WITN11210100
WITN11210100
Witness Name: Richard Phillip Francis
Statement No.: WITN11210100
Dated: 17" October 2024
POST OFFICE HORIZON IT INQUIRY
FIRST WITNESS STATEMENT OF RICHARD FRANCIS
I, RICHARD PHILLIP FRANCIS, will say as follows...
INTRODUCTION
1. 1am a former employee of Post Office Limited and held the position of
Operations Director from January 2005 through to March 2008 when I left
the business.
2. This witness statement is made to assist the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
(the “Inquiry”) with the matters set out in the Rule 9 Request dated 15"
August 2024 (the “Request’). This statement is in relation to Phases 5 & 6
of the Inquiry.
BACKGROUND
3. I have been asked to set out a summary of my career prior to joining POL.
After leaving school at the age of 16 I immediately joined a clerical training
e Page 1 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
program at the South-Eastern Electricity board where in parallel to internal
training programs I studied for an ONC in Business Studies. In approximately
1981 I moved to the Computing function within the Electricity Board to train as a
Computer Programmer.
. Over the years that followed I continued a computing/technology based career
leading to a number of IT Director & CIO roles within Pepsi Cola International,
TW/Smiths Group & Safeway up until Safeway was bought by Morrisons.
. Upon leaving Safeway I carried out a few small consulting/advisory roles before
being approached for the role at POL.
. With regards to my role at POL, I was recruited into as Operations Director in
January 2005 as a direct report to David Mills, the CEO. The role of Operations
Director did not exist at the time and te plan, as it was originally laid out to me
was to take over some of the functions under the control of Dave Miller who was
the Chief Operating Officer (COO). This was to take place during the period of
time before David Miller was due to retire in mid 2006.
. Itis difficult to recall the exact timings of the functional transitions, but the first
function was IT under the interim leadership of David X Smith. My recollection
for starting with IT was that it was my core background together with the fact that
POL was already in a negotiation process with Fujitsu to replace thelegacy
Horizon solution that had been used since1999.
. The second of the functions to move across was the Supply Chain which
consisted of Cash in Transit, Cash Centres and distribution of materials to the
Post Office Network. This function was led by Keith Rann. As stated previously, I
am unsure of the exact timing, but I would believe it to be during the first quarter
Page 2 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
or shortly afterwards. Within a similar timeframe I took over the Property function
which was under the Leadership of Clive Bradley
Towards the end of 2005 I inherited the Security Function which was led by
Tony Marsh who had a dual reporting line with Royal Mail Group (RMG). This
function was taken over by John Scott in early 2007 following Tony Marsh's
appointment to RMG Group Head of Security.
10. In 2006 there was a change of CEO from David Mills to Alan Cook which , at
11.
12.
13.
some point during that year, which led to a switch towards a program based
approach aimed at significant cost reduction to meetbusiness sustainability
targets. At this point I added a program called Operational Efficiency which was
led by Neil Ennis.
One final point of note is that that at some point in 2005, I cannot recall
exactly when, but I would imagine around quarter 3 I decided that to
increase focus on both the Change and Service Delivery, David X Smith
would become the Head of Change & IS (IT) and a new appointment of
Andy McLean to become the Head of Service Delivery. Andy's role was to
cover not only IT services, but all other aspects of Operations performance
(e.g. Contact Centres, Supply Chain etc.)
As previously stated, I left POL in March 2008, I had decided to leave at the
end of 2007 but in discussions with Alan Cook we landed on a date that was
mutually convenient to both POL and myself.
As I had worked for several large organisations over the years it was my
intention to follow a path of independent consulting and advisory for a small
number of companies. This is what I am still doing today.
Page 3 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
ROLE AS DIRECTOR
14.When I joined POL in 2005 this was my first appointment to a Limited
company board and, as such, it was very much a ‘learning on the job’
process. I do not recall any specific training or instructions given to me at
that time but as I was joining an established group, I would have followed
the lead given by my peers.
