POL00022002
POL00022002
NAOGE:
Diakinsow Wes ta
pclae We Bo poi
ects MER WOE
ii acres ween a, Ga
hele & I
aunt 6
TENE van See?
Legally privileged and confidential => 100 Al
Feige N00 ea"
stn Moen Vs
estate SR Milage 2 Is
HA cum, Gunes]
2) Betton 5
Stating # cadane & cendancohig
Post Office Limited
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Privilege — a reminder
Legal privilege = vital to success
Do not discuss any legal advice or anything to do with SPMR
settlements with:
+ Anyone outside Post Office
+ JFSA
+ Second Sight
« Subpostmasters
+ BIS/MPs
* Your teams unless absolutely necessary
Never use legal advice or information about SPMR settlements for any
purpose other than in relation to the Scheme.
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
RAE AERA RAR
Rh Rl a ae Ch A A
Objectives
I Scheme policy
Settlement process _
o
3
S)
fee
a
2
eS
©
=
2
ea
@
q
2
3
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Objectives of the Scheme
+ Listen to SPMRs concerns
+ Explain Post Office's position
+ Offer solutions where possible
+ Compensate if loss has been unfairly suffered
+ Ensure that all convictions are fair
* Demonstrate that Post Office is being transparent
+ Ensure that Post Office's decisions are defensible
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Objectives of today
Begin to establish principles of settlement including:
+ When will a remedy be offered?
+ What types of remedy will be available?
+ How much compensation may be paid?
Deliverable: Settlement Policy
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Settlement policy — why?
1. Many different types of case — need for consistency
2. Need to comply with criminal procedures
3. Control size of scheme / scope of settlement
4. Allow Post Office to prepare for difficult cases / decisions
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Settlement factors
Number of Value of
claims claims
Risk
discount
Settlement
cost
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Recommended settlement process
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Soceusvetaneraherstensrereneranorecone
Rh Rl a ae Ch A A
o
2
a
inci
Settlement pr
_ Settlement options
Compensation principles
Settlement thresholds —
°
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
1. Settlement options
Settlement In-post SPMR I Ex-SPMR
Explanation of issue
Apology
Compensation
Costs
Commitment to change
Se RY RSs
Branch improvements
x
Support criminal appeal
x
Support reversal of
bankruptcy
No
Conviction
v
v
v
v
v
x x
<
Ex-SPMR Ex-SPMR
Convicted Convicted
(unsafe) (safe)
v v
v x
v x
v x
v x
x x
v x
v x
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
2. Compensation principles
Possible head of loss Specific factors that may reduce
compensation for particular heads of
loss
SPMR wrongfully repaid Depends on level of loss suffered
ea uaelcacem by the branch
POL.
755 ST Depends on SPMR's remuneration Loss probably capped at 3 month's
to contract termination. level remuneration as POL always has a right
to terminate on 3 months’ notice.
Difficult to claim because POL could
always terminate on 3 months’ notice and
so loss of branch and subsequent loss of
wider retail business was always at risk.
Distress / loss reputatio! Difficult to value in cash terms. These types of loss are generally
irrecoverable at law for most claims.
Loss of retail business. Depends on value of individual
business
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
Possible head of loss
Costs / expenses related to
the mediation scheme.
Costs / expenses in other
legal proceedings.
Losses relating to wrongful
prosecution / conviction
2. Compensation principles
Depends on nature of legal support
but SPMRs can exceed more than
the POL contribution level for legal
support.
Depends on nature of legal support
provided to SPMR.
Depends on nature of sentence —
usually comprises a combination of
loss of earnings and reputation
losses
Specific factors that may reduce
compensation for particular heads of
loss
Typically only reasonable and
proportionate legal costs are recoverable.
Typically only reasonable and
proportionate legal costs are recoverable.
Wrongful convictions are usually
compensated by the state rather than the
prosecutor.
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
2. Compensation principles
Limitation — claims over 6 years old are generally irrecoverable at law.
Should settlements be offered on old claims?
Causation — At law, SPMRs need to show that their complaints have
actually caused, or at least materially contributed to, the losses claimed.
This is more difficult for claims relating to, say, a lack of training and
support. Should Post Office insist on evidence of causation?
Remoteness - Peculiar or excessive losses that are unforeseeable to
POL may not recoverable at law. Should POL compensate these types
of losses?
Mitigation — At law, SPMRs are obliged to take reasonable steps to
reduce their losses. Should POL be looking for evidence of mitigation
before offering a settlement?
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
3. Settlement thresholds
Nature of compl Recommended threshold of isks
proof before offering a remedy
SESS Sa Very clear proof of a technical POL should be slow to concede that
data / transactions. defect in Horizon. Horizon has any technical faults. To
do so, could open the floodgates to a
Horizon has a technical large number of claims. It will be
problem that caused branch almost impossible to reverse this
losses. position if conceded.
Horizon suffered
communication and power
failures that caused losses ina
branch.
Defective hardware in the Clear proof that a specific branch Hardware failures should be
branch (pin pads, terminals, had defective equipment localised to a particular branch so
etc.). less risk of a flood of claims by
making a concession.
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
3. Settlement thresholds
Nature of complai Recommended threshold of Risks
proof before offering a remedy
Horizon is too complex. SPMR identifies a specific Issue should be confined to a
problem transaction that did not _ specific problem so allows that
Operating processes are have a clear or established problem to be discretely defined and
unclear. operating practice. remedied without undermining all
transaction processes.
Lack of support for SPMR. SPMR shows that they have Issue is confined to the specific
sought support and that the circumstances of an SPMR so less
Helplines were unhelpful. support did not (1) solve the risk of negative consequences when
issue and/or (2) POL failed to _offering a remedy.
follow its established practices.
oe General complaints about POL's POL should be slow to concede that
Horizon system standard training are not its general training is defective as
sufficient. SPMR needs to defective training could impact on a
identify special circumstances _large number of branches. To do so,
that made training inadequate. _ could open the floodgates to a large
number of claim.
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
3. Settlement thresholds
Nature of complai Recommended threshold of Risks
proof before offering a remedy
SPMR unable to investigate General complaints about a lack Issue should be confined to a
losses. of visibility of historic specific problem so allows that
transactions are not sufficient. problem to be discretely defined and
Sed SPMR needs to show a problem remedied without undermining all
with the audit trail of a specific transaction processes.
product / transaction.
eh) Clear evidence that POL failed to Any remedy in response to a claim
ee = look into specific issues (not that a criminal investigation /
SPMR. general complaints) raised by prosecution is unsound should be
the SPMR or failed to followits approved by POL's criminal legal
normal investigation processes. team. Offering any remedy may
undermine a conviction and so any
remedy in this situation needs to be
considered with great care.
POL-0018481
POL00022002
POL00022002
NAOGE:
Diakinsow Wes ta
pclae We Bo poi
ects MER WOE
ii acres ween a, Ga
hele & I
aunt 6
TENE van See?
Legally privileged and confidential => 100 Al
Feige N00 ea"
stn Moen Vs
estate SR Milage 2 Is
HA cum, Gunes]
2) Betton 5
Stating # cadane & cendancohig
Post Office Limited
POL-0018481