Our Ref: NMH/KL
Your Ref:
Please ask for:
Direct Dial
Email address: nmi”
23rd October 2024
Mr S Recaldin
Post Office Limited
By Email only
Dear Sir
As you know, we act for many hundreds of applicants in the Horizon Shortfall Scheme
(‘HSS’).
We have significant concerns regarding its efficient operation.
For present purposes we limit those concerns to matters arising following resubmission of
claims for redetermination.
We firstly observe that lawyers generally have not become involved in the HSS process
until first offers are issued under the Scheme.
Almost without exception in our experience, those offers are inadequate and do not
consider heads of loss that are stipulated within the guidelines of the other schemes as
being appropriate.
We have routinely secured significant increases as claims are reviewed and resubmitted.
Recent examples include;
HUJ00000007
HUJ00000007
PO Original Date of Revised Date of Settled?
Reference I Offer Original Offer Revised
Offer Offer
1/001541 & 47,549.94 31/03/2022 I £ 65,172.57 [22/09/2023 YesI
2}I000334 £ 46,799.52 09/12/2021 I£ 140,126.37 [10/11/2022 No
3}001162 £ 134,829.48 03/11/2022 I£ 218,074.81 {05/10/2023 No
4I002361 £ 4,410.42 05/07/2022 I£ 133,738.86 I12/09/2024 No
No 2 @ The Dock,
NMH Letter"FoSimorre”
ret, Hull, HUL1TU
Lexcel iz...
Personal
Injury
HUJ00000007
HUJ00000007
5I000048 £ 88,516.19 30/06/2022 I£ 119,185.79 {11/01/2024 No
6I000159 £ 164,904.25 20/10/22 £ 270,151.34 [01/02/2024 No
7I000242 £ 21,691.23 31/05/2022 I£ 46,375.78 01/07/2024 No
8I000054 £ 363,095.50 31/10/22 £ 649,414.94 [23/08/24 Yes
9I001983 £ 42,114.82 04/08/2022 I£ 45,114.82 {09/05/2024 No
10I PH2643 £ 21,580.42 29/06/2023 I£ 172,946.40 {04/07/2024 No
11] 000718 £ 298,847.21 23/02/2023 I£ 421,577.87 [24/08/2024 Yes
12IPH2726 £ 10,699.25 06/07/2023 I£ 64,300.75 [16/10/2024 No
13I001572 £ 260,688.76 15/12/2022 I£ 420,587.94 17/10/2024 No
Usually a claim is resubmitted to the Scheme for redetermination following receipt of
medical, accountancy and/or other specialist input. This typically takes 12-18 months to
complete: longer for complex matters such as cases involving insolvency.
At present, we have a total of 38 cases sat with the Scheme for redetermination.
We attach a spreadsheet of those cases suitably annotated and/or anonymised to illustrate
a number of concerning issues.
1. Delay
You will see that many of these cases have been back with the Scheme since before 1 May
2024.
It appears these cases are routinely being referred back to Panel. The effect of that is
significant delay and unclear and/or inconsistent messaging around case progression.
An example of this is HSS reference 001983, which has now been referred to Panel on
three separate occasions: the most recent of which was after an agreement had been
reached to settle the claim “in principle” after an Escalation meeting in July 2024 and yet no
final settlement is in sight. The first offer on this case made by the Panel was £42,114.82
which only rose to £45,114.82 after the Panel spent a further 6 months reviewing the case.
The offer at the Escalation meeting was substantially higher at £171,592.02 plus interest
and tax to be calculated, although this is now back with the Panel for a third time.
A further example of this is HSS reference 001572. A first offer was received on the 15""
December 2022 in the sum of £260,688. Following resubmission to Panel in March 2024,
an improved offer was received on 12" October 2024 in the sum of £420,587. A total of
four new heads of loss were awarded.
We have reviewed all relevant documents relating to the Scheme, including updated copies
of the Terms of Reference, eligibility criteria and ancillary documentation.
We have previously sought clarity on the process adopted once a claim is resubmitted.
NMH Letter To Simon R 20f 5
HUJ00000007
HUJ00000007
Nowhere within the Scheme rules can we find reference to the case being referred back to
Panel.
In fact, the scheme appears to prescribe a Dispute Resolution Process that does not
include further Panel input.
Can we again ask for clarity as to the basis for claims going back to Panel as presently this
is both unclear and from a procedural perspective appears to be incorrect?.
It is the cause of significant and persistent delay.
We raise this particular concern in the context of your Inquiry statement that references a
reduction in Panel meetings during 2024. We also note by contrast that you have recently
stated via management colleagues the intention to increase these panel meetings to two,
possibly three a week. We query whether this will be sufficient considering the plethora of
new HSS cases initiated earlier this year and still to be assessed; combined with an
increasing number of cases being re-submitted to the panel in recent weeks. It seems to
us, therefore, that the picture is only going to get worse.