14.1. Personally, I was not aware of criminal prosecutions that were
being carried out by POL. From my recollection there were no
notifications of intended or actual prosecutions that were presented to
the board at any point in time.
14.2. Personally, I was not aware of any civil litigations that were being
carried out by POL. From my recollection there were no notifications of
civil litigation that were presented to the board at any point in time.
14.3. IT, as per any of the functions of the business, would have major
activities reviewed at a board level (i.e. the proposal to move to the new
Horizon Solution (HNG-X)). In the event of high-profile failures, I would
expect the board to understand the implications. The only example of
one of these issues was around network resilience due to poor
performance from the network suppliers and limited back up capability. I
cannot recall if these issues existed before my arrival but they were
eventually resolved as can be seen in the POL Board papers. Business
as usual activities for IT would be managed within the IT function and
the Service Delivery functions alongside the delivery partner Fujitsu.
14.4. Preparation of Management and Statutory accounts was a role of
Page 4 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
the finance function, and the position of POL’s finances would be
regularly presented to the board, particularly considering potential
solvency issues. The systems that were in use for this were supported
within the IT organisation and its partners.
14.5. I do not recall any specific conversations on the Race Relations
Act at the POL board (the Act referred to here is 2010, which is after I
left the business, but the principal remains the same). I do recall a clear
focus on Diversity and Diversity awareness / training which was
operated at the RMG level. This seemed to be appropriate as all
activities and actions would be groupwide and not just POL.
15. In order to address the question where various responsibilities laid within
the group my views are as follows:
15.1. The monitoring of the Horizon system was a joint responsibility of
Fujitsu (the support partner) and the IT/Service Delivery function.
15.2. With regards to the responsibilities for Criminal Prosecutions and
Civil Proceedings, my understanding of this process was that the audit
function (part of Network or Finance — I cannot recall which) could
identify shortfalls as part of their standard audit processes and in
combination with the contract managers decide if they needed further
investigation from the investigations team. I could assume that at this
point there would be reference back into Fujitsu for data analysis, where
necessary. Any move towards prosecution would then have to be taken
with RMG legal team as there was not a POL legal structure during my
time at POL. I do not know if this has become learned understanding
from the inquiry, but I do not remember it being any different.
Page 5 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
15.3. Personally, I was never asked to review any cases and I was
never asked to authorise or request any prosecutions either as an
individual or at a POL board level.
16.With respect to oversight and reporting lines:
16.1. At no point during my time with POL did I have any personal
involvement or oversight of the Group Legal Department nor did I have
any involvement or oversight of the RMH, RMG IT department.
16.2. The POL IT department reported into me from January 2005 to
March 2008 via The Head of IT, David X Smith.
16.3. I had no personal involvement in the oversight of the RMH, RMG
problem management teams.
16.4. The POL problem management team, although I do not recognise
the name, would have been part of the Service Delivery/IT functions
together with Fujitsu. These internal teams would have ultimately
reported into me via the heads of those internal functions and their own
organisational layers.
16.5. I had no personal involvement in the oversight of the RMH or RUG
security teams. The POL security team reported into me from the end of
2005 with a dual reporting line into RMG.
16.6. I had no personal involvement in the oversight of the investigation
and prosecution of SPMs for the recovery of alleged shortfalls. As
previously stated in response 15.2 there was a range of functions
involved in these decisions with the ultimate responsibility sitting in the
RMG legal function.
Page 6 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
16.7. I had no personal involvement in the oversight of the of SPMs for
the recovery of alleged shortfalls including civil proceedings. As
previously stated in response 15.2 there was a range of functions
involved in these decisions. In my mind I have no recollection of a
delineation between prosecutions and civil proceedings, but this may be
a reflection on my lack of involvement.
17.1 do not recall ever being shown, reviewed or asked to comment on any of
the guidelines and practices followed by POL, RMH and/or RMG when
pursuing a civil action against an SPM.
18.The audit process was not something that I have ever had visibility of. I
suspect this would be because it was managed within a different directorate
(i.e. Finance or Network), and it was never raised as a discussion.
