He is addressing AB re her Witness statement (WS) which suggests she didn’t think that if she had gone to the lengths she had gone to, she wouldn’t have recovered her £150.
POB £150 cash withdrawal authorised by FI and authorised receipt was produced but it failed due to known data centre issue.
AB but I’d already told the PO
POB but this is a Fujitsu employee
Then to show what PO is doing in response to this analysis from Fujitsu… [we go to another doc]
POB you see row 13 has been highlighted with your
AB you see the time of the transaction - it’s at 0826. When my branch wasn’t open
POB the time stamp doesn’t take account of daylight savings time
POB so what I am trying to establish is that having seen now what you’ve seen, with the benefit of that knowledge it looks as if PO would have been able to resolved the problem in your branch even if you hadn’t...
POB no further questions.
Richard Roll up next.
PO QC wants to ask RR about his role in 3rd and 4th tier support for Horizon.
RR I know he’s made some
PO QC have you read them
RR I’ve read some of them
PO QC closely or briefly?
POQC 1st line is run by PO?
RR I don’t recall - I believe there were splits between PO and Fujitsu on first line, but I really can’t remember.
RR No. My recollection is not like that.
PO QC is that right
RR not my recollection - we had nothing to do with 2nd line - we ran 3rd and 4th line...
Do you accept it is true?
PO QC reads out 4th line support - it is a description of the super top peeps who write the software etc. Do you agree this is right?
RR broadly speaking yes
POQC and 3rd line are elite, 4th line are super elite
RR there were some 3rd line I’d describe as super elite to
POQC were you?
RR peaks and troughs - sometimes we have 3 or 4 jobs on the go at the time sometimes quieter
PO QC it says here it would be rare for a software error to go through to 4th line that needed fixing. Correct?
RR calls would come in - we’d work on them, either fix them or pass them on to other people depending on the nature of the problem
RR Sounds about right...
RR when you take, as an average then yes, I suppose so...
POQC software problems requiring a software fix were a tiny fraction of the work of 3rd line support.
RR I was a Product Specialist
POQC quite junior
RR most people were Product Specialist two or three were senior and there were about 25 of us who were Product Specialists
RR junior doesn’t really do justice to the level of knowledge required
PO QC I agree - ordinary level, but there were some really top people who were very specialist
RR there were guys who were more focused
POQC but what I’m saying is that they did the harder work
RR not sure how to explain - there were some jobs where I would be more experienced, but others where they would be far superior to me
RR well some of us were C programmers and we might look at a problem and then pass it on to the top level.
RR yes by Fujitsu
POQC and there was a 6 month mandatory training period before they’d let you loose on the live system
RR I dont’ remember
POQC you did a lot of mundane tasks
PO QC that’s very fair. Let’s have a look at some of the tasks you might have carried out.
POQC what does this task involve?
RR describes basic recollection of the task
POQC and this [another doc]?
RR can’t remember
RR we had an end of day marker and any transactions done after the marker so some transactions may not have been harvested properly
POQC [interrupts] can I suggest to you these are marooned ..
POQC takes him through it show that it was basically a variation of what they both said.
POQC moves to year RR left - "OBC exercise... planned short notice close… pinpad return for triage services…"
RR don’t know what proportion of my work was this sort of thing I can’t remembe
POQC goes to WS. [I’ll see if I can upload the WS and link to it without missing too much]
RR some reports were looking for comms problems. Others would be looking for errors in data stores. The DS would be harvested every day and processed overnight. That would generate reports.
PO QC so these continuously generated reports and if they generated a hit that needed to be identified and dealt with
RR yes and as time went on we were writing more programs ourselves which would help alert us to problems.
PO QC you weren’t generally involved in source code examination
RR not generally, but I was involved in some
RR no we’d identify a problem and pass it on to 4th line
PO QC so reading copious amounts of code was something 4th line did. not you
RR my recollection is I was, but it might be that the interesting stuff was magnified in my memory
RR I wasn’t doing it regularly
PO QC what is your recollection
RR that I did...
PO QC I’m very grateful
RR can’t remember much of what’s being put to him.
Seems a fair approach.
RR says it’s not his recollection but the figures are the figures.
RR notes some problems he would have worked on and then passed to someone more qualified would not be shown on the document.
PO QC that’s wrong isn’t it.
RR on the figures here you are correct…
it’s a tiny amount of the work you did, isn’t it
RR volume-wise no, but obviously you spend more time on a bigger prob
RR my recollection it was a big part of my job so it didn’t seem like a vanishingly small
PO QC [asks about doc which says coding errors were extremely rare]
PO QC and that even 3rd line calls...
RR my recollection was that it was pretty balanced between data corruption and user error
PO QC so 50% was user error?
RR maybe - not the majority was user error but it is possible
RR says sometimes we had a deadline and if we couldn’t find the source of a problem we’d have to leave it
PO QC how often
RR very infrequently.
RR on what you’ve shown me, yes
PO QC and you weren’t working on these daily were you?
RR yes on bugs
J by bugs you mean coding
J I seem to be the only person who cares about the exact language being used
RR yes we were under pressure
POQC and are you saying you didn’t have as much time as you liked. An in that situation you’d report it up…
RR yes to Mr Peach
POQC and what would he say?
POQC did you come across any error which caused a discrepancy in a branch account
RR i did suspect some and passed it on, but I don’t recall uncovering one
POQC quoting Mr Parker docu "on the very rare occasion software error could cause an impact on branch accounts, Fujitsu would tell the PO and work on a resolution." Is that something you can comment on?
J updates on judgment. He has a list of typos from claimants and assuming PO has similar and so is on track to hand down judgment at noon on Friday.
Judge says judgment is 180,000 words long.
Transcripts, witness statements and report will be published on postofficetrial.com tonight.