PS 15/01-15/03
POL00006575
POL00006575
POST OFFICE LTD
SPARROW SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Project Sparrow Sub-Committee of the Board
held at 148 Old Street, London EC1V 9HQ on 12 January 2015
Present: Alice Perkins (AP)
Alasdair Marnoch (AM)
Richard Callard (RC)
Paula Vennells (PV)
Chris Aujard (CA)
In Attendance: Alwen Lyons (AL)
Belinda Crowe (BC)
Mark Davies (MD)
Chair
Non-Executive Director
Non-Executive Director
CEO
General Counsel
Company Secretary
Programme Director, Project Sparrow
Communications and Corporate Affairs
Rodric Williams (RW)
Patrick Bourke (PB)
PS 15/01
PS 15/02
{a)
(b)
(c)
(a)
(e)
Director
Litigation Lawyer
Project Sparrow
OPENING OF MEETING
A quorum being present, the Chair opened the meeting of the
Sparrow Sub-Committee (the “Committee"”) and welcomed Mark
Davies, Belinda Crowe, Rodric Williams and Patrick Bourke.
INITIAL COMPLAINT REVIEW AND MEDIATION SCHEME
The Committee received a paper on the current position of the Initial
Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme (the “Scheme’).
The Committee discussed the immediate steps being taken by the
Business in relation to the Scheme, with Post Office investigation into all
cases now complete and 22 cases resolved,
MD explained that after the recent Westminster Hall debate the Business
proposed to offer face to face meetings with each MP involved and,
where appropriate, take them through their constituent’s case. The
Committee supported this approach and recommended _ that
consideration be given to making a similar offer to all MPs who have a
case in the scheme.
CA reported that changes to business processes had resulted in a
reduction in current litigation cases. Post Office was not bringing a
material number of new prosecutions, but in blatant cases of theft where
large amounts had been stolen the police continued to prosecute the
cases, The Committee was assured that cases were being prosecuted
where appropriate.
The Committee discussed the Judicial Review (JR) advice provided by
Tom Weisselberg QC, and asked whether it was inconsistent with the
Beachcroft advice received in the summer. CA explained that the two
sets of advice were not inconsistent, with the Beechcroft advice having
POL00006575
POL00006575
been given before the Working Group had started considering individual
cases and Post Office had compieted its investigations of all cases. Any
decision to change the Scheme at that time would therefore have been
based on Post Office’s assessment of what might have happened, rather
than on the facts, increasing the JR risk. Since then, the approach
adopted by the Working Group of discussing each case on a case by
case basis had reinforced the positioning that affairs of Working Group
were now (given that all cases had been investigated by Post Office) a
maiter of private law -- that is disputes between Post Office and individual
applicants - as opposed to “network wide” issues more susceptible to a
JR claim.
(f
The Committee discussed Second Sight and their ‘Part Two’ report due
to be finalised in April. The Committee agreed that the Business was
unlikely to be able to stop this report from being produced but should
press Second Sight to complete the individual case reviews by the end of
March i.e. giving the cases priority.
(g) The Committee asked the Business to produce an options paper to
ACTION: analyse the most effective ways to bring the Scheme to a sensible
MD conclusion, taking into consideration; time; financial implications; PR and
stakeholder management (MPs and the Minister); and JFSA.
(h) The Committee asked that the steps set out in the paper be taken quickly
to mitigate recent activities of JFSA and the media, including:
* Providing a robust response to allegations in the media including
writing to BBC lawyers where appropriate and engaging at a
senior level with Programme editors;
* Writing to individual MPs who participated in the Westminster Hall
debate to offer a meeting to discuss their constituents case and
Post Office's position;
¢ Compiling a ‘dossier’ addressing the general accusations made
against Post Office in the Westminster Hall debate and liaising
with RC about how best to handle that with the Minister.
(i) The Committee agreed that the Business should:
ACTION: * continue to take a robust approach at the Working Group,
CA/BC/MD focussing on the agreed TOR in an attempt to set the Scheme
back on track, but with no presumption regarding the next steps
for the Scheme;
* consider the most effective options to draw a fine under the
Scheme for consideration at a future Sparrow Sub-Committee;
and
* provide a general update for the January Board
PS15/03 CLOSE
There being no further business the meeting was closed.