19.My understanding is that the contract management team would be
responsible for suspending or terminating SPMs’ contracts. I had no visibility
into this as it was part of the network function.
20.1 do not recall ever being shown, reviewed or asked to comment on any of
the practices and policies adopted by POL, RMG and/or RMG in
investigating, alleged offences, bringing prosecutions or the process of
disclosing documents. I do not recall ever hearing a conversation around
document disclosure.
21.With regards to the extent to which I passed on information about concerns
as to the reliability of data produced by the Horizon IT System. These
concerns were never raised to me in my timeframe at POL and therefore this
would not have happened.
22.During my time at POL, I did not receive any information about the lack of
Page 7 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
reliability of the Horizon IT system and therefore this information would also
not have been shared with the POL board or Royal Mail.
23.I have been asked to reflect on a number of aspects of how the POL, RMH
& RMG boards operated but as I was not a regular attendee to the RMG or
RMH boards I can only really comment on the POL board from early 2005 to
early 2008. There is one exception to this when I attended small part of the
RMH board in April 2006 to seek approval for the next stage of investment
for the development of the Horizon HNG-X solution (RMG00000033). I
believe that the reason for this was that the amount was too great for the
POL board to approve alone. As a result of just one partial meeting, I do not
have a view on how those boards operated.
23.1. The POL board had a collegiate style under the leadership of Sir
Mike Hodgkinson and David Mills. The discussions were open with a
feeling that any subject could be raised or challenged.
23.2. Following the arrival of Alan Cook and a number of new directors
being appointed, the POL board felt less of a joined up group and more
a set of directors with their own functions.
23.3. As a result of the inquiry providing me with the Board minutes from
February 2005 through to January 2008, I am in a better position to
answer the question relating to regular reporting to the POL board other
than relying purely on memory. (POL00021487, POL00032147,
POL00021490, POL00021491, POL00021493, POL00294385,
POL00032210, POL00021494 and POL00021496). By the end of this
period of time (2007) there would be regular reports from the Chief
Executive/Managing Director, Finance Director covering functional
Page 8 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
performance and activities as well as a large number of solvency related
papers, Sales & Marketing reports, Banking reports and Operations
Reports. The intention of these reports was to share knowledge of the
major activities within the functions. From reviewing these papers, it
shows that my reporting focus for at least the first 16 months was on the
development of the commercial proposition for HNG-X. As the
directorate expanded in line with my comments in points 6 through 11, it
is clear that a number of these areas are brought into the discussion
starting with the Cash in Transit business.
23.4. In my opinion there were varying levels of IT knowledge around
the board table. David Mills had a deeper understanding than most due
to his history in HSBC, however, I would have had the deepest technical
understanding.
23.5. From memory, if a director was absent for any reason, then a
substitute from the directorate would attend the POL board meeting
based upon the subjects that needed to be discussed. I cannot see any
board papers for meetings that I did not attend therefore it is difficult to
say who, if anyone, would have attended on my behalf.
24. During the period from when I joined POL at the beginning of 2005 through
to when I left in early 2008, I never had a conversation about risks and / or
compliance issues that could arise from the a) the prosecution of SPMs for
theft or false accounting and b) the pursuit of civil ligation against SPMs to
recover alleged shortfalls in branch accounts. I was not a member of the
Risk & Compliance committee.
25.With regards to my views on the extent that the RMH, RMG & POL boards
Page 9 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
discussed the Horizon IT system, including BEDs or potential issues with
integrity, my immediate memory was that none of these subjects were ever
discussed at the POL board during my time in the business. This has been
confirmed by reading the POL Board papers shared with me as part of this
inquiry. (POL00021487, POL00032147, POL00021490, POL00021491,
POL00021493, POL00032210, POL00021494 and POL00021496).
