“But not improper” intones the judge.
Patrick Green QC (PG) for the claimants has started xe-ing AB.
PG the measures you are adopting in the BSP will also reduced the number of SPM suspensions - yes - reduction of errors
PG says it is of small relevance and says he has pretty much finished. Asks about helpline budget increases - were there any?
AB we restructured to put more people onto Tier 2 support to help
PG so previously Tier 2 couldn’t see Credence data
PG you explain that for your evidence you have relied on former trainers and auditors who have honed their skills on Horizon investigations - a pretty impressive group of people, it sounds like?
AB yes I did
PG and this bit is about ARQ data and helpline logs
PG helpline logs are not available to SPMs are they?
AB no. no. we should provide it if there is an issue.
AB tries to explain - PG pushes her. She accepts she doesn’t...
PG in your WS you refer to event data, when it is transaction data that you refer to in your WS - the three specific docs you call transaction data are event data docs
AB I understood them to be transaction data as well
PG [shows her the event.] It’s event data. It’s transaction data and we can see here that not every transfer out has a transfer in.
PG so you can’t actually see that
AB not from this one, no
PG all 3 documents...
AB no. I didn’t put the numbers on the documents
PG But it doesn’t support what you said. I asked you at the beginning if you read the docs to see if supported what you...
AB I am mistaken.
PG it was actually disclosed on 21 Feb and Mr Latif went to Kashmire on 19 Feb.
AB no I’m sorry
PG to get to the bottom of Mr Latif’s issue we need to see the transaction data, don’t we?
PG mentions the Dalmellington and Callender Square bug
AB I knew about that.
PG did you have them in your mind when you looked at Mr Latif’s...
AB not specifically. we looked at his data alone.
PG Let’s have a look at his transaction data, shall we
PG when you investigated did you filter this info [there are 28K rows of data] by date?
AB by date, yes
PG on paper or electronically
AB what? that specific row
PG you were looking by date
AB we looked at all of July
AB we looked at June July August - all the transaction data, filtered by stock unit and data…
PG do you know what the code is - 4190 in there
AB no - I’d need the list. My team would know.
PG and one of the things we know is that product ID numbers is that they are different length. Some are 5 digits, some are 2 some are 4…
AB yeah I don’t know where they come from
PG let’s go back to your WS par 91.2 - that was your analysis in your WS when you did it in November and you say there there were 2 x transfers from 1 stock unit to another...
PG and then you’ve had to amend your account of what transactions took place, haven’t you?
PG so it should now be 2 x transfers of £2K “between" not "from" two stock units. PG says the list of 4 transfers noted in 91.3
AB it wasn’t as good as I liked
PG but it’s wrong - it’s not a question of full or not full - it’s wrong
AB I expanded 91.2 and changed 91.3
PG no - 91.2 was wrong
PG Dr Worden suggests Transaction Corrections are part of Horizons robustness. This trial is not part of Horizon’s robustness. If we correct an eror in court it would...
PG well let’s look at Mr Latif’s transaction data again. With reference to the product code list which you did not refer to in your WS. We had to get it under disclosure...
PG but if we look at the product codes, one is cash. That’s important, right?
PG and this other code - that’s a transfer
PG are you just being agreeable or do you understand this?
Ab well - looking at it now yes
PG did you understand this when you signed your witness statement?
PG goes back into the data. Event data at F1354.
[sorry I need to reboot - this is forensic stuff - fascinating watch]
PG how many transfer in slips do you see printed out there?
PG and they’re four seconds apart. Did you notice two transfer in slips were printed out when you made your WS
AB I can’t recall
PG let’s go to it. This [doc] is in the table annexed to Mr Parker’s doc. “Unexplained sicrepancies, duplicate rem in” and if we go to Mr Coyne’s comments...
PG did anyone in your team flag up to you that 2 receipts were printed out?
PG did anyone flag up to you that this was a feature of the Dalmellington bug
AB that’s because Dalmellington only affected outreach
AB that’s because Dalmellington ONLY affected outreach
PG does anything about what you’ve said about Mr Latif’s case worry you
AB well i’d like to look at again
PG I understand
[we have moved on to transaction data again]
PG did you look at THIS data when you did your WS
AB at a high level. I’ve done some more work since, hence the changes to my WS
[But PG has it now - so we are going to it]
PG did anyone point this out to you when you wrote your WS
PG it may not be something that you know about or understand, you’re not required to understand it
AB my team are closer to it but I interrogated it - 2 lots of scratchcards came in the wrong way - they weren’t effectively remmed in and you can...
PG okay well i’ll put this to you. we have two £25s which are positives. And if one should have been a minus he will be £50 short? Yes?
AB but he’s got two negatives here
PG yes but…
J let me try to speed this up
PG okay if my hypothesis is right it would have showed some £50 difference rather than zero. So on this premise - as he didn’t have the stock...
And when that TC comes through he would want his TC to increase his stock and reduce his cash…
AB yep on that premise
PG but he’s complaining about £500
AS Mr Latif would remm in scratchcards and then sell them to his retail
13 Aug 2015 TA’s received, been charged for free games
27 Aug 2015 rollover with discrepancy caused by lottery TAs being wrong
And on 25 Jan 2016 - he’s got a duplicate lottery TA there as well. So there’s a history of him having these duplicate lottery problems and raising them with the helpline
PG now lets’ go to 25 Jan 2018 “TC received for £10 x 1000...
AB he booked in -£500 instead of £500
PG but he’s complaining about accepting a TC for 100 x £10 scratchcards. That’s his discrepancy.
AB but the value of the TC was £1000
PG precisely and that’s why it...
AB because he remmed it in, instead of increasing it decreased. Instead of going £500 to £0 it went to £1000. It is confusing to him, but because of the way he sells the stock to the retail that is why what happened happened.
We have been given an 8 minute break.
Win for the Post Office, I think. And I’m not sure the point before about the transaction data completely landed.
Yebbutt this trial is about whether SPMs have been held liable for incontrovertible Horizon errors.
we are back in court
PG you are blaming what happened to Mr Tank on user error
AB not entirely
PG what I will suggest to you is that ANY error by an SPM is used as evidence for a Horizon error...
AB not in this case no
PG it’s when people in IT routinely blame users first and I say that is the Post Office’s method with SPMs.
AB 99 times out of a hundred it will be user error, but I accept in Mr Tank’s case it wasn’t.
PG he specifically did what the Horizon system told him to. and you blamed him for it.
PG goes through the error and explains the process. Is this Horizon working as it should?
AB in that it was caught in the back end, yes.
PG and a KEL (known error log) was raised about this. Did anyone in your team tell you about this KEL?
PG reads from design of Horizon that a discrepancy...
PG That’s Horizon working as it should?
AB well some people have bad experiences
PG have you heard of the helpline being called the hell-line before
PG why was Mr Tank’s call afforded low priority
AB it doesn’t mean it wasn’t taken seriously