|
|
Enron Mail |
David:
I asked Kevin when the issue of altering B/L's, or any documentation (contractual or logistical) for that matter, first came up in Helsinki or London. Following is in response. How does the timing (ie. last April per Kevin) compare to your understanding? Specifically, I want to know the date it was first noted and raised as individuals in Helsinki said the issue had been raised up to 2 times prior to April of last year (as early as Late 1998). Likewise, do you know what exactly was communicated on any occasions in 1998 or 1999 with Helsinki or London staff on this issue? When I asked Henkka what had occurred previously, he had no recollection of any communication on this last April. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steve W Young/LON/ECT on 20/01/2000 14:07 --------------------------- Kevin Beasley 20/01/2000 09:31 To: Steve W Young/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Visit to Helsinki ---------------------- Forwarded by Kevin Beasley/LON/ECT on 20/01/2000 09:30 --------------------------- Graham Cane 17/01/2000 13:21 To: Tim Poullain-Patterson/LON/ECT@ECT, Kevin Beasley/LON/ECT@ECT, Kevin Sweeney/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Visit to Helsinki This is when the Clayton situation took place Mid to end april last year. Kevin went up there to talk to everybody at the beginning of May. Graham Graham Cane 30/04/99 17:31 To: Kevin Sweeney/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Visit to Helsinki I think that is the best thing, not to get them to sign anything, just really to get the point across that they cannot do it. They know that, because I have had similar discussions with Kitty, and she has alway felt uncomfortable with the whole situation. Graham Kevin Sweeney 30/04/99 16:59 To: Graham Cane/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Visit to Helsinki Don't worry. I just want them to understand that they are a control mechanism and with regards to this particular item that it is no more and a violation of that will be taken seriously. No signing, but I do want agreement. Let me know what you think. Kevin
|