KNOWLEDGE OF HORIZON
26.I have been asked to describe my knowledge of the Horizon IT System
following the national rollout addressing several areas. I have assumed this
question relates to the original Horizon system that was rolled out in 1999 (6
years before I joined in 2005) as I had left POL over two years before the
implementation of the replacement HNG-X solution in 2010.
26.1. BEDs is specific terminology that I have only become aware of
during the inquiry. I was never taken through a list of ‘BEDs’ during my
time at POL.
26.2. I had no concerns with the integrity of the Horizon IT system. This
question was never raised with me during my time at POL.
26.3. I had no knowledge of Fujitsu's ability to insert, edit or delete
transaction data or data in branch accounts without the knowledge or
consent of SPMs. This was never a discussion item during my time at
POL.
26.4. Despite meeting several SPMs either in their branches or
meetings with the NFSP there was never a conversation about BEDs or
Page 10 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
the integrity of the Horizon IT System.
27.I have been asked to provide details of any discussions on the issues in
question 15 of the Request to identify any person that I passed on
information regarding BEDs.
28.As stated in my inquiry response paragraph 26.1, I have never had a
conversation around BEDs in the Horizon system and therefore I would not
have been in possession of any information to pass on.
29.I have been asked to consider POL00028984 (emails relating to the
Callendar Square bug), POL00083163 (17 November 2005 email regarding
Marine Drive Appeal Case) and POL00081928 (5 December 2006 email
regarding Horizon info — Callender Square) and respond to :
29.1. My knowledge of the Callender Square bug and how it developed
29.2. My working relationship with Shaun Turner, Lynne Fallowfield,
Gary Blackburn and Brian Trotter
29.3. Explain to what extent, if at all, was I aware of the case of Post
Office vs. Castleton
30.1 have read the emails to see if there was any information to help but before
the inquiry I do not believe that I had any knowledge of the Callendar Square
bug or how it developed. I do not recognise the names of Shaun Turner,
Lynne Fallowfield, Gary Blackburn and Brian Trotter and I do not believe that
I had a working relationship with them even if they sat within the Operations
function. They were not one of my direct reports or even direct reports to
them. Before the inquiry I do not believe that I had any knowledge of the
case of Post Office vs. Castleton.
Page 11 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
HORIZON NEXT GENERATION
31.
32.
I was not directly involved in the actual technical development of the Horizon
Next Generation solution as this was wholly managed within the IT function
and Fujitsu. I would not have expected to be involved during the
development lifecycle, and I do not believe that the system would have
reached the testing phase before I left in early 2008. I was directly involved
in setting up the framework for the negotiation process for the new system
through to the point where approval was gained from the POL Board and the
RMH board to proceed.
Towards the end of my time within the Post Office I had a monthly meeting
with the Program lead for the development of the HNG-X solution (Mark
Burley). The purpose of this meeting was twofold. Firstly, to understand the
progress of the development versus the original plans, from memory this
was way before any testing cycles were started. The second reason was
that Mark had been identified by David X Smith as a high performer within
his function and this gave me an opportunity to meet with him first hand.
This would have been the opportunity to raise significant issues, but I
believe that these monthly meetings would have been too early in the
development lifecycle.
33.With regards to my relationship and interactions with Fujitsu, I had several
conversations with Fujitsu sales/account management employees during the
negotiations phase, around my expectations of what they should be able to
bring to the table in terms of a better cost position. This had been a
recommended approach from the Gartner Group. During the Business as
usual (BAU) phase of the operations, the Fujitsu relationships would have
Page 12 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
been managed within the IT function or the Service Delivery functions
directly. I do not recall ever having conversations with Fujitsu around
systems performance or capability. Towards the very end of my time with
POL I was asked by Mark Burley to go to the Fujitsu facilities in Bracknell to
address their development team as the development programs are generally
long and hard work. The goal was to explain how important this was to POL
and thank them for their contributions to date.
