins
leaving POL. In September 2012 when Angela moved to a new role, I believe
Drew McBride replaced her and reported to Michael.
36. Although I had general oversight of the audit team, on a practical level, I had
very little involvement with audits. I believe I received a monthly report which
covered high level information such as the number of audits that had been
carried out and if there were any large discrepancies. I think there was also a
quarterly report that went to the Audit and Risk Committee (“ARC”). The
audits would be formally scheduled and I did not receive the results of
individual audits as these would go direct to one of the Contract Managers
who would decide, based on the evidence they heard, what (if any) action to
Page 18 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
take, based on the audit findings. I had monthly one to one meetings with my
direct reports where any issues that I needed to be aware of could be raised
with me or they would raise more urgent issues with me at anytime.
37. I was involved in internal audits where they covered my areas of
responsibility, such as POL00086765 (Network auditing approach, methods
and assurance dated 1 January 2013). This gave a low assurance score and
would have indicated to me that the processes in place were not currently
adequate and provided areas for improvement. I cannot recall exactly, but
from memory the usual process in response to internal audits would have
been as follows. The findings of the internal audit would be discussed and
agreed with the senior managers responsible, Drew McBride for the SPM
Network, Roger Gale for the Crown Offices and then me as the Executive
Sponsor. I believe the agreed recommendations and action plans would then
be approved by the Executive and ultimately the ARC, where progress would
also be monitored. POL000868371 is an options paper dated 1 October 2012
setting out options for the ExCo and the ARC to consider in respect of the
approach to internal audits (as opposed to branch audits), including an outline
of the findings and issues arising from the detailed review of auditing work
undertaken by the Field Support Advisors within Network Operations. I have
not been given any documents that show the outcome of the discussions at
ExCo or the ARC but I seem to recall that the option of separating the branch
audit and training functions was not felt to be an appropriate course of action
to take at this time because it would cause quite a lot of disruption particularly
as this team had been expanded to support the Network Transformation
Page 19 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
programme. I do however, think that the other recommendations would have
been accepted and delivered either through business as usual and/or the
Branch Improvement Scheme, although I cannot say for definite.
38. POL00379712 is an email from Peter Wilkinson, Area Manager, dated 8
January 2013 sending me an audit report, POL00379713, dated 12
December 2012 from Pulborough which shows a shortage of £19,669.53.
Although I cannot remember this specific case, I understand that the branch
was audited because it was identified as a risk because it was reported as
holding too much cash for the size of the branch. POL00179484 (Financial
Branch Performance Profile trial results dated 14 March 2012) is an example
of how we were trying to make branch audits more effective and targeted by
taking more of a risk based approach. We were trialling revised profile audits
to increase the efficiency of detection levels and also earlier detection of
losses. Similarly, through the Branch Improvement Programme a key aim was
to detect losses before they got large and provide support and help to these
SPMs.
39. As Head of Franchise Relationships I was responsible for SPM and Franchise
contracts and so would sometimes provide advice on what the contractual
requirements were following a dispute, as shown in POL00326693 (email
chain dated 25 July 2005). Other than this, I cannot recall having any
involvement with or oversight of POL’s procedures for resolving disputes with
SPMs in respect of discrepancies in branch accounts.
Page 20 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
40. When I came into the role of Network and Sales Director I would sometimes
have involvement in cases concerning branch discrepancy disputes that went
through to the Executive Correspondence Team (discussed in further detail
below). However, I believe that it was primarily the role of the Financial
Services Centre (“FSC”) to deal with disputes with SPMs in respect of
discrepancies in branch accounts. The FSC reported into the Finance
function.
41. The Inquiry have disclosed POL00403835, entitled ‘Post Office Ltd Internal
Review of Agents Processes in Management Suspected Financial
Irregularities’. This is dated 17 January 2011 and was drafted by Tracy
Marshall. I do not remember this document or why this process was being
reviewed. However, in November 2010, shortly before I became Network and
Sales Director, there was a restructuring of the Network Development and
Outlet Support Teams with the two teams merging to become one, headed up
by Sue Huggins. Whilst I cannot say for sure, this restructuring may have
been a catalyst to review the policies relating to the Outlet Support area
managing financial discrepancies.
42. I have been asked to set out my knowledge of POL’s prosecutorial function, in
particular its use of Horizon data to pursue prosecutions against SPMs. Apart
from receiving general updates about prosecutions, such as those contained
in POL00303045 (Significant Litigation Report dated 1 February 2013), I had
very little knowledge as to how the prosecutions worked in practice as these
fell under the responsibility of POL Legal (and Royal Mail Group Legal prior to
Page 21 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
2012). I completely trusted my professional peers and it was my
understanding that full evidence, including Horizon data, where necessary,
would be gathered and considered to ensure that every consideration was
given prior to prosecution. I also believed that the Courts would check and
test that the evidence was accurate and I took comfort that lawyers had
control and oversight of prosecutions.
43. As referenced above, from around 2010 onwards, when the pre-litigation
started, I believe there was a process in place to centralise all Horizon-related
concerns, which were dealt with by the Legal team and subsequently Project
Sparrow. I did not have any direct involvement in this but I might be asked,
from time to time, to gather information. I have discussed this in further detail
below under the section ‘Shoosmiths litigation and 2011 media coverage’.
FERNDOWN
44. The following deals with my recollection of an interview held at Ferndown Post
Office on 6 January 2010. I was asked to become involved in this case when I
was in the role of Head of Agency Sales / Agency Sales Programme Director.
This was a high profile case that involved both Dave Smith (Managing
Director at the time) and Paula Vennells (Network Director at that time). I
believe that Paula approached me to ask if I would try to resolve the problem
because the SPM had had her contract terminated and it was attracting a lot
of media attention and she thought that POL’s reaction was disproportionate
in relation to the discrepancy. I was brought in to try and understand what had
Page 22 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
happened and to try and resolve the issue with a fresh pair of eyes. At the
time, I had no experience with the audit and training team and so I think Paula
thought I would be a good person to get involved as I could be objective. This
was the first and only SPM interview that I was ever involved in.
45. Lynn Hobbs (General Manager Network Support) had oversight of the branch
audit function and had been asked to review the case so I started by speaking
to Lynn. She explained that matters had escalated because Mr/Mrs Athwal
were no longer allowing the branch to be run by the temporary SPM and
therefore the branch was closed. Lynn had discovered that there were Priority
Mail items and a passport application locked in the safe and Mr Athwell was
refusing to release the items. He said that he would not allow the branch to
reopen until his wife had been reinstated. I phoned Mr Athwell to try to get him
to release the mail and passport form and reopen his branch but he refused.
Lynn and I then discussed the situation with Dave Smith (POL Managing
Director). Dave’s view was that unless the situation could be resolved in the
next two working days, we should reinstate Mrs Athwell so that we could get
the Mail and passport form. Lynn and I concluded that under the
circumstances we should reinstate. We cleared this with Paula Vennells who
agreed with the approach and cleared this with Dave Smith. I spoke to Mr
Athwell again and informed him we would reinstate his wife and requested his
wife to meet with me and others within POL so that we could try and
understand what had happened and get the relationship back on a positive
footing. Mr Athwal agreed and I said that I would write to his wife to set up the
Page 23 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
meeting. POL00294717 is the letter from me to Mrs Athwal sent on 6
December 2010.
46. Between this conversation and the interview taking place, I moved into the
role of Network and Sales Director. I would not have been involved in the
preparations and setting up of the meeting or who the POL attendees should
be because I didn’t have the background, knowledge or experience in this
area. By this time, Sue Huggins, (General Manager Network Services and
Transformation) had now taken responsibility for this area and was a direct
report to me. I would have asked Sue to make the preparations and
arrangements for the meeting. However, Sue was on annual leave for the
meeting and Angela Van Den Bogerd deputised for her in this role (at this
time Angela was responsible for the Branch Audit team and was a direct
report to Sue). I can see from the papers, POL00294705 and POL00294707,
that ahead of the meeting, on 3 January 2011, Tracy Marshall emailed Angela
Van Den Bogerd and myself with details of the background to the case and a
meeting was held ahead to discuss the case, with a Briefing Paper,
POL00142625, provided. Late in the afternoon, the day before the meeting
Tracy Marshall also sent POL00294728, an email to myself and Angela Van
Den Bogerd with information on Horizon Network Performance, POL or
Fujitsu having remote access to individual horizon systems and the
independent review of Horizon system integrity. I have seen a copy of an
undated briefing note, POL00294706, which appears to have been prepared
in advance of the meeting.
Page 24 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
47. The meeting was held on 6 January 2010 with Angela Van Den Bogerd
(Network Change Operations Manager), Helen Rose (Tactical Analyst,
Security) and myself from POL, Mr and Mrs Athwal and Mark Baker
(representative from NFSP). It was my role to lead the meeting but I had little
operational experience in this area and so it was important that Angela was
there, as she had a deep understanding of the operation of branches, and that
Helen was there, so that she could speak to the technical aspects of the
Horizon logs.
48. Arecord of the meeting is at POL00294743 (interview notes dated 6 January
2010). Following the meeting I requested branch data from Fujitsu to be sent
to Mrs Athwal via discs as requested by her in FUJ00224980 (email chain
dated 10 January 2011). There is an email chain which shows that Mrs Athwal
sent a letter around a month later, on 15 February to which Fujitsu drafted a
response, POL00294761 (email from me to Angela Van Den Bogerd and
Peter Johnson on 17 February 2011). I ask to hold off our response until we
have spoken to Legal. My recollection was that whilst we could not come to
an agreement in the meeting, we all agreed that we would put the matter
behind us and that there would be no recriminations. This recollection is in
line with Angela’s email which says
“It’s interesting to see the list of questions posed by Mr Athwal given that we’d
agreed to wipe the slate clean and move forward.”
Page 25 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
49. My recollection of the meeting itself was that with the use of the Horizon logs,
Helen presented evidence of how the disputed loss was put into a dormant
account and she was able to identify who made the transfers and at what time
and date, which confirmed to me that the disputed entries were entered by the
people working in branch. Both Angela’s and my response in POL00294761
(email chain dated 17 February 2011) were based on the complete belief that
Horizon was robust.
50. It is only now, following the information which has come to light in the case of
Mr Bates and Others v Post Office Ltd, as well as the Inquiry, that I am able to
properly reflect on the information provided at this interview concerning both
the integrity of Horizon and the ability to add or amend transaction data. At the
meeting, I had complete belief that Horizon was robust and thought that the
information provided was correct.
51. The issue of Horizon’s robustness and remote access was covered in the
briefing paper POL00142625 (undated) which states:
“POL cannot remotely control a branches system...Any technical changes by
Fujitsu that impact the system have to go through clearance processes which
would prevent any amendment to existing data”
52. An email sent by Tracy Marshall the day before the meeting, on 5 January
2011, at POL00294728 also states:
Page 26 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
“POL cannot remotely access systems and make changes to specific stock
units etc. Fujitsu can remotely access systems...technically, Fujitsu could
access an individual branch remotely and move money around however this
has never happened yet. The authority process required and the audit
process are robust enough to prevent this activity from being undertaken
fraudulently”.
53. In the interview, I say that POL cannot manipulate data and Angela Van Den
Bogerd says that Fujitsu cannot manipulate data “without being seen to have
done that”. Since leaving POL I now know that this is incorrect, and Fujitsu
had uncontrolled access to branch accounts.
BBC INSIDE OUT
54. When I was on the Executive team I was often copied into emails on high
profile matters. POL00294745 (email from Paula Vennells to me and others
on 26 January 2011), POL00294746 (email chain dated 27 January 2011),
POL00120451 (email from Mike Granville to me on 4 February 2011) and
POL00294779 (email from Susan Crichton to me and others on 18 February
2011) are all examples of such emails, updating me and the team on the BBC
Inside Out programme and what POL’s response to the programme was. This
was the extent of my involvement as I would not have been involved in
actually formulating the response but merely kept up to date on POL’s
position.
Page 27 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
55. As I was not a member of the Board I do not feel able to comment on their
views as to the reporting.
SHOOSMITHS LITIGATION AND 2011 MEDIA COVERAGE
56. My only involvement in POL’s response to litigation threatened by Shoosmith /
Access Legal was to provide information as and when required to feed into a
particular case. For example, Legal might contact me with the background of
a case and ask for network-related information, as shown in POL00056782
(email dated 26 August 2011). I would either be able to answer the questions,
or refer them to the best person placed to answer these questions.
57. As shown at POL00379142, on 19 November 2010, Seema Misra’s husband
copied me and others into an email he had sent to Amnesty International
asking them to help his wife, following the outcome of the Court Case and her
(wrongful) imprisonment. Paula Vennells asked me, Susan Crichton (General
Council) and Sue Huggins (General Manager Network Services and
Transformation) to look into this. Sue Huggins and I took a decision not to
reply because the POL recipients were only copied in to the email and this
was not a matter that we could assist with. This was clearly the wrong
decision and even though at the time we believed (wrongly) that there had
been a fair trail and I do not know what we could have done at that stage
given she would have needed to appeal her conviction, it is still no excuse for
not responding and seeing whether there was any particular support or
assistance, which would have helped her and her family at such a distressing
Page 28 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
time for them. I deeply regret this and offer my unreserved apology to them
and their family. POL00379142 shows that on 1 and 2 of December 2010, Mr
Misra emailed me and others in POL asking us to help his wife in prison. Sue
Huggins replied on 3 December suggesting that he takes up some of the
issues directly with the prison service and that the matter is out of the hands
of the Post Office. This email response was inappropriate and we should have
offered more help and support. Mr Misra wrote to the prison service again on
7 December 2010 copied to myself and others in POL, POL00379142. I can
see from the email chain that we chose not to reply. We should not have
chosen to leave the matter solely to the prison service. I am truly and deeply
sorry that we didn’t.
58. On 8 February 2011, following the BBC programme into Horizon, Mike
Granville emails myself and others saying:
“In terms of next steps on the issue (for example the threatened civil legal
challenge by Shoosmiths that was mentioned in the programmed), I'll liaise
with Kevin Gilliland, Susan Crichton and Mike Young” - POL00294749.
59. I think that Mike’s reference to liaising with me, Susan and Mike was in order
to cover the areas of Network, Legal and IT Fujitsu respectively.
60. I can also see that on 24 November 2011 I was copied into an email,
POL00338518, to keep me informed of POL’s response to a BBC programme
which was being run on Horizon.
Page 29 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
61. I was not involved in formulating POL’s strategy in responding to the
Shoosmiths litigation and I cannot remember being informed of it other than
as seen in the email from Mike Granville (Head of Regulation Strategy) dated
26 November 2010, POL00120561, which states, in respect of legal cases
relating to individual SPMs being prosecuted for theft / false accounting, “our
approach throughout has been to robustly defend the integrity of the Horizon
system.” The email concerns Mike Granville asking for views on a statement
that he intends to send to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
(“BIS”) on Horizon issues. I think that I had only just started my role as
Network Sales Director when this email was sent and cannot remember
having any further involvement.
62. On 20 October 2011, the business received instructions from Legal,
POL00176465, in respect of document creation, including around legal
privilege -. Angela Van Den Bogerd and Sue Huggins were recipients of this
email and it was their teams within the Network to whom the instructions in
this email were applicable, so my assumption is that they would have followed
these instructions and forwarded the email onto their teams. I would not have
questioned these instructions and I do not believe any of my team would have
either would have either as none of us are legally trained. As I was not
involved in the litigation, I do not feel it is for me to say whether those
instructions that we received were driven by POL trying to prevent the
disclosure of documents so that it could prejudice its position in relation to
Horizon.
