POL00444611
POL00444611
Message
From: Mandy Talbot [CN=Mandy Talbot/OU=e/O=POSTOFFICE]
Sent: 28/07/2004 18:28:48
To: Keith K Baines! John Legg
ce: susanne.helliwe David W Miller
Subject: Wolstenholme
Our agents have now spoke to Counsel again.
He is of the opinion that there is no way in which all reference to the experts report can be excluded from the trial save for
a payment of Mrs W of her entire claim of £187,500.
The best that can be achieved is to try and minimise the damage by a report from Fujitsu along the lines suggested in the
advice. There is no guaranty that the original adverse report will not be commented on in the final judgement.
An adverse finding on the Horizon system will have major implications for Pol. As such I should be grateful for formal
instructions at this stage as to whether, despite the weakness in aspects of the case of Mrs Wolstenholme, the business
wishes a strategic settlement to be made.
If we do not wish to settle the claim for 187.5 K or enter into negotiations involving substantial sums of money going up to
187 K if necessary then we have to try and minimise the risk as much as possible.
To that end please may I have Carol your immediate instructions to make and additional payment into Court in the sum of
£10,000 and to formally admit that there was a problem with the notice period so that the inadequate notice constituted a
breach of contract.
Carol can you or John please suggest any person who is able to produce a statement compiling the list of goods and
services supplied by postmasters and who may be available to attend Court next month. It is essential that we counter the
argument that she is an agent within the definition of the Commercial Agents Directive. Manish has given me some names
and I have left messages with them.
Keith please can you give me details of the person suggested by Fujitsu to supply a statement as a priority as our agents
need to contact him.
Mandy Talbot
Royal Mail Legal Services
Impact House
2 Edridge Road
Mandy Talbot To: Carol
r King/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE, Manish
2TOTZ00S S'S, Patel/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE, Rod
Ismay/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE, John
Legg/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE,
susanne.helliwelf
cc: Clare
Wardle/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE, Tony
Marsh/e/POSTOFFICE@POSTOFFICE
Subject: Wolstenholme
POL00444611
POL00444611
I have spoken to Keith Baines and he is identifying a member of the fujitsu staff to prepare a statement dealing with
paragraphs 38 to 41 of the advice.On receipt of a name I will give it to our agents for them to take a statement and lodge
an application at Court.
You may recall that Jim and I obtained Counsel's opinion in 2002 on whether the Commercial Agents Directive applied to
postmasters and Counsel advised in conference on being given an indication of the services and some goods which
postmasters supply to the public, that on the basis of current case law that it did not. I need your assistance in identifying
somebody within Pol who can provide a statement and attend Court if necessary in August giving information about the
range of products and services which a typical postmaster would supply.John I seem to recall that you attended the
conference and wondered whether could think of a suitable candidate.
The information is contained in the operational guide in crude form but I was wondering whether there is a simple list
somewhere which could be appended to a straight forward statement so as to demonstrate that its predominantly services
which are supplied.
I would also recommend along with Counsel's advice that the claim for errors be formally dropped, that an admission be
made that a breach of contract in respect of failure to give proper notice did occur and that the payment into Court be
increased by a further £10,000 plus interest as a further hedge against a particularly adverse finding. The advantage of the
above is to remove that need for the expert to attend. Our agents should also notify him of this intention so as to avoid
cancellation charges as soon as possible.
Please let me have you reply as soon as possible as time is against us in this matter
Mandy Talbot
Royal Mail Legal Services
Impact House
2 Edridge Road