34.Reflecting on the circumstances in which I would have expected issues
related to the Horizon IT System to be escalated to me by my own teams or
by Fujitsu, I would have expected to hear about any catastrophic failures
that would have an effect across large parts of the branch network which
would inhibit trading. In addition, as I suspect the inquiry is more interested
in matters relates to potential integrity concerns, I would have expected an
immediate escalation if identified issues of false information been discovered
within the Horizon IT System. The reason for this would have been to inform
the POL Board along with any other potential stakeholders. This did not
happen during my tenure. I would not have expected escalation of ‘day to
day’ issues as the IT and Service Delivery functions, along with Fujitsu
would be managing them directly.
35. The circumstances when I would have escalated issues relating to the
Horizon IT system (e.g. BEDs) to the POL board are reflected in paragraph
35. As these situations never arose this did not happen.
36.Answering slightly outside of the Horizon IT system itself, I have referred to
challenges with parts of the IT network to the branches which result in the
branch being offline and unable to trade. This led to the network resilience
Page 13 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
program which was reported to the board as identified within the POL board
papers and the Operations Reports (POL00021491, POL00032147,
POL00032210, POL00095512, POL00095521, POL00294385)
37.1 have been asked to consider the POL Executive Committee minutes 13"
July 2005 (POL00137216), pages 9 & 10 to respond to the following:
37.1. In relation to the cost reduction exercises; to set out which areas
of the business were predicted to be exposed to increased risk
37.2. To explain why these increased risks were acceptable
37.3. To explain why the SPMs may perceive the plan to be a ‘mere
deterioration of service’
37.4. To explain how Fujitsu were expected to provide an improved
service at a lower cost to POL
38.1 will respond to each of these questions within one answer as I believe
there is a misinterpretation of what the minutes are reporting. The primary
goal was the delivery of the Horizon Next Generation platform at a reduced
cost meeting the expectations of POL but also to meet the externally
benchmarked assessment by the Gartner group which anticipated that a
30% cost reduction was achievable. Within the minutes it states from point
(viii) onwards that in the event of Fujitsu not meeting the expectations, that
there are alternative approaches that could be taken from network
desegregation (different levels of service to certain branches), lowering the
client performance, network segmentation or even a PFI approach all of
which would come with potential to introduce risks to a perceived
degradation of service. The minute relating to the EC’s position is that the
risks could be acceptable but only if case by case they were calculated and
Page 14 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
approved individually by the EC with associated communications plans. In
the event, Fujitsu eventually met the cost reduction expectations, and as a
result, I do not believe any of these alternative paths were followed during
my tenure.
39.Addressing the challenge to how Fujitsu were expected to provide a better
service at a reduced cost, this is a peculiar feature of the technology
industry, especially over multi-year outsourced contracts for services (e.g.)
39.1. Like for like network costs fall on an annual basis
39.2. Increased capability for remote support changes the expensive
onsite support model to support that can, on occasion, be performed
remotely
39.3. Swapping out some of the outdated hardware which, on a cycle,
reaches toward end of life. This reduces the meantime between failure
and reduces associated costs.
39.4. Breaking the contract into several components allowed POL to
retender individual elements on a more regular basis to potential
entrants and Fujitsu. Fujitsu always had the option of matching the cost
proposal from a potential new 3% party which would be beneficial to POL
as service continuation is normally a better outcome than a full migration
activity.
39.5. None of these elements are related to the core HNG-X system and
therefore did not increase application risk. My recollection is that the
application was being designed to provide functional equivalence and
that rigorous testing cycles that would need to be navigated before
implementation, which would be the appropriate mitigation.
Page 15 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
39.6. As with all outsource partners, there is an expectation that their
internal costs would be higher at the start of the contracts but that they
will bring their own professional focus across the lifetime of the contract
to bring their own costs down and their margin up. This is the basis of
the strive that they sign up to.