Page 30 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
63. I have been asked to consider POL00294896 (email from Rod Ismay to Paul
Meadows and others on 14 October 2011) and attachment POL00294897
(Request for Delegated Authority as regards costs of Legal Action 14 October
2011).
64. From reading the email and its attachment, Rod Ismay has drafted a proposal
around the legal action and subsequent legal costs in defence of challenges
made by Shoosmiths. All projects needed to have an Executive Sponsor and
Rod has referenced that he is going to have a call with me to discuss my
thoughts on sponsoring it. I cannot remember having such a call and to the
best of my recollection, I never sponsored this project or any similar one. My
name is shown in square brackets in the proposal and my assumption is that
it is a draft. I have not been disclosed a final version of the proposal from the
Inquiry and so am unable to comment on if this ever went ahead and, if so,
who sponsored it.
65. I was not a Board member and therefore am unable to comment on what
steps any Board members took in relation to the Private Eye Article about the
Horizon issue other than what is referenced in the disclosure - POL00338392
(email from Mike Granville to me on 21 September 2011), POL00363235_050
(email from David Simpson copied to me on 12 October 2011) and
POL00294969 (email from Paula Vennells copied to me on 27 October 2011).
Page 31 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
66. I have been asked to describe my views as to any steps taken within POL as
at late 2011/early 2012 regarding the potential of litigation against POL from
SPMs. Legal was completely outside of my area of expertise and so I do not
feel able to comment on the approach but personally, I would follow their
instructions and I thought that it was sensible that Royal Mail Group were
taking a lawyer led approach in light of the potential litigation. From memory,
after litigation was threatened, I believe all correspondence on Horizon was to
have oversight by Royal Mail Group and POL Legal so that there was a
coordinated response and teams started to be contacted by Legal to collect
relevant documents. I also think Mike Granville may have been a point of
contact within POL with regard to the potential litigation although I can’t be
sure.
67. The Inquiry have asked me about POL00378468 (email from Eunice Kirby
forwarding emails between me, Rod Ismay and Mike Granville dated 18
March 2011). From recollection, as mentioned in the paragraph above, we
may have been asked to notify Mike if we received any information which was
relevant or potentially relevant to the litigation. I therefore wrote to him,
flagging a case which demonstrated that the process for inputting transactions
was complicated which could lead to SPMs making errors, as had happened
in this situation. Although I cannot remember, from reading the email, the
complaint had been dealt with but I forwarded it to Mike as I thought that it
was an example of where our processes needed to be improved, and for
which we could be criticised. I do not know what TV reports I am referring to.
Cases such as these strengthened my belief that there was not an issue with
Page 32 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Horizon’s integrity, but the issues stemmed from the fact it could sometimes
be difficult to use, resulting in human error.
68. The Inquiry have asked me to provide my reflections on the learnings shared
by Angela Van Den Bogerd and Dave Pardoe on past cases, including
Ferndown, as noted in POL00294869 (memo from Rod Ismay to me and
others on 12 October 2011). My reading of the document is that it does not
say what the learnings are, but merely says that Dave and Angela would
deliver key learnings at the first Steering Group meeting. I was not at the
meeting and do not know what these learnings were. In fact, I do not know if
this proposed Steering Group was ever established and I have no documents
to show what happened next.
MONITORING OF HORIZON
69. In answering the Inquiry’s questions on this subject, I have reviewed the
following documents:
a. POL00030217 (E&Y Management letter for the year ending 27 March
2011)
b. POL00294829 (Terms of Reference from Stephen A Collins sent to me
and others on 5 August 2011)
c. POL00294906 (Email from Paula Vennells on 20 October 2011)
d. POL00029114 (POL Draft Review of Key System Controls in Horizon
dated 1 February 2012)
Page 33 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
. POL00030482 (POL Review dated March 2012)
POL00339056 (email from Dave Hulbert to me dated 6 May 2012)
. POL00129915 (Outputs of the Fujitsu Services Review of Horizon
Online, dated 1 May 2012)
. POL00339652 (email from Lesley Sewell to me dated 9 September
2012)
POL00114269 (POL Board Noting Paper- Horizon Evolution Update
dated 19 September 2012)
UKGI00018115 (POL Board - Risk and Resilience Review dated
September 2012)
. POL00184071 (Minutes of the Network Transformation Programme
Board 21 November 2012)
POL00029713 (POL Assurance Review December 2012)
. POL00340338 (Assurance review dated 1 March 2013)
. POL00144659 (Assurance review dated 1 May 2013)
. POL00380822 and attachment POL00380823 (POL Follow Up Review
of Key System Controls in Horizon dated 24 May 2013)
. POL00162189 (Email chain dated 3 June 2014)
70. I had very limited knowledge of Horizon from a technical perspective as my
knowledge of it was from a business perspective. I therefore do not recall the
full extent of what systems were in place for testing, monitoring and auditing
Horizon, other than to believe that it was tested and monitored and that there
were both internal and external audits. As shown by the documents above, I
was on the circulation list for emails concerning Horizon’s monitoring,
42349433.1
Page 34 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
although these were of a technical nature. If anything important was of note, I
would have expected this to have been picked up by the IT team and flagged
to the senior team within POL.
71. The document POL00030217 shows me that in March 2011, POL
commissioned EY to have a look at POL’s internal systems and controls, in
order to have their accounts signed off . From memory this was an annual
review for the accounts to be signed. EY’s report covers Horizon (back end)
user administration. I have also been disclosed a Terms of Reference from
August 2011, POL00294829, which shows that POL carried out an internal
audit to review Horizon System Controls, which was being prepared in
contemplation of litigation. It would seem that was done in response to EY’s
report, following which POL implemented the recommended actions and
carried out its own internal audits to check outstanding actions against the
action plan (POL00029114 (February 2012), POL00030482 (March 2012),
POL00029713 (December 2012), POL00340338 (March 2013) and
POL00144659 and POL00380822 (May 2013)). Reports such as these would
have given me reassurance that Horizon was being reviewed and monitored
internally and externally.
72. The documents disclosed also show Board papers, including POL00129915,
a paper dated 1 May 2012 informing the Board of the action being taken to
identify the cause of four significant incidents in the branch network,
POL00114269, a POL Board Noting Paper on Horizon Evolution dated 19
September 2012, which provides an update on the findings and activities
Page 35 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
being taken in response to a KPMG Risk and Resilience report,
UKGI00018115, dated 1 September 2012. I was not a Board member and do
not recall if I would have received a copy of these papers or an update on
their content.
73. I can see at POL00294906, that on 20 October 2011 Paula Vennells has
emailed Lesley Sewell, copying me in, asking for confirmation at to the
robustness / reliability of Pintest. I do not recall what Pintest was but the
email shows me that I have flagged it might be something that the BBC are
picking up on.
74. On occasion, if it affected the operation of the network, I may have more
involvement in issues with Horizon. For example, on 6 May 2012, Dave
Hulbert writes to me updating me on a Disaster Recovery Test which was
being carried out, POL00339056. Dave was keeping me informed how the
test was going and notified me that whilst there had been, “no issues for
branches or customers — they’re not writing to the database correctly”. He
explained that to correct the problem he would need to cease the service to
branches 45 minutes earlier than scheduled to ensure that it did not impact on
the following days trading (the test was carried out on a Sunday because it
was the quietest trading day). I asked a number of questions about the
process involved and was provided reassurance as to the processes for
ensuring data integrity.
Page 36 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
75. As shown at POL00339652 (email from Lesley Sewell to me dated 9
September 2012, I can also recall raising a complaint that I did not think
Fujitsu were adequately logging issues raised by SPMs, as one SPM was
having a repeat problem which Fujitsu were logging as a new issue every
time, meaning the SPM had to repeat their explanation of the issue every time
she called and there was a failure for Fujitsu to recognise it was an ongoing
issue. Another topic concerning Fujitsu’s support is noted in POL00184071,
the Network Transformation Board meeting minutes of 21 November 2012.
Part of the Network Transformation programme was about increasing the
opening hours of branches to meet customer demand and match what our
competitors were offering. We therefore needed to extend the hours of
Fujitsu’s support in line with this, and in order to establish how much support
was required, we were seeking to obtain data about what the branch demand
was for Fujitsu support outside core hours. In June 2014, there was a move of
the Horizon Service Desk from Fujitsu to Atos which involved a lot of prior
testing and monitoring before it was implemented. As shown in POL00162189
(email chain dated 3 June 2014), I was involved in this because of any
potential impact to the branch network .
76. I did not have any knowledge or involvement in relation to the preparation of
the EY Report. I cannot remember reading or discussing the EY report after it
came out, but this is not to say that I did not. As can be seen from the report,
it was technical and I believe that I would have relied on the Chief Financial
Officer and Chief Operating Officer to explain the report and any business
implications. As noted above, following the report, POL carried out its own
Page 37 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
internal review followed by internal audits to monitor the outstanding actions
and I think I would have taken comfort from the fact POL had commissioned
an external report and were taking action following its recommendations.
Terms of Reference for this internal review dated 5 August 2011 at
POL00294829.
77. The Inquiry have asked me about POL00143600, an email chain dated 9
September 2012. This is linked to POL00339652, another email chain from
the same date which I have mentioned above. From my recollection, a SPM
had got in contact with me because she was having problems with a Horizon
terminal at outreach locations. This was where Horizon was set up in
locations where there was not a Post Office, such as a village hall. The SPM
was having ongoing issues which she would raise with Fujitsu, who would get
the service up and running again and then close the call log. When she rang
them again, they would not have any record of her previous calls meaning she
had to explain the problem again and Fujitsu were not recognising the length
of time this was going on and therefore they were not getting to the root of the
issue or registering the true length of time the problem had been going on for.
The problem ultimately turned out to be a faulty cable. As shown in
POL00143600, I reported this issue back to Lesley Sewell, who in turn
reported it to Dave Hulbert stating:
“When I met with Kevin his concern was more broad — he is worried that
because the issues at the branches get raised and then closed that we’re not
Page 38 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
seeing the bigger picture. And that we may have something systemic that we
can't see.”
78. Here, Lesley is passing on my comments of frustration that Fujitsu do not
have good case management where call logs are logged together, meaning
the way they log calls stops them from seeing the full picture and get to the
root of the issue in a more effective and efficient way.
ENGAGEMENT WITH MPS IN 2012
79. On 15 December 2011, Lord Arbuthnot sent a letter to Moya Greene (CEO of
POL) about software issues at Odiham Post Office in Hampshire to which I
respond on 12 January 2012 (both letters at POL00105483).
80. When correspondence from MPs came in, it would be dealt with by the
Executive Correspondence team who would gather all of the background
information from the relevant teams within POL and then produce a draft letter
with a background sheet as to what, why and how the situation had arisen,
why our response is what it was and any other relevant information. A copy of
the background sheet which would have accompanied this letter has not been
disclosed. My normal course of action would be to read the draft letter and the
background sheet, gone back to the Executive Correspondence team with
any questions and, when satisfied, signed the letter for sending. I cannot say
for definite but it is possible that Legal would also have had input due to the
threat of litigation from Shoosmiths / Legal Action.
Page 39 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
81. I would have satisfied myself that the content of the letter was accurate based
both on the background sheet provided and what I believed to be true about
the reliability of Horizon at the time, from the internal messaging within POL.
Horizon was very in focus at the time because of the proposed litigation and
therefore whilst I may have asked questions around the specific
circumstances of the branch, it is unlikely that I would have asked general
questions in terms of Horizon’s robustness because this had been closely
monitored within POL and we had standard messaging as produced by the
Communications team.
82. From what I recall, the Executive Correspondence team were responsible for
preparing POL’s response to any concerns raised by MPs during 2012. I
would become involved on an ad hoc basis, to the extent that the issue was
relevant to my team and my input was required. Although the Executive
Correspondence team would draft these letters, I would always check those
that required my involvement and make amendments as I saw fit. As can be
seen in POL00096780, the email correspondence between Alice Perkins and
myself on 8 July 2012, with Paula Vennell’s response at POL00096804,
where Alice had asked for my input regarding the operation of the new ‘locals’
branch model.
83. From what I recall, I did not attend any meetings with MPs during 2012 or at
anytime relating to Horizon, but I was sometimes informed of them, as is seen
in the email chain dated 20 April 2012, POL00105494. I might be given action
Page 40 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
points that arose from such meetings if the action fell within my responsibility.
For example, POL00105481 is the notes of a meeting attended by Lord
Arbuthnot, Alice Perkins and Alwen Lyons on 13 March 2012. Whilst I did not
attend this meeting, I can see that I was given two action points to complete
ahead of the next meeting on 28 March, including putting together a brief
covering the facts about the issues that Lord Arbuthnot raised and finding out
what POL could show Lord Arbuthnot about balancing and how SPMs can
check their accounts during balancing if he was invited into the model office.
Similarly, in POL00417089, an email chain from Mike Whitehead to Peter
Batten dated 18 June 2012, I have been given two action points concerning
NFSP and CWU as I was responsible for these stakeholder relationships
(discussed in further detail below).
84. In POL00142984, an email chain dated 18 April 2012 , Paula Vennells asks
me for history on correspondence concerning Yetminster Post Office, which I
forward to Sue Huggins and Mike Granville to provide the background.
Similarly, in POL00105490, an email chain dated 22 May 2012, although I am
not copied in, it is referenced that I will look into questions from Sir Paul
Beresford. Although I do not recall what these questions were, it was not
uncommon for questions to be put to me, not because I was close to the detail
but because my position as Network and Sales Director meant that I was well
connected to those who would know the detail and I knew who to ask.
85. The Inquiry has asked about my understanding of any steps taken by POL to
notify BIS regarding Horizon issues, with reference to POL00180807. This is
Page 41 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
an email chain dated 22 June 2012 between Paula Vennells and Mike
Granville to which I am copied in. Although I held monthly meetings with BIS,
this was to update them on the progress of Network and Crown
Transformation and I never spoke to them about Justice For SPM’s Alliance
(“JFSA”) or Horizon. I am therefore unable to provide any further details on
how they were notified about Horizon issues beyond what is contained in this
email.
RELATIONSHIP WITH NFSP
86. Prior to 2004, I would only occasionally engage with NFSP within the various
head office roles I held to discuss any changes or developments to the
products and services that I was responsible for. However, in 2004, as Head
of Franchise Relationships, I became responsible for POL’s relationship with
NFSP. This responsibility briefly stopped in 2006 — 2007 when I moved to
General Manager Multiples but I picked up responsibility for the NFSP again
from 2007 — 2009 as Head of Agency Development. In November 2010, I
became Network and Sales Director at which point I had oversight of the
relationship but my relationship became more strategic, with day to day issues
being handled by members of my team and my contact with the NFSP
primarily relating to the Network Transformation programme and the future of
the branch network. From 2014 — 2016 the responsibility for the NFSP was
transferred to Neil Hayward, the new HR Director. It was during this period
that the Grant Agreement was negotiated and agreed. From 2017 until I left
POL the relationship sat within my business unit.
Page 42 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
87. Being responsible for the relationship with NFSP meant coordinating between
them and the different teams within POL, keeping NFSP updated on any
matters which would affect SPMs and negotiating SPMs annual remuneration
increases. NFSP were the recognised representative body for SPMs and they
were a good vehicle for two way communications. I would say that I had a
good professional working relationship with George Thomson (General
Secretary of NFSP), the negotiating committee, executive and the branch
officials that I had dealings with. Although I found them to be demanding and
challenging, they were supportive of the Network Transformation and I believe
that we shared a common goal of wanting success for the branch network and
to avoid branch closures as had been seen in the past. It was important that
we had a positive relationship with them and had their support with Network
Transformation because we were working with them to shape the programme
and it was going to be such a big change as I have highlighted at POL11/47
within the Board meeting minutes of 22 September 2011, POL00030365.
