NFSP00000779
NFSP00000779
Message
Sent: 18/10/2023 11:20:21
Subject: FW: NFSP piece
On 16 Nov 2018, at 13:24, Lynn Eccles!
— —_ aa
Thanks Amanda, Calum the ongoing court case line doesn’t entirely stand-up because not all of
these questions are linked directly to what’s happening in court.
q@
p)
e)
2
Still, I don’t think we should provide a detailed comment, it’ll give the discussion around our
independence legs. I think there is also a risk if we just step up and defend the NFSP it gives
support to the perception that we only really care about the Fed and not the SPMRs which are part
of this class action.
Nick will criticise us for hiding behind court process but given that we are no longer firmly coming
down on one side or the other I think that’s the best we can do for now.
Suggest something like this:
Thanks for sharing the blog and giving us a right to reply. We welcome the opportunity for these
matters to be explored fully in court and respect the court’s process. We do not wish to contribute to a
running commentary on the case and won't be making any comment until all matters have been aired
in court.
FYI - he will come back to us for a comment when it is all done and dusted so you will need to be
ready for that.
Best wishes
Lynn
From: Amanda Cox
Sent: 16 November 2018 12:58
To: Calum Greenhow
Cc: Lynn Eccles:
Subject: FW: NFSP piece
Amanda Cox
General Office Supervisor and Receptionist
The National Federation of SubPostmasters
Evelyn House, 22 Windlesham Gardens
<image001 jpg> Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex BN43 5AZ
NFSP00000779
NFSP00000779
<image002.jpg> <image003.jpg> <image004.png>
This email (and any attachment) is confidential, may be legally privileged and is intended for the
addressee only. If you have received it in error please inform us immediately by email responding to the
sender and then delete this message. Please do not copy it, disclose its contents to any other person or
use it for any purpose. Thank you for your cooperation.
We have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that this email and any attachments have been
scanned for software viruses. We cannot accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of
software viruses and would advise you to carry out your own virus checks before opening any
attachment.
You can view our privacy policy online at www.nfsp.org.uk/privacy
National Federation of SubPostmasters is a company limited by guarantee (incorporated in England,
company number 09771284)
From: Nick Walli in Behalf Of Nick Wallis
Sent: 16 November 2018 12:57
To: Amanda Cox
Subject: NFSP piece
Hi
lam a journalist covering the Bates v Post Office high court trial and yesterday, as you may
know, the NFSP’s independence was queried in court.
I have covered this as a reporter and published a separate piece for my blog outlining the NFSP's
historic refusal to get behind claims that Horizon is not fit for purpose.
My separate piece is a piece of comment and I am very hard on the NFSP - focusing on its
contractual inability to criticise the Post Office on this issue and the decision it appears to have
taken as an organisation that it is better to let its members hang out to dry if they are having
problems with Horizon, in order to protect the integrity of the brand to clients and other
Subpostmasters (as explained by George Thomson in his evidence to parliament on 3 Feb 2015).
It is both right and fair to offer you the opportunity to have your position acknowledged and
incorporated into the piece.
You could do this in one of two ways - issue a statement or have the right of reply.
If you want to issue a statement I would you to comment on:
1) your refusal to effectively support the claimants when they were having problems and during
this litigation
2) your independence from the Post Office, or lack of it
3) your inability to do anything which could materially damage the post office as part of the
terms of your funding agreement
4) whether your position on Horizon has evolved since George Thomson’s comments to
parliament in 2015
5) whether, as the Post Office infer, you support their assertion that this case is without merit
NFSP00000779
NFSP00000779
If the CEO of the NFSP would prefer to write a right of reply piece for publication on my blog,
he would be more than welcome.
The blog piece is here: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2018/11/bates-v-post-office-
nfsp.html the write up of yesterday in court is
here: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2018/1 1/day-6-write-up-post-office-speaks.html the live
tweets unroll is here: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2018/11/day-6-live-tweets.html
Many thanks
Nick
Nick Wallis
www.nickwallis.com