40. The inquiry provided me with an internal Fujitsu document (FUJ00003675
4
a
(August 2005 Fujitsu internal document major bids - Summary)) which
presented me internally to their bid group as a challenging character to work
with taking a more demanding, risk-taking, retail centric approach to the
project. This was the first time that I had seen this document which is not
surprising as it was internal to Fujitsu. One of the reasons that I was hired
into POL by David Mills was that I came from a more commercially focused
(retail centric) background and this was some of the thinking that Fujitsu
were seeing at this stage. I believe that before I joined the contract
negotiations had been moving forwards relatively well with the Fujitsu
expectation that they would roll forward for several additional years as a
matter of course. It was my belief that they thought there was no alternative
for POL (confirmed within their document) and, as a result, that did not force
them to challenge their commercial thinking. I believe the risk that is being
referred to is their internal risk in meeting the ‘strive’ conditions to bring the
costs down over time.
.As part of the inquiry I was provided with four sets of minutes relating to the
Impact Program Board (POL00445451, POL00445491, POL00445718 and
POL00445856) which state that I was in attendance, but I cannot recall the
content of any of the conversations. I was aware of the IMPACT Program in
Page 16 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
so far as it was a finance improvement project for the back office
environment but further that that I do not have a deeper recollection. Give
that the program had been running for some time, was nearing go-live and
was under the leadership of the Finance Director (Peter Corbett) I cannot
recall getting deeply involved.
42.As part of the inquiry I was provided with document POL00001203 (21
September 2005 — Horizon Next Generation Plan X) which would appear to
be an internal Fujitsu design document and, as such, would definitely not be
a document that I would have seen before. As a result, I can only give a
speculative answer which is probably not helpful as I am not, and have
never been, a systems architect. I note that there is a reference in the
document that ‘all access by Operations to manage IT systems will be fully
audited’. From reading this document I would suggest that Operations refers
to an internal Fujitsu operations function as opposed to POL but I must be
clear that I am speculating.
GENERAL
43.Commenting on whether on whether I thought there was sufficient IT skills
and knowledge on the POL board to effectively understand and escalate
reports of BEDs in the Horizon System; during my time I would have said
yes. However, as there was never an escalation of BEDs to the POL board,
this was not something that I can verify. I would not have expected this level
of information to be reaching the board unless there were catastrophic
issues that needed to be understood and addressed. Systems operations
Page 17 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
and performance is an IT/Service Delivery task that would be managed at
that level and not at the board.
44.I have been asked to describe the processes that the SPMs could report
BEDs that they have experienced with the Horizon System. I cannot
describe this in detail, but if I was to speculate, I would imagine that they
would log the call with the appropriate branch support call centre and that
this ‘ticket’ would be picked up and processed by the support organisation.
This is standard practice across most business organisations to enable
tickets to be raised and analysis to start.
45.I have been asked to summarise my understanding of the processes by
which BEDs in the Horizon IT System were reported and recorded by Fujitsu
and to set out my reflections on the effectiveness of these processes, but as
I have stated previously in my witness statement I had no visibility of the
BEDs process and as there was no escalation on any issues I cannot
comment on the effectiveness of the process.
46.I have been asked to summarise my understanding of the processes by
which BEDs in the Horizon System were reported, recorded and monitored
by Fujitsu. In addition to state whether I had any input on the development of
these processes but as per previous responses, I had no visibility into the
process for raising or managing BEDs with Fujitsu. I had no role in the
creating or monitoring of these processes.
47.I have been asked to comment on the process by which Fujitsu would keep
me and / or POL informed of any new information relating to BEDs in the
Horizon IT System but as I was not personally involved in any BEDs
information or review process, this would have sat within the IT/Service
Page 18 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
delivery function and would be managed directly with Fujitsu
CONCLUSION
48.1 decided to leave POL toward the end of 2007 to pursue a more
independent career of smaller consulting style engagements. I had no
issues with POL, the POL Board or the MD Alan Cook.
49.With hindsight, I have reflected on whether I should have done anything
differently during my time at POL. As with any activities that took place
between 16 and 19 years ago, there will always be questions as to whether I
could have explored further, asked more questions etc. However, in reality
to pursue a path for deeper and deeper understanding, as it relates to the
inquiry, there would have needed to have been some issues/evidence that
were reaching me and/or the POL Board but that is clearly not the case. At
the time perhaps I focused more on the major transitions of the cash
business, the property functions and the operational efficiency program in
the expectation and understanding that the ‘business as usual’ functions
were managing themselves under their own senior leadership structures.