88. As I was responsible for POL’s relationship with NFSP, I would often be
forwarded any communication or information that was relevant to them such
as POL00294748, the email sent by Mike Granville on 2 February 2011
informing me that NFSP was supportive on Horizon, in response to the BBC
programme . George Thomson would keep me updated of any relevant
information, as he did on 12 July 2013 where he has forwarded on an email
from a dissatisfied SPM, POL00372043. George also had good connections
within POL and so would often email the relevant person direct but keep me
Page 43 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
copied in for information purposes, as he has on 20 December 2012 in
respect of a letter received from Alan Bates at POL00296010 and
POL00296011. I do not think that I would have responded to either of these
emails.
89. In 2014, the responsibility for the NFSP transferred to Neil Hayward (Group
People Director). It was during this time, that the Grant Agreement was
developed and agreed which created a difficult relationship between POL and
NFSP. I would still assist as and when required, as noted in the action that
Paula Vennells has given me in her email of 15 August 2014, POL00348119.
As seen in the email from Nick Beal to me on 17 January 2014,
POL00150720, as the negotiations over the Grant Agreement occurred, other
issues were brought to the table such as the Cliff and Network Extension as
negotiation tools. As these were both my areas of responsibility, I was kept
updated. Because of this involvement and due to my seniority, I also attended
the annual NFSP conference on 11 May 2015,, which discussed the Grant
Agreement. POL00151913 are the NFSP conference papers dated 11 May
2015.
90. From December 2016 until I left POL, responsibility for the relationship with
the NFSP was transferred back to me, as seen in the Group Executive
Agenda of 14 September 2017, POL00027276. In the main, I felt that POL
had a positive but challenging relationship with NFSP.
Page 44 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
91. In the early days of my involvement with the NFSP, members of my team and
I would meet Colin Baker (General Secretary or the NFSP prior to George
Thomson) and subsequently George and their negotiating team to discuss or
negotiate and agree any changes that were happening within POL. A large
part of my role was to negotiate and agree remuneration rates and changes to
products and services particularly the annual remuneration negotiation.
92. Occasionally, I would be invited to the national executive council to discuss
matters that would have an impact on NFSP members, such as before the roll
out of the Network Transformation Programme (NFSP00000454 — NFSP
report of a meeting of the National Executive Council on 10 — 12 October
2011). I can recall Michael Larkin (Head of Agency Sales) and myself
attending the National Executive Council meeting in 2010 to explain the new
field support structure and what it would mean for SPMs but I don’t recall
attending many of these meetings.
93. From time to time, I would also attend local branch meetings, either through a
planned series of events or ad hoc meetings where I had been invited. If I was
asked to present on a chosen topic I would always allow time at the end for
questions about wider business issues which was a useful way of getting
firsthand feedback.
94. In my role of Network and Sales Director, I would have regular meetings with
George Thomson. These would be ad-hoc, as and when matters needed to
be discussed. George also had a quarterly one to one meeting with Paula
Page 45 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Vennells that I would attend. As the Network Transformation was happening,
we worked very closely with the NFSP to make sure that they were kept fully
informed of what was happened and we worked closely with them to shape
the programme.
95. Colin Baker and later George Thomson, had good access to all parts of the
business and George, in particular, had contacts at the most senior levels of
the business, meaning it wasn’t just me and my team who were having
contact with them. Whilst I would facilitate meetings and access for the NFSP
to all parts of POL where required, for any complex or technical issues which
were specific to an area of the business, these would be dealt with by the
subject matter expert within POL.
96. POL would also support the NFSP annual conference with stands and
presentations and there would usually be a government minister and Paula
Vennells speaking so that material matters could be discussed and voted on
and so that the NFSP had the chance to ask questions direct to the
government and POL CEO.
97. When the SS review was published in June 2012, NFSP started to receive a
number of complaints from SPMs and ex-SPMs about Horizon which were
forwarded on to POL. George Thomson was very annoyed that SS had been
commissioned and he emailed Paula Vennells on 22 June saying that 6 or 7
people had contacted NFSP in the last 2 days and asking why his views were
not sought prior to POL commissioning a review of Horizon, POL00295389.
Page 46 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
98. There continued to be multiple complaints to NFSP in the following days
which were forwarded to myself either direct or in copy as shown in
POL00295392, POL00295393, POL00295394, all being emails from George
Thompson to me and Paula Vennells dated 26 June 2012. These were
forwarded to me because I was responsible for the relationship with NFSP.
99. I cannot remember specifically dealing with any complaints from the NFSP.
about the integrity of Horizon. As I’ve explained above, the NFSP had a good
network of contacts in POL and any complaints could have been raised
directly with the appropriate people or departments for example, Angela Van
Den Bogerd, for issues with training and support, IT for issues relating to
Horizon, or even with Paula Vennells. I know that POL’s Communications
team also had good links with the NFSP and so would often deal with them
direct in respect of complaints, although my team may have facilitated this
communication.
100. Again, I do not recall specifically, but it is clear from POL00295395 (email
chain dated 27 June 2012) that I spoke to George Thomson and wanted to
put in place a process to pick up any future complaints as the number had
risen following the publication of SS’s report. I think that after this point, all
complaints were sent direct to Angela Van Den Bogerd, Craig Tuthill and
Susan Crichton to deal with centrally. I think that POL’s Communication team
were also in touch with NFSP to share any briefings that they had on the
integrity of Horizon but I cannot say for sure. I can also see from
Page 47 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
POL00105607 (email from me to Dave Hulbert dated 5 July 2012) that
George was taken down to Fujitsu to talk through some incidents but I don’t
know what these incidents are. I do not think that I had any involvement with
this meeting although my team may have facilitated it.
10
-POL00152168 is an email from me to Mark Davies dated 14 June 2015 in
which I say “if we could get George making a positive public response it would
be v helpful”. My email is in response to Mark Davies, who has emailed the
Field Team who I was responsible for, as well as me, saying that Panorama is
planning a piece on Post Office and Horizon. Mark outlines his preferred
approach and asks for our input and help in executing this approach. I
respond that it would be helpful for George to make a positive public response
about Horizon because I thought this would provide reassurance to SPMs if
they saw that their representative body was supportive of Horizon, which is
what I understood the NFSP’s position to be at that time. I was prompted to
make the comment about George after Nick Beale (who was responsible for
the day to day relationship with the NFSP) was asking Mark to meet, about
briefing George.
102.POL00372043 is an email from SPM Richard Blackshaw to George Thomson,
forwarded to myself and others, dated 12 July 2013. I cannot recall my
reaction upon reading it and cannot recall if any response was made. Reading
it now, it is a highly emotive email and I am sure I would have thought the
same at the time.
Page 48 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
SECOND SIGHT
103.1 was not personally involved but from memory, I believe that Alice Perkins
(Chair) and maybe Paula Vennells (CEO) were responsible for the
appointment of SS. However, I think it was Susan Crichton (General Counsel)
who suggested SS because she had worked with them before.
104. Again, I had no involvement in the ambit of SS’s investigation and I cannot
say for sure, but my recollection was that it was agreed between Paula
Vennells and Alice Perkins, in discussion with Lord James Arbuthnot and
Susan Crichton.
105.1 was not involved in and do not know what access SS had to information or
relevant documents and therefore do not feel able to comment on this.
106.1 have reviewed POL00021508 (POL Board Meeting Minutes 4 July 2012),
POL00167447 (POL Board Meeting Minutes 24 June 2013) and
POL00358173 (the statement that POL issued following the publication of SS
Interim Report, dated 8 July 2013). I do not recall these meetings and was not
involved in the drafting of the statement and so do not feel able to add
anything beyond what is contained in the documents. I have, however, noted
that the Board Meeting Minutes of 24 June 2014 state:
“The CEO explained that although the SS report had been challenging it had
highlighted some positive things as well as improvement opportunities. The
Page 49 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
business had been praised in Parliament for setting up the independent
review; the proportionality of the tiny number of cases had been emphasised;
and no systemic issues had been found with the Horizon computer system.
However there were cultural issues which had to be addressed to improve the
support we gave to SPMS.”
107.1 understand that this was the first time that the Board met to discuss to the
SS Interim Report and therefore it is my assumption that Paula Vennells
message was a reflection of the Board’s view of the Interim Report. However,
I cannot comment on how other senior executives within POL viewed SS and
the purpose of its investigation as I had little involvement with it. Personally, I
believed that Horizon was robust but recognised the benefits of an
independent review as there were people saying something was wrong and
so I thought the decision to appoint SS was sensible.
108.1 was not involved in POL’s response to requests for information from SS and
/ or investigations into the integrity of Horizon and so do not feel able to
comment on it.
THE INTERIM REPORT AND MEDIATION SCHEME
109. The below deals with my involvement in POL’s preparation for and response
to SS’s reports, the Branch Support Programme and the Mediation Scheme.
Page 50 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Involvement in preparation for and response to Second Sight’s reports
110.1 was not involved with POL’s preparation for, or response to, SS’s Reports
other than to provide my input as and when requested. For example, an email
chain from 16 July 2013, POL00192104, states that as part of POL’s
response to the SS Interim Report, a regular conference call will be set up to
enable any identified issues with Horizon to be shared with business units
who use and rely on the system. A representative is required from multiple
areas of the business, including Network, with the email chain showing that I
have nominated Nick Beal as an appropriate representative to Crowns,
Agency, Multiples and Partners.
111.As a member of ExCo, I would have been updated with what was happening
in response to SS's Interim Report but would not have been involved in
formulating this response. For example, POL00207756 (email from Belinda
Crowe to me and others dated 21 August 2014 and attachment
POL00207757 (Second Sight Briefing Report — Part Two) and POL00101299
(email from Mark Davies to me and others dated 5 September 2014)
112.1 have reviewed POL00190338 which is an email dated 3 July 2013 from
Martin Edwards (Paula Vennells’ Chief of Staff) to myself and other senior
employees attaching a briefing note on the SS Interim Report, POL00190341.
Martin’s email states that the headline point to note is that
Page 51 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
“to date, no systemic issues have been identified in the Horizon system itself
through this process. However, we expect SS will draw attention to areas for
improvement in our wider support system (e.g. the guidance and training
provided to smprs).”
113.The Inquiry have asked whether I consider the phrase “systemic issues” to be
a concept that is distinguished from the description of “system exceptions”.
My interpretation is that they are distinguished, in that if something has
systemic issues it is fundamentally flawed, whereas if something has system
exceptions (or anomalies as referred to in the Briefing Paper), then it might be
an issue which requires rectification but does not necessarily mean that it is
an issue which undermines the overall integrity of the system. In this context,
the fact that we were told that Horizon had no systemic issues but some
system anomalies, to me meant there were some bugs which required
attention but did not undermine its overall integrity.
114.1 was not involved in any decision making relating to the ambit of SS’s
investigation or the extent of its access to relevant information and
documents.
115.Both Martin’s email POL00190338, and the Briefing paper, POL00190341,
both dated 3 July 2013, reference a meeting that Alice Perkins, Paula
Vennells and Alwen Lyons had with Lord James Arbuthnot on 3 July 2013. I
do not believe that I had any involvement in preparing for this meeting.
Page 52 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
116.1 do not believe that I was involved in liaising with any MPs in relation to
matters arising from the interim SS report, or in any communications /
stakeholder plans to manage the potential scenarios following the publication
of the Report. There was a specific team who dealt with this and I was given
updates as a member of the ExCo.
117.In an email dated 10 July 2013, POL00341624, George Thompson forwards
an email from a Dispute Resolution firm which has contacted the NFSP,
asking if George wants legal advice, having read “detail of the computer
system fall out”, to Paula Vennells, Susan Barton, Nick Beal, Mike Whitehead
and myself . In forwarding the email, George comments:
“This is the type of mess we have created with the Horizon debacle. Our
tactics were totally misguided.”
118.1 do not know what tactics Mr Thomson is referring to, but it could be a
reference to POL’s decision to conduct an independent review into Horizon,
which Mr Thomson previously expressed annoyance about, as shown in
POL00295389, the email chain dated 25 June 2012..
Involvement in Initial Complaint and Mediation Scheme
119.1 had no involvement in the Initial Complaint and Mediation Scheme but as
part of ExCo, I would have received regular updates on its progress.
Page 53 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
120.In addition to the documents referenced within the body of my answers below,
I have reviewed the following:
a. POL00029663 (email chain between Paula Vennells, Lesley Sewell and
myself dated 15 July 2013) — the email starts with Paula disclosing a
confidential case study, which she has been allowed to share to help POL
plan what to do to correct the issues raised in the SS review. The case raises
a number of issues for Susan Crichton and myself to look at, covering issues
such as “tone of voice, help not available, escalation impossible, Network and
Legal blocking any ability to discuss, contract questions etc.” These issues all
highlight shortcomings which made SPMs lives operationally more difficult.
This demonstrates my involvement in individual cases within the Scheme
where they concerned operational issues so that I was aware of them and
could then enable improvements to be put in place
b. POL00298435 (emails between SPM Pervez Nakvi, dated 21 August 2013) —
Paula Vennells has blind copied me into an email responding to a SPM who
she knows well, asking for Angela Van Den Bogerd or one of her team to be
in touch. I am likely copied in for general awareness, in case my involvement
was needed at a later date, given that Paula knew the SPM personally. Again,
this is an example of where I might be copied into correspondence for the
higher profile or more complex cases.
c. POL00099702 (email chain dated 4 October 2013) — Paula Vennells has
forwarded a spreadsheet of ‘thematic issues’ of cases likely to go into the
mediation process. She has shared with this the whole ExCo team, firstly to
Page 54 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
make us aware and secondly, to think about how we share the information
and take learnings from it.
d. POL00294482 (email from Gayle Peacock to me and others dated 30 July
2014) and attachment POL00294483 (Branch Support Programme — Work
Stream meeting papers dated 31 July 2014). This refers to a Workstream
meeting which I would not have attended. I did, however, chair the Branch
Support Programme Steering group meetings.
121.The Inquiry have asked me to consider POL00040032, a document entitled
“Lessons Learned” Review of handling of alleged issues/concerns about
Horizon: Terms of Reference’ dated 30 August 2013. The document lists
myself as one of the people who will be interviewed in relation to an internal
POL review of the way in which Horizon complaints were handled in the
period before the SS Interim Report.
122.I have no recollection of attending any such interview or being asked to attend
any such interview and I do not recall seeing any report which covered the
scope as set out in this document.
123.On 27 November 2013, the Board agreed that it would be appropriate to
consider the future approach to prosecutions (POL00021520 — Meeting
Minutes: Board meeting minutes for meeting held on 27 November 2013). I
cannot remember exactly and the Board papers do not assist me, however,
the Prosecutions Policy paper, POL00100193, shows that at an ARC meeting
on 19 November 2013:
Page 55 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
“the Committee considered whether or not there was merit in formally
amending the existing approach to prosecutions and if so what the substance
of these amendments should be”.
124.I am assuming that as a result of this it was discussed at the Board. I was not
a member of the ARC or the Board and I cannot remember what approach
was approved but from my recollection, the prosecutions remained
suspended. I think that the trigger for the policy review was because of the
publication of SS’s report, but I cannot say for sure.