It is completely unacceptable for claimants to be waiting months in an informational
vacuum, not understanding the stage their case has reached nor having any clarity on the
process to be followed.
A second aspect of delay relating to Panel, is the time it takes for a determination to
translate into a written record. This can take many months after a meeting. Only last week
we received a decision, that ran to 60 pages relating to a case determined two months
earlier. Surely there is a quicker and more efficient way of distilling down a meeting record
for circulation?
2. Dispute Resolution Process
Our experience is that it is proving incredibly difficult to secure Escalation meetings and/or
formal Mediations.
In some instances, those meetings have proven successful.
Examples of this are HSS reference 000054 settled following Escalation at £649,000 after
an initial offer of £363,000, and HSS reference 002361 settled following Escalation at
£137,000 after an initial offer of £4,400.
In other instances, quite the reverse.
An example of this is HSS reference 001982 which is detailed above
Clients have been encouraged into dispute resolution meetings, with recommended
outcomes that have not translated into any definitive proposal.
Recent examples are HSS reference 000242 and HSS reference 000556 both of whom
held what seemed to be successful Escalation meetings, in relation to which there has
since been no tangible follow up.
NMH Letter To Simon R 30f5
HUJ00000007
HUJ00000007
In other words, they feel that they have been “led up the garden path”.
A variation on a theme is HSS reference 000048. Our client attended mediation in July
2024 where a suitable settlement was reached, only for there to have been months of
subsequent delay while internal arguments persist about which head of claim the loss
should be recorded under. This is far from acceptable or unique.
3. Joint losses
We read with interest your statement to the Inquiry referencing consistency of approach
between Schemes.
Joint losses have been excluded from the Horizon Shortfall Scheme.
These losses can very often be significant and this anomaly cannot be justified.
4. Consequence of delay
Clients are unwell, reinjured and suffering heightened anxiety as a result of delay.
A number have and/or are contemplating settlement of claims at reduced offers to put an
end to matters.
For example, HSS reference 000938. This Sub-Postmaster is now 78 years of age. His
application was made in May 2020.
An offer was made in May 2022 in the sum of £9,943. In February 2024 a revised
Schedule of Loss was submitted in the sum of £305,000.
As of today, no revised offer has been forthcoming. We are told a reasoned Panel decision
on outcome is due shortly.
This client is elderly, anxious and we worry that he is the sort of vulnerable client likely to be
tempted by the fixed sum settlement of £75,000.
The scheme pays scant regard to the welfare of applicants
There are a significant number of medical reports that demonstrate the process itself is
causing Claimants to be unwell.
In the face of that, Panel are still asking clients for further information and/or to return to
medical experts for re-examination/clarification.
In addition, the scheme is wholly inefficient when dealing with requests for funding.
In many instances, Claimants need treatment before damages can be quantified (see
preceding point);despite which the response to treatment requests is piecemeal and
unpredictable.
NMH Letter To Simon R 4of5
HUJ00000007
HUJ00000007
For example, in case HSS reference 001935treatment costs were requested on 25 June
2024 and approved some four months later on 21 October 2024. However, in the case of
HSS reference 001838 a similar request was approved in less than a month.
The longest delay that we have experienced to date in relation to treatment requests is in
the case of HSS reference 001177 in which treatment was requested on 15 January 2024
and we have still yet to receive any substantive response.
In another case, the Dispute Resolution Team have recently reverted to us for clarification
of our request after an extremely lengthy delay. In the case of HSS Reference 002091
treatment costs were requested on 25 March 2024 and we received questions on 14
October 2024 after almost seven months.
5. The Way Ahead
We know from our regular dialogue that you welcome suggestions for change.
It is very apparent that blockages and delays are caused by a number of features (Beyond
the multiple and unfathomable layers of governance).
First, cases are taking too long to get to Panel (if, indeed, they should be going there at all).
Secondly, it is taking too long to get decisions back from Panel.
It seems to us the way ahead is simply to increase resources for the Dispute Resolution
process so that, after a first offer has been determined by Panel, the Claimants can rework
their cases and go before a streamlined process for discussion, negotiation and hopefully
settlement.
At the end of the day, this is an aging demographic of claimant. It is not the case that they
wish to squeeze every penny in compensation. They simply want full, fair and timely
compensation that enables them to get on with what is left of their lives.
I am happy to discuss any of the particular matters raised in this letter or more generally
how we can proceed to speed up and streamline the process.
Yours faithfully
“Neil Hudgeil”
HUDGELL SOLICITORS
NMH Letter To Simon R 50f5