This is pure speculation, however.
50.1 cannot think of anything additional to add to the inquiry’s Terms of
Reference at this time.
Statement of Truth
I believe the content of this statement to be true.
_GRO
Signed:
Dated: 17th October 2024
e Page 19 of 21
Index to First Witness Statement of Richard Francis
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
No.
URN
Date
Description
Control number
RMGO00000033
27/04/2006
Minutes: Royal Mail Holdings plc Board
of Directors MeeBng Minutes of
27/04/06
VISO0007441
POLO0021487
23/02/2005
Post Office Limited Board Minutes of
23/02/2005
POLO000020
POLO0032147
17/08/2005
POL Board MeeBng Minutes
POL-0029082
POLO0021490
14/12/2005
MeeBng minutes: minutes of the Board
meeBng held at Bank of Ireland
POLOO00023
POLO0021491
09/02/2006
MeeBng minutes: Board meeBng
minutes held at 148 Old Street in
London.
POLOO00024
POLO0021493
28/06/2006
MeeBng Minutes: minutes of Board
meeBng held on 28th June 2006.
POLOO00026
POLO0294385
17/05/2006
Post Office Limited (company no.
2154540) Minutes of the meeBng of
the Board held at 148 Old Street,
London on May 17th 2006
POL-BSFF-
0132691
POLO0032210
20/04/2006
POL - Minutes of the MeeBng of the
Board.
POL-0029145
POLO0021494
27/09/2006
MeeBng minutes: minutes of meeBng
of the Board held on 27th September
2006. Purpose of the meeBng was to
review the Company's financial
posiBon.
POLOO00027
10
POLO0021496
21/01/2008
MeeBng Minutes: minutes of the Board
meeBng held on 21st January 2008.
POLO000029
11
POLO0028984
06/03/2006
Email exchanges between Post Office
and (Contract & Service Managers)
Sandra MacKay, Brian Troaer, Shaun
Turner, Gary Blackburn, Stewart Mike,
Lynne Fallowfield, re: Callendar Square
Bug.
POL-0025466
12
POLO0083163
17/11/2005
Email from John H Jones to Stephen
Dilley, cc Mandy Talbot and Cath
Oglesby, RE: Urgent The Post Office v
Lee Castleton (Marine Drive Post Office,
Bridlington).
POL-0079726
13
POLO0081928
05/12/2006
Emails between Nicola Sherry, Mandy
Talbot, Stephen Dillley, Keith Baines and
Clare Wardle re Callender Square & Lee
Castleton.
POL-0078491
14
POLOO095512
01/08/2005
OperaBons funcBonal report
POLB(05)72, 2005
POL-0095095
15
POLOO095521
01/04/2006
OperaBons funcBonal report
POLB06(32b) for 2006
POL-0095104
16
POLO0137216
13/07/2005
Post Office ExecuBve Commiaee
Minutes
POL-BSFF-
0000009
Page 20 of 21
WITN11210100
WITN11210100
17 I FUJO0003675 01/08/2005 I Fujitsu Services Major Bids Report, POINQO009846F
August 2005
18 I POLO0445451 I 07/04/2005 I IT Directorate IMPACT Programme POL-BSFF-096-
Board No.17 Minutes. 0007378
19 I POLO0445491 I 10/05/2005 I POL Project IMPACT Programme Board POL-BSFF-096-
Minutes. 0007418
20 I POLO0445718 I 09/08/2005 I IMPACT Programme Board Minutes POL-BSFF-096-
(No.21) 0007645
21 I POLO0021487 I 23/02/2005 I Post Office Limited Board Minutes of POLO000020
23/02/2005
22__I POLOO032147 I 17/08/2005 I POL Board MeeBng Minutes POL-0029082
Page 21 of 21