125. Although I was not involved in the reasoning behind the changes made to the
policy, I can see from the email chain of 5 February 2014, POL00130502, that
Neil Hayward, Chris Day and I were asked to sign off a note on the
prosecution policy dated 4 February 2014, POL00100193. The email chain
shows that I am largely supportive of the policy but have a few observations /
questions arising from the ‘Commercial Impact / Costs’ section of the note.
126.On 11 February 2014, the ARC Sub-Committee held a meeting based off the
note of 4 February 2014, POL00100193, the purpose of which was to seek
the ARC’s views on the proposed changes to the prosecution policy and the
way in which POL will prosecute criminal cases in the future. I am not listed as
an attendee at this meeting and do not feel able to add anything beyond what
is contained in the meeting notes, POL00030900, dated 7 February 2014.
Page 56 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
127.During the entirety of my employment at POL, I never thought that there was
a risk that POL had inappropriately prosecuted SPMs and never thought or
had reason to believe that anyone else in POL thought this either. I can see
from the documents disclosed, that in multiple ExCo meetings, including: 16
September 2014, POL00306425; 16 October 2014, POL00149190; 13
November 2014, POL00038819; and 15 January 2015, POL00109859 that
we received the same update in respect of criminal litigation as follows:
“There are a number of cases which could have been prosecuted...but
prosecutions were not commenced to avoid adverse judicial comment.
Several cases have also been terminated while POL obtains an independent
expert report on the Horizon branch accounting system...There are currently
14 cases being kept under review as to whether a prosecution (supported by
an expert report) can be commenced.”
128.My recollection is vague and I cannot recall the chronological order of events
but from memory, prosecutions stopped from late 2013 and my belief was that
this was because of SS’s report. However, I cannot remember any specific
details around this and I was never directly involved.
129.1 was not directly involved in the Mediation Scheme but I understood that any
complaints that were made about Horizon were being investigated and
process improvements were developed where there were shortcomings. For
training and support issues, improvements were developed and implemented
by the Branch Support Programme.
Page 57 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
130.When the Scheme was first set up, a process was put in place to centralise all
complaints as referenced in POL00145553 (emails between Matt Baker of
CWU, Angela Van Den Bogerd and myself dated 18 July 2013). This email
chain concerns a SPM who is experiencing problems with losses which he
believed was because the new security alarm system which had been
installed was sharing the same communication line as Horizon. I have
forwarded it on to Susan Crichton and Nick Beal, copying in Angela Van Den
Bogerd, asking whether there is now a process for handling these. Angela
confirms that there is now a process for logging and acknowledging the case
although the second part of the process, how to work with the SPM to get to
the bottom of the issue, needs to be reviewed.
131.From reviewing the papers disclosed, the process for suspension and
termination changed around July 2013 as noted in POL00145530 (email
chain dated 17 July 2013) and POL00327004 (email chain dated 17 July
2013). At the same time, the SPM Appeal Panel Process was reviewed as
shown in POL00125022 (email from John Breedon copied to me dated 12
July 2013), POL00125023 (SPM Appeal Panel Review Document) and
POL00341652 (SPM Appeal Panel Process Document)).
132.From memory, there was a case concerning a Scottish SPM, David Woodrow,
who was suspended because he retained £2,000 in lieu of a rates issue which
was exclusive to Scotland. This is noted in POL00099179 (Email chain
between SPM David Woodrow, Paula Vennells, myself and others, dated 12
Page 58 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
July 2013) and POL00116059 (associated SPM case summary) and
POL00145419 (associated email chain of the same date). Paula Vennells
forwarded the case to myself and Susan Crichton, asking us to take this
seriously and investigate as his suspension appeared to be overbearing and
disproportionate. I am asked to meet with Susan and Paula to discuss what
we can do about this and what we might need to think about to be able to
respond responsibly going forward. I cannot say for definite, but it could be
that as a consequence of this meeting, we reviewed the processes for
suspension and termination and appeal panel process.
133.From looking at the documents, we increased the threshold for suspensions
with no suspensions to take place if the amount of money in dispute was
below £2,000. We also created greater oversight, with any future suspension
requiring authorisation by either Lin Norbury or John Breedan. For all other
cases, they would be referred to one of the national contract managers who
would then speak to either Nick Beal, Michael Larkin, Angela Van Den Bogerd
or myself, so that we could start to get a better picture of what was taking
place to help us formulate new criteria.
Branch Support Programme
134.The SS Interim Report identified a number of weaknesses in the training and
support that was provided to SPMs and gave a number of associated
recommendations. The Branch Support Programme (later known as the
Branch Improvement Programme) was established to look into these
Page 59 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
weaknesses and implement the recommendations. As noted in the Terms of
Reference, POL00089711, dated 19 July 2013:
“The purpose of this Programme is to understand the current business
processes, operational procedures and ways of working which are in place to
support branches, identify the gaps and produce recommendations to rectify
the issues.”
135.The programme was underpinned by three guiding principles: 1. Treat with
dignity and respect at all times; 2. stand in SPMs shoes and 3. Right first time.
136.Paula Vennells asked Angela Van Den Bogerd to lead the programme and I
was asked to sponsor it as all programmes required an Executive sponsor. As
a sponsor, I was not involved in the day to day running of the programme but
it was my role to make sure that the programme was on course to fulfil its
purpose, had adequate resources and was delivered to time, cost and quality
objectives.
137.1 would be kept updated on the progress of the programme, as shown in a
POL00203724 (Network and Sales Lead Team Meeting on 2 May 2014) and
would have approved any business cases related to the programme as shown
in POL00369484 (Business Case for Branch Support Programme dated 9
May 2014 and POL00304377 (email from Angela Van Den Bogerd to me
dated 9 May 2014). As my role was to ensure that the Programme was
fulfilling its objective, I would occasionally send actions to Angela Van Den
Page 60 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Bogerd to assess our progress. For example, at POL00312231 (email chain
dated 18 February 2015) I ask Angela to “consider how we should test the
contract managers engagement with sub postmasters to see if new approach
is working”.
138.The Branch Support Programme was later developed into the Branch
Improvement Programme, which had a wider scope, as detailed in the Terms
of Reference dated 4 February 2014, at POL00148920. I continued to be the
sponsor and Angela continued to be the Programme Director. As sponsor, I
would continue to receive updates on the programme as shown in the
following documents:
a. POL00374418 — Branch Support Programme Presentation dated 6
June 2014
b. POL00039217 — Branch Support Programme DRAID Log dated 6 June
2014
c. POL00374558 — Branch Support Programme Training Board dated 7
November 2013
d. POL00091483 — Branch Support Programme Meeting Slides dated 13
June 2014
e. POL00407938 — Email chain dated 25 June 2014 and attachment
POL00407939 (Branch Support Programme paper dated 25 June
2014)
Page 61 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
f. POL00374655 — Email from Gail Peacock to me dated 10 July 2014
and attachment POL00374656 (Branch Support Presentation dated 11
July 2014)
g. POL00349923 — Email from Angela Van Den Bogerd to me and others
dated 19 November 2011 and attachment POL00349924 (Branch
Support Programme paper for ExCo dated 20 November 2014)
h. POL00220938 — Email from Craig Tuthill to me and others dated 3
February 2015 and attachment POL00220939 (Branch Support
Programme Steering Group Meeting)
i. POL00446790- Branch Support Programme Improvements Updated
dated 12 February 2015
139.1 may sometimes give an introduction at the start of Steering Group meeting
to set out the objectives of the meeting and also give views, guidance and
direction where necessary on individual agenda items. In general, these
briefings would provide an update on the programme. I would also review
slid
le decks that were used at the Branch Support Programme and
Transformation Board ahead of presentations and ask questions to refine the
slid
42349433.1
les as necessary as shown in the following documents:
a. POL00374441 - Email from Gail Peacock to me dated 11 June 2014
and attachments POL00374442 (Branch Support Transformation
Programme dated 11 June 2014 and POL00374443 (Branch Support
Programme Performance Narrative dated 11 June 2014)
b. POL00374556 — Branch Training and Support Programme
Presentation (undated)
Page 62 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
c. POL00374750 — Email from Gayle Peacock to me dated 7 August
2014
d. POL00374850 — Email from Gayle Peacock to me dated 21 August
2014 and attachments POL00374851 (Branch Support Transformation
Programme dated 4 August 2014), POL00374852 (Transformation
Committee August 2013 narrative dated 22 August 2014 and
POL00374853 (Branch Support Dashboard 2014 dated 22 August
2014)
e. POL00210245- Transformation Committee Slides dated 9 October
2014
140.1 was not involved in the Working Group which was established to monitor the
Mediation Scheme. My recollection is that this was given direction and
oversight by the Project Sparrow Sub-Committee. However, I would have
been aware of it and received updates on its operation as a member of ExCo.
141.1 cannot recall any specific discussions that I had with individuals in the ExCo
on the Mediation Scheme and SS Report, other than those shown in the ExCo
meeting papers:
a. POL00414076 — Board meeting papers dated 30 April 2014
b. POL00300065 — ExCo meeting papers dated 8 May 2014
c. POL00027399 — ExCo meeting papers dated 4 June 2014
d. POL00027377 — ExCo meeting papers dated 3 July 2014
e. POL00207432 — ExCo meeting papers dated 19 August 2014
Page 63 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
f. POL00027358 — ExCo meeting papers dated 11 September 2014
g. POL00306425 — ExCo meeting papers dated 16 September 2014
h. POL00149190 —- ExCo meeting papers dated 16 October 2014
i. POL00038819 — ExCo meeting papers dated 13 November 2014
j. POL00149531 —- ExCo meeting papers dated 20 November 2014
k. POL00214660 — ExCo meeting papers dated 16 December 2014
I. POL00351813 — ExCo meeting papers dated 12 February 2015
m. POL00151514 — Group Executive meeting papers dated 12 March
2015
n. POL00130901 — ExCo meeting papers dated 16 April 2015
142.Although I would not have been party to discussions, I was updated on
Project Sparrow. For example, I would have had sight of the Sparrow Lessons
Learned Paper dated 25 April 2014, POL00104259, and would have been
briefed on the Initial Complaints Review and Mediation Scheme: The Way
Forward, dated 3 June 2014, POL00205259. This paper noted the scheme
was taking far longer than expected and proposed three options for
consideration by Sparrow Sub-Committee as shown in POL00205260
(Sparrow Sub-Committee Scheme briefing dated 9 June 2014).
143.As I was on the ExCo, I received updates on Project Sparrow. For example,
on 11 December 2014, Alwyn Lyons alerting the ExCo that there would be a
parliamentary debate on the Mediation Scheme POL00027747 and on 14
January 2015, Mark Davies providing a general update on the Mediation
Scheme as shown in POL00150615 and attachment POL00150616
Page 64 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
(Mediation Scheme Summary dated 14 January 2015). Similarly, the
documents disclosed show that Mark emailed myself and other senior
colleagues on 22 January 2015 POL00027739 and 30 January 2015
POL00117078 to provide us with an update on Project Sparrow ahead of the
BIS Select Committee hearing. As Mark notes, these messages were to keep
me and others in the loop and I cannot recall any subsequent discussions
from them.
144.1 was not responsible for responding to, or assisting with the response to,
Freedom of Information requests in connection with Horizon or SS matters but
as a member of ExCo, I was updated when we received them, as can been
seen from me being notified of them on 2 October 2014 at POL00210081, 17
November 2014 at POL00349860, 27 March 2015 at POL00225651 and 27
April 2015 at POL00353617. I believe, these email notifications would have
been for information only and my assumption is that there was an internal
policy on how to respond to them.
145.I had no involvement in POL’s strategy in preparing responses to applications
made to the Mediation Scheme or in POL’s response to SS’s investigations,
including disclosure of documents to SS.
146.1 never had any concerns that I was not receiving accurate and / or complete
information regarding BEDs, remote access or the integrity of Horizon and I
never had any reason to think that others in POL were not, particularly those
responding to applications to the Mediation Scheme. I was reassured that the
Page 65 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Scheme had the oversight of legal and IT specialists and I truly believed at the
time that the information POL had obtained was complete and accurate.
147.On 9 March 2015, Jane MacLeod (General Counsel) sent a message via
Alwyn Lyons that POL would be bringing the Working Group to a close and
giving notice of termination to SS, POL00352489.
148.Mark Davies sent an email, UKGI00003629, the following day, 10 March
2015, to the Board, copying in ExCo, with an executive summary of the
reasons for closing the Working Group . He states that POL has now
completed the investigations of all of the 136 cases admitted to the Mediation
Scheme and nothing has been found in any of the cases to suggest that
Horizon has not worked as it should. Having completed its investigation, POL
has decided to put forward for mediation, all cases remaining in the Scheme
except for those that have been subject to a previous Court ruling. Later that
day, an update from Jane Hill and Mark Davies is circulated confirming that
POL has made the public announcement that the Working Group is to close
with immediate effect and that JFSA, SS and MPs with a case in the Scheme
(or a particular interest in Post Office) have been separately informed
alongside the announcement UKGI00003691. Two days later, as shown in
POL00224273, Mark emailed me direct, providing another update on media
coverage and Sparrow, following the issue being raised by James Arbuthnot
MP in Prime Minister’s Questions.
Page 66 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
149.From my recollection and on review of the documents disclosed, the
Mediation Scheme was taking a lot longer than anticipated with JFSA and
SPMs unhappy that their expectations were not being met and POL not being
happy with some aspects of the quality of SS’s work. As POL had completed
its investigation into all cases, it therefore decided to mediate all cases apart
from those that had gone through the Courts.
150.In the same month, the Branch Support Programme was brought to an end
with resources removed. It was felt that following the wrapping up of the
scheme, all the necessary improvements were delivered or in place to be
delivered and transferred to the business as usual teams. A presentation on
the programme as provided for a Steering Group meeting in this month is at
POL00223299.
151.On 30 July 2014 I, along with other senior members, was sent minutes and
actions from the Risk and Committee meeting on 21 July 2014 -
POL00206989 with attachment POL00206990. P.5 of these minutes
references a Project Zebra, a report by Deloitte on the internal controls over
Horizon. Prior to reading these documents I could not recall Project Zebra and
I was not an attendee at this meeting. I do not recall having any involvement
and my awareness would have only been very peripheral.
Page 67 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
THE DEATH OF MARTIN GRIFFITHS
152.1 was deeply shocked and saddened at the death of Martin Griffiths and owing
to the tragic nature of the incident, a lot of senior managers were notified and
involved. From memory, following the incident, Angela Van Den Bogerd took
the lead in keeping myself and others updated on Martin’s condition and
putting in place practical arrangements for the family, such as a temporary
SPM to keep the branch open and providing ongoing payment of
remuneration to Martin's family. There were a lot of unknowns at the
beginning and so Angela also assisted in answering any questions that Paula
had around the circumstances of Martin’s case as shown in POL00196100
(emails from Paula Vennells to Angela Van Den Bogerd and myself dated 12
October 2013).
153.Mark Davies took the lead on the media communications as can be seen in
the email chain of 24 September 2013, POL00116133. I maintained general
oversight as to what measures POL was putting in place to support the family
and kept Paula Vennells updated. As noted in my email of 30 September
2013, POL00300096, “our priority is to support the family in this difficult time”.
154.After Martin passed away, I telephoned Gina Griffiths (Martin’s wife) to offer
my sincere condolences on behalf of POL. POL00393539 is an email chain
between Paula Vennells, myself and others from 11 — 22 October 2013.
Within this email chain, Angela wrote explaining that Gina Griffiths had
contacted Glen Chester to enquire as to whether there was any death in
Page 68 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
services benefit or pension and he had confirmed that neither was available
“given the Spmr status and contract for services etc.” Following this, Fay
Healey (Chief HR Officer) is asked by Paula Vennells to look into a couple of
options for payment. Fay subsequently emails me on 22 October 2013,
copying in other senior members of the team, outlining a number of different
payment sources. She states “Having discussed all of this with Mark, Belinda,
Angela and Alwen our collective view is that we should not consider a
payment at this stage, happy to discuss the rationale in person”.
155. The Inquiry have asked to what extent I was satisfied with the response/plan
arising from this correspondence. I have not been sent any further disclosure
following Fay’s email but from what I recall, payment was made to Martin’s
family through the Network Transformation funds. No amount of money can
be satisfactory payment for a life, but I think that I was at least satisfied that
Angela had found a way for some payment to be made. From what I
remember, everyone at POL was truly devastated, as noted in Angela’s email
of 16 October 2013, POL00381972.
156. The Inquiry have asked me to consider POL00196407 and POL00196410
(email from Mark Davies to myself and other dated 16 October and
attachment). Mark’s email informs me and other that Alan Bates has
proactively contacted the local MP (Jo Swinson) with regard to Martin
Griffiths, with the attachment showing a copy of this correspondence. As a
result of this, Mark says that he would like to contact the MP and offer a
meeting about the case which he thinks would need to involve Angela, myself
Page 69 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
and possibly Paula. I don’t believe that I met with Jo Swinson MP in relation to
this matter and there are no further documents in my bundle to suggest what
happened following this email.
2014 AND 2015 MEDIA COVERAGE
157.During my time on ExCo, I regularly received internal updates from Mark
Davies on the media’s response to Horizon and related issues, such as
Project Sparrow and SS’ Report, as shown in the documents listed below:
a. POL00101340 — Email from me to Mark Davies dated 9 September
2014
b. POL00101353 — Email from Mark Davies copied to me dated 10
September 2014
c. POL00101632 — Email chain dated 5 December 2014
d. POL00101761 — Email from Mark Davies to me dated 9 December
2014
e. POL00385837 — Email from Mark Davies to me dated 12 December
2014
f. POL00308946 — Email from Mark Davies to me dated 17 December
2014
g. POL00101983 — Email from Mark Davies to me dated 14 January 2015
h. POL00102395 — Email from Mark Davies to me dated 12 April 2015
158. Occasionally, I would also receive emails from Paula Vennells providing an
update on important media matters, such as the parliamentary debate as
Page 70 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
shown in POL00116922 (email chain from Paula Vennells to me and others
dated 17 December 2014). These updates were to keep me and other senior
leaders informed on what was happening within the media but I did not have
any direct involvement with formulating POL’s response to media coverage.
The limits of my knowledge with what was happening within the media is
noted in POL00333392 (email from Paula Vennells to me and others dated 14
January 2015) where Paula Vennells notes “/ expect the Exec and SLT
colleagues are not so well briefed.” Although I received regular updates, I was
not close to the detail of what was happening.
159.On occasion, I would be specifically approached to provide my input. For
example, in an email dated 24 April 2015, POL00151835, Mark Davies drafts
a message to be sent out to the network from the leadership team which he
says is probably best pitched from me, given my position. Similarly, an email
from me dated 14 June 2015, POL00162429, shows Mark Davies running a
proposed approach in respect of Panorama past the senior leadership team
for our input. Although my input might be sought on tone and audience, I was
never involved in drafting the actual content.
160.Separately, I was involved in a BBC Programme called “signed, sealed,
delivered” which aired in July 2015 and is referenced in the email from Paula
Vennells on 30 July 2015, UKGI00005157. This was not to do with Horizon,
but was a fly on the wall documentary, about every day life in the Post Office
and was seeking to underline the imperative for change that was happening
within the business.
Page 71 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
161.1 was not involved in developing the strategy or content of internal
communications relating to the Horizon IT system content. However, I would
be asked from to time to send out communications to my teams on the
subject. Draft communications would be sent to me asking for my approval
and where necessary sent out on my behalf.
162. In terms of internal communications regarding challenges to Horizon, every
day there would be the Daily Digest which summarised internal news. This
would be on all internal communications, not just Horizon. For example, the
Daily Digest from 10 September 2014, POL00158683, provides internal
communications on the leaking of the SS Report, as well as an industry news
summary.
163.1 did not have sight of any policies in respect of internal communications on
Horizon, but I can see that Mark Davies has said in his email of 14 June 2015
that his aim is to “make sure we reach the front line with reassurance and
information”. This approach is in line with my understanding that POL’s
intention was to inform and reassure people about Horizon, based on what
they believed at the time to be true.
164.1 was not on the Board and so am unable to comment on their views as to the
media reporting, beyond what is contained in the email correspondence.
Page 72 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
165.1 have considered POL00387685 (email from Paula Vennells to me dated 23
May 2015). Within this email chain I write:
“I’m sure the noise will increase as we implement the cliff and announce the
first few crown closures/mergers next month”.
166.My comment was in response to Mark Davies, who flagged a newspaper
article that contained negative and inaccurate comments about the Network
Transformation. My response was because I thought we might face similar
media articles in the future as we would be shortly announcing more Crown
office franchising mergers and what was know as the ‘Cliff, where any
branches which had not yet converted under the Network Transformation
programme, would be given notice to either convert to one of the new models,
close with 26 months remuneration or be moved onto variable pay. The
concept of Cliff was driven by the fact funding for Network Transformation
could not be guaranteed after a certain date and there was desire to complete
the modernisation process to help POL become more competitive and have a
more sustainable network. I can recall that despite my thoughts that Cliff may
attract a lot of media attention and hence my comment to Mark, in actual fact
it did not attract as much attention as I had anticipated.
POL’s RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS FROM 2014 ONWARDS
167.From 2014 onwards I was Network and Sales Director, and then CEO Retail
(2017).
Page 73 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
168.As referenced above, SPMs might raise concerns about Horizon by writing
direct to POL and when the litigation started, there was a process in place to
deal with all of the complaints.
169.As referenced above, on a regular basis I would visit branches to meet staff
and SPMs to get their feedback and answer any questions or issues they may
have and gain first hand experience of day to day life in post offices and
SPMs experience. This meant that occasionally a SPM might be in personal
touch with me as shown in the email chain dated 21 November 2014,
POL00308162, and attachment POL00308163 (Spreadsheet of Copy of 311
of Concurrence Report dated 20 November 2014). Similarly, because of my
seniority, a SPM might send correspondence direct to me so that I was aware
of a complaint, as SPM lan Straughan did in his email Of 21 July 2015,
POL00152655, and later 21 September 2015, POL00233039. As referenced
above, I would also occasionally attend NFSP local branch meetings where
SPMs would have the opportunity to feedback any concerns
170. If I received any complaint direct from a SPM, I would forward it to the
appropriate team within POL to investigate. For example, POL00344065 is an
email chain regarding Histon Post Office, dated 17 — 22 January 2014. The
email chain starts with an email from me to Dave Hulbert (Head of IT
Services) and Nick Beal (Head of Network Development) forwarding a text
message from a SPM asking if he can claim any money for his branch being
down for longer than 48 hours. I would often provide my phone number to
Page 74 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
SPMs so that they could contact me if needed and this is an example of such
contact happening, with me taking action to forward his issue to the people
best placed within POL to help. Dave Hulbert subsequently responds saying
that he will look into the issue with Fujitsu. I can recall this complaint as it was
particularly frustrating because it led to an argument between BT and Fujitsu
as to where the problem lay, with neither fixing the issue but with the SPM
being caught in the middle, extremely upset because they were unable to
trade. I ask for this to be urgently looked into, with the email showing that I
have spoken direct to the SPM and I want her to be fully compensated. I am
subsequently taken out of the email chain with the problem being taken
forward by Nick Beal and Dave Hulbert.
171.Due to my role as Network and Sales Director, I was often copied into
complaints to keep me in the loop, although my direct involvement was not
needed, as with the email chain dated 19 January 2015, POL00102042.
172.From 2013 - 2015 the Branch Support Programme was also in operation, for
which I was the Executive Sponsor. This is discussed in further detail above
but one of my roles as a sponsor was to oversee the costs. An email from me
to Angela Van Den Bogerd dated 27 November 2014, POL00350031, shows
Angela asking me to approve a business case asking for funding which would
automate a manual transaction around cheques, helping to prevent human
error. This is a good example of the programme putting in place practical
measures to assist SPMs when complaints were raised over the practical
operation of Horizon. Because Angela was in charge of the day to day running
Page 75 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
of the Business Support Programme, I would also usually direct SPM
complaints on Horizon to her to deal with as shown in POL00308241 (email
from Angela Van Den Bogerd dated 28 November 2014), POL00150177
(email from Paula Vennells copied to me dated 14 December 2014) and
POL00314060 (email from Angela Van Den Bogerd dated 1 April 2015) and if
I received feedback on an issue then I would feed this back to her to look into.
For example, in April 2015 I emailed Angela, POL00353200, to let her know
that an issue that a SPM had thought was Horizon related, was actually an
error with the SPM crediting a customer's account, instead of making a
withdrawal . In this same email chain, I feed back to Angela that reduced
classroom training meant the SPM was having to dedicate more time to a new
person and ask her to look into it.
173. If a complaint was particularly high profile or complex, then I might be asked
to oversee it. For example, in December 2014 Paula Vennells asked me to
sponsor a review of a complaint by SPM Haydi O’Brien, POL00150182. I
agree to sponsor it and to look at it objectively to see whether it raises any
wider issues. Similarly, in March 2015 Paula askes to me look into a
complaint from SPM David Atkins, POL00151726 and I can see from the
disclosure that I was copied into a letter from Nisha Kaur SPM to Paula
Vennells on 22 June 2017 about a phone alarm issue, POL00174666. The
documents disclosed do not assist me and I cannot recall what the outcome
of these complaints were. However, the course of action I would have
normally taken would be to contact the relevant senior manager responsible
and ask them to investigate and let me know their recommendations before
Page 76 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
finalising. This would then allow me to review, challenge or support the
outcome.
174.In the main, I was copied into correspondence on complaints so that I had a
general awareness and oversight of them and could input when needed,
particularly as a lot of the complaints related to operational issues. For
example, on 4 September 2014, there is an email chain, POL00355475,
where Michael Larkin (Head of Agency Network and my direct report) makes
me aware of an issue at a branch in Crichton Avenue. Michael asks Angela
Van Den Bogerd to advise and she says that the problems that the SPM is
experiencing are unacceptable and advises on how to stabilise the Horizon
connectivity and suggests a remuneration figure to cover the SPMs losses. I
follow on from this, asking to make sure that legal are comfortable with the
proposed wording for any payment to cover losses.
175.Following this complaint, I had correspondence with Rachael Maskell MP who
wrote to me about the issue as shown in POL00119501 (letter from Rachel to
me dated 4 November 2015) and POL00154419 (letter from me to Rachel
dated 11 December 2015). Similarly, POL00251201 is a letter from me to a
Jennifer Joannon JP dated 27 January 2017. This refers to two previous
letters of 7 and 16 January which have not been disclosed but from the
contents of the letter, Jennifer was writing to obtain information on a branch
which was closed due to an audit shortage. I would not have drafted the
wording of any external correspondence, but this would have been done by
Page 77 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
the Executive Communications Team, who would then pass the letter for me
to sign off.
176.Another example of how POL would respond to complaints can be seen from
a letter that was sent to Paula Vennells from a SPM, Mr Summers dated 19
March 2017 as shown in POL00423866 and attachment POL00423867. The
response is coordinated by the Executive Correspondence Team and
because the letter is extremely comprehensive covering a wide range of
issues, it has been sent to all the relevant senior managers to investigate and
copied to me as CEO Retail. POL00344413 is an email between myself,
Rebecca Barker (IT Service Manager) and others dated 10 February 2014
where Rebecca has provided an update on a joint visit with Fujitsu and POL
to look into Outreach site Horizon equipment which was experiencing issues.
On 15 February 2014, Paula Vennells emailed Chris Day and myself, copying
in Martin Edwards and Neil Hayward about a SPM Pervez Nakvi, who was
having problems within his branch, POL00373817. The email chain shows
that I picked up the complaint and took action ‘on the ground’, with Pam Heap
(Regional Area Manager) visiting the SPM on a Saturday to assist them.
Although I would not deal with every complaint personally, if it was particularly
important or I was asked to step in, I would take action as I did here. As
demonstrated above, my involvement was specific to individual cases, I was
not involved in formulating POL’s overall strategy in responding to complaints.
177.I have been asked to consider POL00249601 (email from me to Paula
Vennells dated 4 July 2017) and to explain my comment:
Page 78 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
“we can offer HNGa but this could throw doubt on the integrity of HNGx. We
took the prospective pmr to meet and speak to other pms who were positive
about the local model and the integrity of Horizon. However, 2 of the 3
brothers who are owners of the store believed that running a PO still
presented too big a risk.”
178.From what I recall, we were trying to open a new Post Office in Quarry Bank
and one of the prospective operators (being three brothers) pulled out
because they had concerns about Horizon in light of the media reports. Paula
Vennells asked me how we might provide reassurance and suggested that I
offer for them to use the next version of Horizon. I did not think that that was a
good idea because at the time, I believed that the current version of Horizon
was working as it should be and I thought that by offering to send a more
updated version, it might be perceived as POL not having confidence in the
existing version.
ENGAGEMENT WITH BARONESS NEVILLE-ROLFE FOLLOWING THE
MEDIATION SCHEME
179.As noted in the email sent by Jane Hill on 5 June 2015, POL00316792, Jane
and I met with Baroness Neville-Rolfe at the Post Office Penzance Road
branch in Ipswich on 5 June 2015. This was an informal, non-official visit as
Baroness Neville-Rolfe was in the area. The email notes that the SPM and
myself led the discussions, with the Baroness asking questions of a
Page 79 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
commercial nature, such as around branch and retail turnover, as well as
questions about Horizon and SPM training. Overall, Jane’s comments on the
meeting were positive. I would have attended this meeting because I was the
Network and Sales Director to answer questions about the operation of
branches and also to brief her on the Network Transformation and Crown
Transformation programmes as these were both very important matters at the
time and I would be best placed to answer any questions on them.
180.Paula Vennells responds to this email on 6 June 2015, POL00376515, and
asks me to put my ‘black hat’ on and drop a note of “where there could have
been negatives/challenges lurking behind the questions asked”. I take this to
mean that she wanted me to see whether anything negative could be taken
from the questions asked by Baroness Neville-Rolfe and our subsequent
answers.
181.1 respond on 7 June, POL00152132, reframing the questions that Baroness
Neville-Rolfe raised from a negative point of view and providing my answers. I
think that Paula had asked me to do this as she wanted to know what sorts of
questions Baroness Neville-Rolfe might ask POL about so that she would feel
prepared when she met her.
182.POL00162422 is an email from Mark Davies to me and others dated 11 June
2015. This references a meeting that he attended with Baroness Neville-
Rolfe, along with Al and Paula which he says was “very positive”. I cannot
remember the meeting and my comment “Great news. Well done mark”
Page 80 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
suggests that I was not there. However, I can see the briefing note,
UKGI00001074, sent to Baroness Neville-Rolfe ahead of a meeting on 11
June, lists me as one of the attendees. I cannot recall if this was a separate
meeting on the same day or if I was originally meant to attend but did not.
However, I think that I would have contributed to the briefing note for the
meeting.
183.On 8 July 2015 Paula Vennells emails myself and others, UKGI00004900,
forwarding a positive note from Baroness Neville-Rolfe, following a Board
Awayday and two executive meetings, one which included me. A copy of the
note has not been disclosed. I cannot remember this meeting or what the
content of it would have been about.
184.1 cannot recall having an ongoing working relationship with Baroness Neville-
Rolfe beyond the meetings referenced above but from memory and from the
tone of the emails discussing the meetings, all of my interactions with her
were positive.
GROUP LITIGATION
185.As I was on ExCo, I was kept up to date with the progress of the Group
Litigation Order (“GLO”). For example, on 25 January 2017, Jane MacLeod
emailed me, the Board and other senior members to let us know that the
preliminary hearing in relation to the litigation was to take place the next day,
POL00103302. Similarly, on 30 January 2017, Mark Davies provided an
Page 81 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
update to me and other senior managers of the outcome of hearing as part of
his weekly communications, POL00391120. That same day, I attended an
ARC meeting where I provided an update on branch compliance for financial
services. Minutes of this meeting are at POL00247182. I can see from the
minutes that there was also an update on the litigation but I would have only
attended the meeting to provide my update and would not have been present
for the litigation update. On 13 November 2017 I attended a Group Executive
meeting where I can see from the minutes, POL00251520, that there was a
verbal update on Group Litigation. However, I cannot recall the content of this
update. My involvement in the GLO was very minimal although, as can be
seen above, I was kept up to date with its progress due to my position as an
ExCo. I left POL before the case was heard.
186.1 was not responsible for developing POL’s general litigation strategy in
relation to the GLO, as this was led by the Legal team. However, I was briefed
on the proposed strategy, and asked for my input from a business perspective
as there were issues which fell under my responsibility (as shown in
POL00024700 (email from Jane MacLeod copied to me and others dated 20
September 2017) and POL00250687 (email from Jane MacLeod to me and
others dated 21 September 2017)), as well as potential implications to how
the branch network would be affected if the contractual issues in the litigation
went against POL. A paper, POL00250688, was then sent to the Board on 26
September 2017, setting out the different options..
Page 82 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
187.1 did not have any involvement in POL’s decision-making to disclosure of
documents, preparation of lay and expert evidence or its decision to seek
Fraser J recuse himself as I no longer worked at POL at that time.
188.P0L00391185 is an email dated 22 February 2017 from Jane McLeod,
forwarding a letter from Freeths (not disclosed). From reading the email, I
think that Freeths were contacting SPMs to gain support ahead of the GLO.
As I was responsible for the relationship with the NFSP, Jane was raising this
with Paula and me for briefing George Thomson and the NFSP more
generally to expect these kind of letters, which should be sent to Rod Ismay to
deal with. POL00248687 (email chain dated 19 April 2017) is a copy of this
email forwarded on to other senior colleagues without me copied in. I do not
remember speaking to the NFSP about the Group Litigation but I am sure that
they would have been kept updated about its progress. As noted above, I left
the business before the cases were heard.
LEAVING POL
189.In around November / December 2016, POL reorganised into two business
centres (retail and financial services), with Paula Vennells putting me in
charge of the retail business, as CEO Retail. However, this was on the
understanding that POL would begin actively recruiting externally for someone
with retail experience who would replace me. Once a replacement was found,
I was put on 6 months gardening leave, starting in January 2018. Although it
was a business decision for me to leave, I left on good terms.
Page 83 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
190. The Inquiry have disclosed POL00250878, a document dated 8 October 2017
which I have never seen before and for which I do not know who the author or
recipient is. The documents asks two questions about me, which appear to
have been answered by Mark Davies. The first question asks whether I have
been sacked to which the answer was “Absolutely not!...”. The second
question ask why two versions of the announcement of my leaving went out,
to which the answer was “Quite simply, we made a mistake and sent out an
earlier draft — we're sorry for the confusion this caused”.
191.From my recollection, POL made two announcements that I was leaving. The
first of these was quite blunt, simply stating that I was leaving but this was
followed by a more substantial and personal announcement. As noted in the
document, I understand that the first announcement was an initial draft sent in
error.
GENERAL
192.During my time at POL, as Network and Sales Director, I was completely
focused on delivering the Network and Crown Transformation programmes for
which there was tremendous pressure to deliver. This was also a priority and
focus for our Shareholder, Board and Executive as it formed a major part of
POLs overall transformation and route to profitability. On reflection, I think that
we were trying to do too much too quickly and because there were designated
teams set up to look into Horizon, I personally did not get as involved in it as I
Page 84 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
might otherwise had if Network and Crown Transformation was not
happening.
193.1 do not think that I could have done anything differently in respect of IT or
Legal issues but I can see now, how imbalanced the relationship was
between SPMs and POL. I would like to think that if I had been aware of this
at the time I would have sought independent advice on how to fix this. I
genuinely thought that I and those around me were trying to improve the
sustainability of the network and helping SPMs. To me, the SS review
highlighted that the problems weren't down to the Horizon system but that
there were shortcomings in our training and support. I can see now that we
were acting in error in focusing on operational issues.
194.1 truly and sincerely believed the messages I was receiving from POL on
Horizon. I believed that the Board, Executive and others that I worked with
genuinely wanted to get to the truth. We should have commissioned a
thorough independent review of the system. From what I have heard from the
Court hearings and Inquiry, I feel very frustrated that the extent of BEDs in the
system and the uncontrolled remote access was not disclosed.
195. There are no other matters that I wish to draw to the attention of the Chair.
Page 85 of 109
42349433.1
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Statement of Truth
I believe the contents of this statement to be true.
Signed:
Dated: 15 November 2024
Page 86 of 109
42349433.1
Index to First Witness Statement of Kevin Gilliland
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
No
URN
Document Description
Control Number
POLO0099063
Signed Interim Report into
alleged problems with the
Horizon system
POL-0098646
POL00145179
Email from Dave Hulbert to
Lesley Sewell re: 061904
Baughurst Post Office and
Outreach Operations.
POL-BSFF-
0004306
POL00105625
Email from Lesley Sewell to
Dave Hulbert, cc Antonio
Jamasb, Steve Beddoe re:
ACTION RE: The Broadway
126001 - Update 1
POL-0104592
POL00294728
Email from Tracy Marshall to
Kevin Gilliland, Angela Van-
Den-Bogerd cc'd Helen Rose re:
Horizon system issues
POL-BSFF-
0132778
POL00142625
Ferndown PO Branch - Outline
of meeting with Mrs Athwal
POL-BSFF-
0001790
POL00041564
Bankruptcy, prosecution and
disrupted livelihoods -
Postmasters tell their story;
reported by Rebecca Thomson -
Article
POL-0038046
POL00026572
Horizon — Response to
Challenges Regarding Systems
Integrity
POL-0023213
POL00444612
Email from Carol King to Victoria
Noble and Jenifer Robson re A
subpostmistress' trial for
discrepancies in her branch
POL-BSFF-096-
0006539
POL00363086
Email from Victoria Noble to
Lynn Hobbs and Kevin Gilliland
re: URGENT Impact Transaction
Correction and Branch Trading
Issue
POL-0185327
10.
POL00326693
Email from Lesley Cartwright to
Jennifer Robson RE: TC and BT
and the 42 week issue
POL-0173913
11.
POL00015020
Email from Maureen Moors to
Adrian Wales, Andrew Daley,
Andy Hayward, Paula Vennells
POL-0008212
42349433.1
Page 87 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
and others Re Major incident
stakeolder REPORTING: Tile
Farm - audit shortage at branch
12.
POL00403835
Post Office Ltd Internal Review
of Agents Processes in
Managing Suspected Financial
Irregularities.
POL-0188578
13.
POL00434015
Email from Christina Wood to
various re Major Incident
Stakeholder Reporting:
Shortage over £46k Glenholt
SPSO
POL-BSFF-
FLP006-0000001
14.
POL00405605
Email chain from Kendra
Dickinson to Anne Allaker RE:
Penzance PO - Mrs Tenbeth -
update and action proposals
POL-BSFF-
0229917
15.
POL00338648
Email from Andrew Winn to
Alison Bolsover RE: Branch
visits with shex
POL-BSFF-
0164369
16.
POL00184326
Email chain from Nick Beal to
Adrian Wales and Angela Van-
Den-Bogerd Re Sarah Burgess-
Boyd, Starbeck Avenue PO
POL-BSFF-
0022389
17.
POL00184327
Correspondences between
Ronnie Campbell MP and Sarah
Burgess-Boyde re Former Post
Office Branch situated at 22
Starbeck Avenue
POL-BSFF-
0022390
18.
POL00316792
Email from Jane Hill to Paula
Vennells Mark Davies Alisdair
Cameron & others cc Kevin
Gilliland Martin Humphreys RE:
Baroness Neville-Rolfe visit
POL-BSFF-
0154842
19.
POL00099179
Email from Paula Vennells to
Alice Perkins CB re The case for
independence in the Post Office
appeals system
POL-0098762
20.
POL00298435
Email from Paula Vennells to
Pervez Nakvi, Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd cc'd George Thomson
and others re: Glitch in Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0136485
21.
POL00086765
Network auditing approach,
methods and assurance
POL-0083823
22.
POL00086831
POST OFFICE LTD
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:
Internal Audit Options
POL-0083889
42349433.1
Page 88 of 109
WITN10040100
Kevin Gilliland, Paula Vennells,
Mike young and others Re: FW:
Inside Out programme. Contains
Post Office Statement in regards
to Horizon.
WITN10040100
23. POL00379712 Email from Peter C Wilkinson to I POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland, Michael Larkin 0206599
and others re: Pulborough audit.
24. POL00379713 Audit report of Post Office POL-BSFF-
Pulborough branch to Elaine 0206600
Ridge from Susan Swabey.
25. POL00179484 Financial branch performance POL-BSFF-
profile trial results 0017547
26. POL00303045 Post Office Limited Matters: POL-BSFF-
Dispute Resolution - Privileged I 0141095
and Confidential - Claims over
£500K or Those of a Sensitive
Nature
27. POL00294717 Letter from Kevin Gilliland to POL-BSFF-
Athwal re: letter to Paula 0132767
Vennells
28. POL00294705 Email from Tracy Marshall to POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland and Angela Van- I 0132755
Den-Bogerd re: Ferndown
branch briefing doc
29. POL00294706 Ferndown Post Office Branch POL-BSFF-
Information Briefing 0132756
30. POL00294743 Interview Notes - Ferndown POL-BSFF-
branch - in confidence 0132793
31. FUJ00224980 Email from Penny Thomas to POINQ0231095F
Bains Rajbinder, Re: Fujitsu
Logs for Ferndale
32. POL00294761 Letter from Kevin Gilliland to POL-BSFF-
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd, Peter I 0132811
D Johnson cc'd Dave S Pettitt
and others re: Val Athwal
33. POL00294745 Email from Paula Vennells to POL-BSFF-
Mike Granville, Kevin Gilliland, 0132795
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd and
others RE: BBC TV - Inside Out.
34. POL00294746 Email from Nick Beal to Angela I POL-BSFF-
Van-Den-Bogerd re: BBC TV - 0132796
Inside Out
35. POL00120451 Email from Mike Granville to POL-0126141
42349433.1
Page 89 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
36.
POL00294779
Email from Susan Crichton to
Paula Vennells, Mike Granville,
Kevin Gilliland and others re
BBC Inside Out Programme
POL-BSFF-
0132829
37.
POL00056782
Email from Sabrina Jethwa to
Emily B Springford cc: Rebekah
Mantle re: RE: Horizon - Wilson
POL-0053261
38.
39.
POL00379142
POL00294749
Criminal Case Study - Email
from Mike Granville to Mike
Whitehead RE: information
requested
Email from Mike Granville to
Kevin Gilliland, Paula Vennells,
Mike Young and others re:
Inside Out programme on BBC
South last night
POL-BSFF-
0206029
POL-BSFF-
0132799
40.
POL00338518
Email chain from Mike Granville
to Paula Vennells, Mike Young,
Kevin Gilliland & others cc Rod
Ismay, Alana Renner, Stuart
Taylor RE: Inside Out
Programme on BBC East on
Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0164239
41.
POL00120561
Email from Mike Granville to
Paula Vennells, Mike Moores,
Mike Young and others re:
Update on JFSA and Horizon
issues and urgent respinse
needed for BIS and Report on
JFSA response to issues for BIS
POL-0126174
42.
POL00176465
Email from Emily B Springford to
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd, Lesley
J Sewell, Mike Granville and
others re: JFSA claims -
disclosure and evidence
gathering
POL-0171736
43.
POL00294896
Email from Rod Ismay to Paul
Meadows, Rebekah Mantle and
Emily B Springford re: JFSA -
Delegated Authority for Key
Decisions - Proposal - Legally
Privileged and In Confidence
POL-BSFF-
0132946
POL00294897
Response to JFSA - Request for
delegated authority as regards
POL-BSFF-
0132947
42349433.1
Page 90 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
costs of legal action 14 October
2011
45.
POL00338392
Email chain from Mike Granville
to Hayley Fowell, Susan
Crichton, Rebekah Mantle,
David Simpson & others cc Mike
Young, Kevin Gilliland, Sue
Huggins & others RE: Private
Eye inquiry - Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0164113
46.
POL00363235_0
50
Email from David Simpson to
Mike Young, Paula Vennells,
CC Shane O'Riordain and
others re: Horizon - Private Eye
- concerning a magazine
challenging the integrity of the
Horizon IT system
POL-BSFF-
0191195_050
47.
POL00294869
Memo from Rod Ismayu to
Angela Van Den Bogerd and
others on 12/10/11 re: JFSA and
Shoosmiths / Access Legal -
Response to Challenges -
Proposed Steering Group and
Purpose.
POL-BSFF-
0132919
48.
POL00294969
Email from Paula Vennells to
Shane O’Riordain, Mike Young,
Susan Crichton and others re:
For your attention from press
cutting
POL-BSFF-
0133019
49.
POL00378468
Email from Eunice Kirby to Eunice
Kirby forwarding emails between
Kevin Gilliand, Rod Ismay and
Mike Granville - Re: FW:
Plumstead High Street Post Office -
J Singh
POL-BSFF-
0205355
50.
POL00030217
Ernst & Young Management
letter to POL for year ended
2011
POL-0026699
51.
POL00294829
(Final) Terms of Reference from
Stephen A Collins to Susan
Crichton cc Kevin Gilliland,
Derek K Foster and others RE:
POL - Review of Horizon
System Controls
POL-BSFF-
0132879
52.
POL00294906
Email from Paula Vennells to
Lesley J Sewell cc'd Mike
Young and Kevin Gilliland re:
POL-BSFF-
0132956
42349433.1
Page 91 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Horizon independent
assessment
53.
POL00029114
POL Draft Review of Key
System Controls in Horizon:
Assurance Review (Draft
11/005)
POL-0025596
54.
55.
POL00030482
POL00339056
Post Office Limited Review of
Key System Controls in Horizon,
Assurance Review Report for
March 2012
Email from Dave Hulbert to
Kevin Gilliland, Alana Renner,
Lesley J Sewell and others RE:
IMPORTANT: Horizon service
test today during Disaster
Recovery test
POL-0026964
POL-BSFF-
0164777
56.
POL00129915
post office LTD Board - Outputs
of the Fujitsu Services review of
Horizon Online
POL-0123922
57.
POL00339652
Email from Lesley J Sewell to
Kevin Gilliland Re: Horizon
service - RE: Baughurst Post
Office
POL-BSFF-
0165373
58.
POL00114269
Post Office Limited - Extract
from minutes of a Board
meeting held on 19 September
2012.
POL-0113196
59.
UKG100018115
POL Board - Post Office
Technology - Risk and
Resilience Review - by Lesley
Sewell
UKGI028122-001
60.
POL00184071
Minutes of the network
transformation programme
board 21 November 2012
POL-BSFF-
0022134
61.
POL00029713
Post Office Limited Assurance
Review Report AR12/050 for
December 2012
POL-0026195
62.
POL00340338
Follow up review of key system
controls in POLSAP - Post office
limited -Assurance review
presentation slides
POL-BSFF-
0166059
63.
POL00144659
Follow up review of Key System
Control in POLSAP - POL- Draft
Report - AR 12/037b
POL-BSFF-
0003788
64.
POL00380822
Email from Sue Singh to Susan
Crichton, Chris M Day, Kevin
Gilliland and others. RE: Internal
POL-BSFF-
0207709
42349433.1
Page 92 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Audit & Risk Management AR
12.050a - Follow Up Review of
Key System Controls in Horizon
65.
POL00380823
Post Office Limited Assurance
Review May 2013
POL-BSFF-
0207710
66.
67.
POL00162189
POL00143600
Email from Mark R Davies to
Richard Z Walden and Nina
Arnott. RE: Fwd: An important
change to the Horizon support
service - IT Transformation.
Email chain from Lesley Sewell
to Dave Hulbert, Gina Gould re
Baughurst PO
POL-0150629
POL-BSFF-
0002765
68.
POL00105483
Letter from Rt Hon James
Arbuthnot MP (JA) to Ms Moya
Greene & response letter re:
Odiham Hampshire Post Office
Closure
POL-0104663
69.
POL00096780
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Paula Vennells regarding James
Arbuthnot correspondence
POL-0096363
70.
POL00096804
Email from Paula Vennells to
Kevin Gilliland, Theresa lles,
Mark R Davies and others in re
to James Arbuthnot
correspondence
POL-0096387
71.
POL00105494
Email from Glenda C Hansen to
Theresa Iles, Alwen Lyons and
Lee Summers re: Rt Hon Oliver
Lewin MP and Post Office Ltd's
Horizon System
POL-0104674
72.
POL00105481
Notes of the Meeting with
James Arbuthnot, Alice Perkins
and Alwen Lyons
POL-0104661
73.
POL00417089
Email from Mike Whitehead to
Peter Batten, RE: Will Gibson
Meeting -
Feedback/actions attaching
Arbuthnot meetings
communication plan.
POL-BSFF-
0237240
74.
POL00142984
Email from Dave Pardoe to
Jarnail A Singh, Helen Dickinson
RE: Yetminster
PO: Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0002149
75.
POL00105490
Email from Alice Perkins to
Glenda Hansen, RE: responses
POL-0104670
42349433.1
Page 93 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
to letters from MPs request for
meeting.
76.
POL00180807
Email from Paula Vennells to
Mike Granville re Horizon in
Confidence
POL-BSFF-
0018870
77.
POL00030365
Post Office Limited Board of
Directors Meeting Minutes of
22/09/2011
POL-0026847
78.
POL00294748
Email from Mike Granville to
Kevin Gilliland, Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd, Paula
Vennels and others re: NFSP
line on Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0132798
79.
POL00372043
Email from George Thomson to
Paul Vennells, Kevin Gilliland,
Susan Barton
and others re: Fwd: Horizon
Interim Report
POL-BSFF-
0199436
80.
POL00296010
Email from George Thomson to
Nick Beal, cc'd Kevin Gililand
and Paula Vennells re PRINTED
Fwd: Horizon Investigation.
POL-BSFF-
0134060
81.
POL00296011
Letter from Alan Bates to
George Thompson re Post
Office Horizon System
Problems
POL-BSFF-
0134061
82.
POL00348119
Email chain from Paula Vennells
to Neil Hayward, Nick Beal,
Kevin Gilliland
and others re: The NFSP/A few
‘think digital’ thoughts
POL-BSFF-
0173840
83.
POL00150720
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Nick Beal, CC Neil Hayward and
Mark R Davies
and others re: NFSP update -
concerning Grant Agreement
POL-BSFF-
0009832
84.
POL00151913
National Federation of
Subpostmasters Annual
Conference 2015- briefing
areas
POL-BSFF-
0011025
85.
POL00027276
Post Office Group Executive
Agenda 14/9/2017 and
associated documents
POL-0023917
86.
NFSP00000454
NFSP report of a meeting of the
National Executive Council on
10 - 12 October
2011
VIS00008912
42349433.1
Page 94 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
87.
POL00295389
Email chain from Alwen Lyons to
George Thomson, cc'd Paula
Vennells and
Kevin Gilliand - Re: Re: Fwd:
Ref; Thorney Post Office, 5
Abbey Place PE6 ,
Computer Systems failure.
POL-BSFF-
0133439
88.
POL00295392
Email from George Thomson to
Paula Vennells, Kevin Gililand,
Nick Beal re
PRINTED Fwd: SubPostmasters.
class action against the Post
Office - possible
evidence regarding Horizon
errors etc.
POL-BSFF-
0133442
89.
POL00295393
Email from George Thomson to
Paula Vennells, Kevin Gililand,
Nick Beal re
PRINTED Fwd: Horizon System.
POL-BSFF-
0133443
90.
POL00295394
Email from George Thomson to
Paula Vennells, Kevin Gililand,
Nick Beal re
PRINTED Fwd: Press enquiry
on Horizon.
POL-BSFF-
0133444
91.
POL00295395
Email from Alwen Lyons to Craig
Tuthill, Angela Van-Den-Bogerd
RE: Thorney
post office, 5 Abbey Place PE6,
computer systems failure
POL-BSFF-
0133445
92.
POL00105607
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Dave Hulbert re: NFSP Session
- discusses need
to POL to retain NFSP support
POL-0104581
93.
POL00152168
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Nick Beal CC'ing Mark Davies,
Roger Gale and
others RE: Media coverage on
Post Office and Horizon - BBC
Panorama
programme
POL-BSFF-
0011280
94.
POL00021508
Meeting minutes: Board meeting
minutes for meeting held on 4th
July 2012
POL0000041
95.
POL00167447
Post Office Limited - Meeting
Minutes of the Board Meeting of
Post Office Ltd
POL-0162744
96.
POL00358173
Post Office statement on
findings on interim report into
Horizon computer
POL-BSFF-
0183894
42349433.1
Page 95 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
system
97.
POL00192104
Email from Jackie Meylak To:
Nick Beal re FW: Regular Call re
Horizon Issues
POL-BSFF-
0030167
98.
POL00207756
Email from Belinda Crowe to
Martin George, Chris M Day,
Mark R Davies and
others re: Fwd: Second Sight
Part Two report
POL-BSFF-
0045819
99.
POL00207757
Second Sight Briefing Report —
Part Two
POL-BSFF-
0045820
100.
POL00101299
Email from Mark R Davies to
Neil Hayward, Nicholas Kennett,
Chris Aujard and others re
Sparrow - BBC North story
POL-0100882
101.
POL00190338
Email chain from Martin
Edwards to Chris M Day, Kevin
Gilliland, Susan
Barton & others cc Paula
Vennells, Susan Crichton, Mark
R Davies Re: JA
meeting brief
POL-BSFF-
0028401
102.
POL00190341
POL Second Sight review into
Horizon - briefing note on
interim report.
POL-BSFF-
0028404
103.
POL00341624
Email from George Thompson
to Paula Vennells to Kevin
Gilliland, Susan
Barton and others re: Post
Office dispute: Urgent 9 July
2013
POL-BSFF-
0167345
104.
POL00029663
Email from Lesley J Sewell to
Paula Vennells, cc'ing Kevin
Gilliland, Susan
Crichton and others, re: Case
Study.
POL-0026145
105.
POL00099702
Email from Theresa lles to
Alwen Lyons, Chris M Day, Fay
Healey and others
RE: FW: Example Applications
POL-0099285
106.
POL00294482
Email from Gayle A Peacock to
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd, Anne
Allaker, Peter Prior-Mills and
others re: Branch Support
Programme - Work Stream
meeting - Papers
POL-BSFF-
0161719
42349433.1
Page 96 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
107.
POL00294483
Email from Branch Support
Programme - Work stream
meeting - Thursday
31st July 2014
POL-BSFF-
0161720
108.
POL00040032
Post Office- Lessons Learned
Review of handling of alleged
issues/concerns
about Horizon: Terms of
Reference
POL-0036514
109.
POL00021520
Meeting Minutes: Board meeting
minutes for meeting held on
27th November 2013
POL0000053
110.
POL00100193
Post Office Audit - Risk and
Compliance Committee -
Prosecutions Policy
POL-0099776
111.
POL00130502
Email chain from Kevin Gilliland
to Alwen Lyons cc'ing Chris
Aujard, Chris Day
and others re: Prosecution
Policy Paper
POL-0124092
112.
POL00030900
Meeting Agenda for the Audit,
Risk and Compliance Sub-
Committee,
including paper on the Post
Office's Prosecuting Policy
POL-0027382
113.
POL00306425
Post Office Limited Executive
Committee Agenda Meeting
September 2014
POL-BSFF-
0144475
114.
POL00149190
Executive Committee Agenda
for the meeting to be held on 16
October 2014
in Room 501
POL-BSFF-
0008310
115.
POL00038819
Post Office Executive
Committee Agenda for meeting
held on 13th November
2014 and associated documents
POL-0027705
116.
POL00109859
Post Office Agenda for the
meeting to be held on 15
January 2015
POL-0111095
117.
POL00145553
Emails between Angela Van-
Den-Bogerd and others RE:
Nelson Post Office
Mid Glamorgan Horizon
technical issues.
POL-BSFF-
0004680
118.
POL00145530
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Susan Crichton cc'd Alwen
Lyons re: For Action:
POL-BSFF-
0004657
42349433.1
Page 97 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
Ref: ECT 524/13 Customer
name: Anna Skoczen Feedback
due: 19/7/13 Case
signatory: ? Lin Norbury
119.
POL00327004
Email from John Breeden to KB
Owen re Urgent - FW: FOR
ACTION: Ref: ECT
524/13 Customer name: Anna
Skoczen Feedback due: 19/7/13
Case
signatory: ? Lin Norbury
POL-0173455
120.
POL00125022
Email from John Breeden to
Mike Granville cc: Craig Tuthill,
Susan Crichton,
and other Re: Appeals Process
POL-0131788
121.
POL00125023
POL Subpostmaster Appeal
Panel Process Review
POL-0131789
122.
POL00341652
Subpostmaster Appeals Panel
Process
POL-BSFF-
0167373
123.
POL00116059
Statement in relation to the
Bishopston Post Office
POL-0117061
124,
POL00145419
Email from Paula Vennells to
Susan Crichton and Kevin
Gilliland re: Fwd: The
case for independence in the
Post Office appeals system
POL-BSFF-
0004546
125.
POL00089711
Branch Support Programme —
Terms of Reference v.2
POL-0086686
126.
POL00203724
Branch support programme
update - network and sales lead
team meeting.
POL-BSFF-
0041787
127.
POL00369484
roject Initiation Document
Template v1.04
POL-BSFF-
0192901
128.
POL00304377
Email from Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd to Sharon Bull, lan
Kennedy, Alison
Thompson and others re: RE:
Branch Support Programme -
Business Case -
Request for Concurrence by
lunchtime Thursday 8th May
POL-BSFF-
0142427
129.
POL00312231
Email from Jackie Meylak to
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd RE;GE
Actions
POL-BSFF-
0150281
130.
POL00148920
Post Office Business Support
Programme Terms of Reference
POL-BSFF-
0008040
131.
POL00374418
Branch Support Programme -
Steering Group Meeting
POL-BSFF-
0201811
42349433.1
Page 98 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
132. POL00039217 Branch support programme POL-0035699
DRAID Log (dependencies,
Risks, Actions, Issues Database
133. POL00374558 Branch Support Programme : POL-BSFF-
Programme Board - "to be" 0201951
processes PPT
134. POL00091483 Post Office Branch Support POL-0091046
Programme - Work Stream
Meeting Presentation
Slides
135. POL00407938 Email from Gayle Peacock to POL-BSFF-
Belinda Crowe, Angela Van- 0231936
Den-Bogerd, Jackie
Meylak & Ors RE: Up to date for
Exco - inclusion of branch
support programme
with sparrow
136. POL00407939 Post office Itd - executive POL-BSFF-
committee branch support 0231937
programme
137. POL00374655 Email from Gayle A Peacock to I POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland CC: Angela Van- I 0202048
Den-Bogerd
RE: Branch Support Programme
Steering Group pack
138. POL00374656 Meeting Minutes on Branch POL-BSFF-
Support Programme 0202049
139. POL00349923 Email from Angela Van-Den- POL-BSFF-
Bogerd to Alwen Lyons, Kevin 0175644
Gilliland cc Jackie
Meylak Re: Branch Support
Programme Update paper for
ExCo
140. POL00349924 Post Office Ltd Executive POL-BSFF-
Committee Branch Support 0175645
Programme
141. POL00220938 Email from Craig Tuthill to Kevin I POL-BSFF-
Gilliland, Angela Van-Den- 0059001
Bogerd, Nick Beal
and others re: Branch Support
Programme - Steering Group
Meeting
142. POL00220939 Branch Support Programme POL-BSFF-
Steering Group Meeting. 0059002
143. POL00446790 Post Office Group Executive - POL-BSFF-102-
Branch Support Programme 0000044
Improvements
Update (Confidential) - Report
42349433.1
Page 99 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
144, POL00374441 Email from Gayle A Peacock to I POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland, Angela Van Den I 0201834
Bogerd - Re:
Submission of Branch Support
Programme for Transformation
Committee
145. POL00374442 Branch Support Transformation I POL-BSFF-
Programme 0201835
146. POL00374443 Branch Support Programme POL-BSFF-
Performance Narrative By Gayle I 0201836
Peacock —
Transformation Committee -
Narrative on Branch Support
Programme Slide
147. POL00374556 Branch Training and Support POL-BSFF-
Programme PPT 0201949
148. POL00374750 Email from Gayle A Peakcock to I POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland and Angela Van- I 0202143
Den-Bogerd
Re: Slide deck for Friday
149. POL00374850 Email from Gayle A Peacock to I POL-BSFF-
Kevin Gilliland and Angela Van- I 0202243
Den-Bogerd RE:
Transformation Committee
Slides for 4th September
Meeting
150. POL00374851 Branch Support Transformation I POL-BSFF-
Programme 0202244
151. POL00374852 Transformation Committee POL-BSFF-
August 2014 narrative 0202245
152. POL00374853 Branch Support Dashboard POL-BSFF-
2014 0202246
153. POL00210245 Post Office Transformation POL-BSFF-
Committee Agenda and 0048308
Overview presentation for
9th October 2014
154. POL00414076 Post Office Ltd Board Meeting POL-BSFF-
between Nick Kennett, Chris 0234189
Aujard, Chris Day
and others.
155. POL00300065 Executive Committee Agenda. POL-BSFF-
0138115
156. POL00027399 Post Office Executive POL-0024040
Committee Agenda
42349433.1
Page 100 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
157.
POL00027377
Post Office Agenda: Executive
Committee meeting held on 3rd
July 2014 and
associated documents
POL-0024018
158.
POL00207432
Executive committee agenda for
the meeting to be held on 19
August 2014 in
Room 501
POL-BSFF-
0045495
159.
POL00027358
Post Office Agenda: Executive
Committee meeting 11th
September 2014 and
associated documents
POL-0023999
160.
POL00149531
POL Executive Commitee
Agenda - present Paula
Vennells (Chair), Gavin
Lambert, Mark Davies & others.
POL-BSFF-
0008651
161.
POL00214660
Executive committee agenda
POL-BSFF-
0052723
162.
POL00351813
Group executive agenda
POL-BSFF-
0177534
163.
POL00151514
Group Executive Agenda for the
meeting to be held on 12th
March 2015 in
Boardroom, Room 501, Old
Street
POL-BSFF-
0010626
164.
POL00130901
April 2015 Group Executive
Agenda PO - Paula Vennells
chairing Nail
Hayward, Martin George and
Others present from 16/04/2015,
POL-0120776
165.
POL00103259
Email from Jane MacLeod to
Tim Parker, Carla Stent, Richard
Callard and others, RE: PO Ltd-
Supply Chain Litigation-
Confidential and subject to legal
privilege- do not forward
POL-0102842
166.
POL00104259
Post Office Ltd Board Noting
Paper: Lessons Learned —
Second Sight Investigation into
Horizon Author: Belinda Crowe
POL-0103842
167.
POL00205259
Post Office Ltd Initial Complaints
Review and Mediation Scheme:
The way forward
POL-BSFF-
0043322
168.
POL00205260
Sparrow Sub-Committee
Scheme briefing - 9 June 2014
DRAFT NOT POLICY
POL-BSFF-
0043323
169.
POL00027747
Email from Alwen Lyons to Chris
M Day, David Ryan, Paula
Vennells and
POL-0024388
42349433.1
Page 101 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
others RE: FW: Sparrow Update
170.
POL00150165
Email chain from Angela Van
Den Bogerd to Mark R Davies
and Belinda Crowe cc’
ing Rodric Williams and
others RE: BBC - One Show
POL-BSFF-
0009283
171.
POL00150616
Mediation Scheme: What You
Need To Know
POL-BSFF-
0009728
172.
POL00027739
Email from Mark R Davies to
Paula Vennells, Chris Aujard,
Alisdair Cameron
and others RE: Sparrow Update
POL-0024380
173.
POL00117078
Email from Mark R Davies to
Paula Vennells, Martin George,
Neil Hayward and
others re Sparrow update,
including in relation to BIS
Select Committee,
Second Sight, and CCRC
POL-0117912
174.
POL00210081
Email from FOITEAM to Chris
Aujard, Kevin Gilliland re:
requests for recorded
information under the FOIA -
confidential Second Sight report
leaked to BBC.
POL-BSFF-
0048144
175.
POL00349860
Email from FOI! Team to Chris
Aujard, Kevin Gilliland and Chris
M Day RE:
Request for information under
the Freedom of Information Act-
Costs of
Second Sight Report II
POL-BSFF-
0175581
176.
POL00225651
Email from FOI Team to Jane
MacLeod, cc'd Mark R Davies
and Kevin Gililiand
- Re: Request for information
under the Freedom of
Information Act - Second
Sight Report II
POL-BSFF-
0063714
177.
POL00353617
Email from FOI Team to Jane
MacLeod, Kevin Gilliland and
Mark R Davies re:
Request for information under
the Freedom of Information Act -
SS Report I!
and Post Office's Response
POL-BSFF-
0179338
178.
POL00352489
Email from Alwen Lyons to Alice
Perkins, Neil Wilkinson, Virginia
Holmes and
POL-BSFF-
0178210
42349433.1
Page 102 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
others Re: Sparrow email to the
Board
179.
UKG1I00003629
Email from Alwen Lyons to Alice
Perkins, Neil McCausland,
Virginia Holmes
and others Re: Additional
Sparrow email to the Board
UKG1014443-001
180.
UKG100003691
Email thread from Alwen Lyons
to Alice Perkins, Neil
McCausland, Alasdair
Marnoch and others RE:
Sparrow - update to Board and
GE
UKGI014505-001
181.
POL00224273
Mark R Davies to Melanie
Corfield, Jane Hill & Ruth Barker
RE: Sparrow media
and Parliament
POL-BSFF-
0062336
182.
POL00223299
Branch Support Programme.
Steering Group Meeting.
Discusses update on
action from previous meeting,
status updates, progress against
work streams,
risks and issues
POL-BSFF-
0061362
183.
POL00206989
Email from Rob Bolton To:
Martin George, Kevin Gilliland,
David Ryan and
others re Risk & Compliance
Committee Minutes - 21st July
2014
POL-BSFF-
0045052
184.
POL00206990
Post Office Ltd Risk and
Compliance Committee Meeting
Agenda
POL-BSFF-
0045053
185.
POL00196100
Email from Paula Vennells to
Angela Van Den Bogerd to
Kevin Gililand, Alwen
Lyons, Martin Edwards and
others re Martin
Griffiths/Sparrow.
POL-BSFF-
0034163
186.
POL00116133
Email from Mark Davies to
Paula Vennells, Susan Crichton,
Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd and others re: Martin
Griffiths.
POL-0117132
187.
POL00300096
Email from Paula Vennells to
Kevin Gililand, Fay Healey,
Mark Davies re Martin Griffiths.
POL-BSFF-
0138146
42349433.1
Page 103 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
188.
POL00393539
Email from Fay Healey to Kevin
Gilliland, Cc'd Alwen Lyons,
Hugh Flemington
and others Re: Martin Griffiths
death
POL-BSFF-
0228377
189.
POL00381972
Email from Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd to Martin Edwards,
Kevin Gilliland and
others re: following conversation
with Glenn on Monday.
POL-BSFF-
0208859
190.
POL00196407
Email chain from Mark Davies to
Rodric Williams Kevin Gilliland
Angela Van-
Den-Bogerd & others RE:
Stephen Mosley MP: Martin
Griffiths
POL-BSFF-
0034470
191.
POL00196410
Letter from Stephen Mosley MP.
to Jo Swinson MP Re:
Correspondence
received from Mr Alan Bates
from JFSA regarding his
concerns relating to the
suicide attempt of Mr Martin
Griffiths
POL-BSFF-
0034473
192.
POL00101340
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Mark R Davies, Paula Vennells,
Alwen Lyons and
others Re: Post Office IT system
criticised in report - BBC News
POL-0100923
193.
POL00101353
Email from Mark Davies to Neil
Hayward, Kevin Gilliland, Martin
Edwards and
others re: Post Office IT system
criticised in report - BBC News
POL-0100936
194.
POL00101632
Email from Mark Davies to
Paula Vennells and Alwen Lyons
regarding Sparrow
update
POL-0101215
195.
POL00101761
Email from Mark R Davies to
Alwen Lyons, Paula Vennells,
Kevin Gilliland and
others re: Sparrow update
POL-0101344
196.
POL00385837
Email from Mark R Davies To:
Paula Vennells, Chris Day, Chris
Aujard & Ors
RE: Sparrow media
POL-BSFF-
0212724
197.
POL00308946
Email from Mark R Davies to
Alwen Lyons, Paula Vennells,
Nichloas Kennett
POL-BSFF-
0146996
42349433.1
Page 104 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
and others RE: Sparrow
198.
POL00101983
Email from Mark R Davies to
Paula Vennells, Neil Hayward,
Martin George and
others re: Sparrow
POL-0101566
199.
POL00102395
Email from Mark R Davies to
Paula Vennells, Alisdair
Cameron, Neil Hayward
and others - Re: Sparrow
POL-0101978
200.
POL00116922
from Paula Vennells to Nicholas
Kennett, Martin George, Kevin
Gilliand
and others re: Fwd: One show
POL-0117777
201.
POL0033339
Email from Paula Vennells to
Mark R Davies, Neil Hayward,
Martin George and
others RE: Sparrow
POL-0179748
202.
POL00151835
Email chain from Kevin Gilliland
to Mark R Davies cc Paula
Vennells, Jane
MacLeod, Gavin Lambert Re:
Note to network
POL-BSFF-
0010947
203.
POL00162429
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Mark Davies cc Roger Gale,
Michael Larkin and
others RE: Panorama
POL-0150838
204.
UKGI00005157
Email chain from Paula Vennells
to Alice Perkins cc Alwen Lyons,
Neil
McCausland 'and others' RE:
BBC 2 Documentary
UKGI015971-001
205.
POL00158683
Email from Ellie B Austin to
Alana Renner, Alasdair
Marnoch, Alice Perkins, Alwen
Lyons and others RE: Your
Daily Digest - Wednesday 10
September
POL-0147259
206.
POL00387685
Email from Paula Vennells to
Kevin Gilliland, Mark R Davies,
Tom Wechsler
and others. RE: Media coverage
for The Post Office: The Post
Office,
23052015 (05:26)
POL-BSFF-
0214572
207.
POL00308162
Email from Keith Bridges To:
Andrew Winn and CC: Sarah
Lambert, Mark Irvin
re Hurst Hill
POL-BSFF-
0146212
42349433.1
Page 105 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
208.
POL00308163
Spreadsheet of Copy of 311 of
Concurrence report
POL-BSFF-
0146213
209.
POL00152655
Email from lan to NBSC
Enquiries cc Paula Vennells,
Kevin Gilliland, George
Thomson and others RE:
Transaction Corection
POL-BSFF-
0011767
210.
211.
POL00233039
POL00344065
Email from lan Morton to NBSC,
Kevin Gilliand, and cc'd Paula
Vennells - Re:
Horizon Error
Email from Dave Hulbert to
Lesley J Sewell re: Fw: Update.
Wednesday
09:00am - Histon post office
INC0003137
POL-BSFF-
0071102
POL-BSFF-
0169786
212.
POL00102042
Email from Avene O Farrele to
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd, ECT,
FlagCaseAdvisor
and others Re: Probably too late
now
POL-0101625
213.
POL00350031
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Angela Van-Den-Bogerd cc
Jackie Meylak RE:
BSP - CAF for approval
POL-BSFF-
0175752
214.
POL00308241
Email from Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd to Gavin lambert, lan
Thomas Re: Horizon
Fault - Urgent repsonse please -
complaint from Debenham PO
Branch FAD
2331306
POL-BSFF-
0146291
215.
POL00150177
Email chain from Paula Vennells
to Haydi O'Brien, cc'd Angela
Van-Den-
Bogerd, Kevin Gilliland and bec
another re Griffithstown 342632
POL-BSFF-
0009295
216.
POL00314060
Email from Angela Van-Den-
Bogerd to Avene O'Farrell Re:
Scratchcards -
Aston on Trent Post Office
POL-BSFF-
0152110
217.
POL00353200
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Angela Van Den Bogerd re: Re:
Postmaster IS
error
POL-BSFF-
0178921
218.
POL00150182
Email chain including Kevin
Gilliland (POL); Paula Vennells
(POL); Haydi
O'Brien (POL) Re: Griffithstown
POL-BSFF-
0009300
42349433.1
Page 106 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
219.
POL00151726
email from Paul Swanton to
Mark R Davies re Horizon Help
POL-BSFF-
0010838
220.
POL00174666
Letter from Nisha Kaur to Paula
Vennells. RE: difficulties with
employment
with Post Office
POL-0168849
221.
POL00355475
Email from Andrew Carpenter to
Kevin Gilliland, Michael Larkin,
Angela Van Den Bogerd and
others - RE: Crichton Avenue -
2793490 - YO30 6HB UPDATE2
POL-BSFF-
0181196
222.
POL00119501
Letter from MP Rachael Maskell
to Kevin Gilliland Re: Critchton
Ave Post Office
POL-0119813
223.
POL00154419
Letter from Kevin Gilliland of
Post Office Ltd to Rachel
Maskell MP - York
Central re Crichton Avenue Post
Office
POL-BSFF-
0013518
224.
POL00251201
Letter from Kevin Gilliland OBE
to MMs Jennifer Joannon J.P.
re: response to
previous letter dated on
07/01/2017
POL-BSFF-
0089264
225.
POL00423866
Email from flagcaseadvisor to
Thomas P Moran, Mark Ellis,
Neil Ennis and
others RE: FOR ACTION: ECT
1723/16(JW) Martin Summers,
Postmaster
Feedback due
POL-BSFF-
0238681
226.
POL00423867
Letter from Martin Summers
(Whitchurch Post Office) to
Paula Vennells re:
Experience of working with the
Post Office
POL-BSFF-
0238682
227.
POL00344413
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Rebecca Barker and cc'd Gina
Gould, Lesley J
Sewell and others re: Re:
Michele Middleditch - Baughurst
POL-BSFF-
0170134
228.
POL00373817
Email from Paula Vennells to
Chris M Day, Kevin Gilliland and
CC'ing Martin
Edwards and other RE:
Culture/Pervez incident
POL-BSFF-
0201210
42349433.1
Page 107 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
229.
POL00249601
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Paula Vennells cc Avene Regan,
Martin Edwards
and others RE: Quarry Bank -
request from Margot's office
about the status of
the new branch & Horizon
POL-BSFF-
0087664
230.
POL00376515
Email from Paula Vennells to
Jane Hill, Kevin Gilliland, Mark
R Davies & Ors
RE: Baroness Neville-Rolfe visit
POL-BSFF-
0203908
231.
POL00152132
Email from Kevin Gilliland to
Paula Vennells cc Jane Hill,
Mark R Davies, Mike
Granville and others RE:
Baroness Neville-Rolfe visit
POL-BSFF-
0011244
232.
POL00162422
Email from Mark R Davies to
Kevin Gilliland, Martin George,
Neil Hayward and
others. RE: Minister meeting.
POL-0150832
233.
UKG1I00001074
Briefing from Laura Thompson
to Baroness Neville-Rolfe re
Meeting with Paula
Vennells, Post Office Limited
CEO
Vviso0009212
234,
UKGI00004900
Email from Paula Vennells to
Alice Perkins, Virginia Holmes,
Tim Franklin and
others re: Baroness Neville-
Rolfe Scanned doc - negotiating
with the CWU and
Unite
UKGI015714-001
235.
POL00103302
Email from Jane MacLeod to
Tim Parker, Ken McCall, Carla
Stent et, RE:
Subject to privilege- Postmaster
litigation: GLO Application
POL-0102885
236.
POL00391120
Email from Mark R Davies to
Alisdair Cameron, Alwen Lyons
and others re:
Communications weekly update
- key messages attached.
POL-BSFF-
0218007
237.
POL00247182
POL Audit, Risk and
Compliance Committee meeting
minutes.
POL-BSFF-
0085245
238.
POL00251520
Post Office Ltd — Confidential -
Group Executive - meeting
POL-BSFF-
0089583
42349433.1
Page 108 of 109
WITN10040100
WITN10040100
239.
POL00024700
Email from Jane MacLeod to
Mark Ellis, Mark Davies and
others re: URGENT -
Postmaster litigation -strategic
options for CMC
POL-0021179
240.
POL00250687
Email from Jane MacLeod to
Paula Vennells, Alisdair
Cameron, Kevin Gilliland
and others Re: Postmaster
Litigation - Update tomorrow
morning
CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT
TO LEGAL PRIVILEGE — DO
NOT FORWARD
POL-BSFF-
0088750
241.
POL00250688
Postmaster Litigation Executive
Summary
POL-BSFF-
0088751
242.
POL00391185
Email from Jane MacLeod to
Paula Vennells, Kevin Gilliland
re: FW Freeths
POL-BSFF-
0218072
243.
POL00248687
Email from Rodric Williams to:
Melanie Corfield, Andrew
Parsons, CC: Mark Underwood1
re FW: Freeths
POL-BSFF-
0086750
244,
POL00250878
Q8A Re: Kevin Gllliland and
other Post Office Matters
POL-BSFF-
0088941
42349433.1
Page 109 of 109