POL00026641
POL00026641
“INITIAL COMPLAINT REVIEW AND MEDIATION SCHEME
WORKING GROUP - MINUTES
30 JANUARY 2014
1. Terms of reference for the Working Group
The Working Group discussed the revised Terms of Reference revised and retabled
after their initial discussion on 3 January.
In discussion the following points were made:
e The ToRs were currently drafted with an end date of end of March in Clause
1.1. Although this had been the initial timescale by which it had been hoped
to have resolved the cases it was now apparent to all members that this was
not going to be the case. It was explained that the intention was not to close
the Working Group at this point but that the ToRs could be amended to make
them open ended with a regular review. This suggestion was agreed.
ACTION Post Office to redraft Working Group timing clause to make the Working
Groups existence open ended with regular reviews.
e Alan Bates raised the issue of the scope of the Working Group and whether
the intention was that the Terms of Reference would replace existing
documentation particularly but not limited to the “raising concerns about
horizon” documentation.
e Discussion then turned to the purpose set out for the Working Group with the
point being made that if the Terms of Reference superseded previous
documentation then JFSA felt the Terms of Reference as drafted were
insufficiently broad.
e Responding for Post Office Chris Aujard explained that the Terms of
Reference accurately reflected the purpose of the Working Group as
explained to him when he had taken over as General Counsel and that his
understanding was that the Working Group’s purpose was narrower than Alan
Bates had set out.
e twas agreed that Chris Aujard would review any documentation provided by
Alan Bates and following wider consultation with Post Office Colleagues
return to the next face to face Working Group with the Terms of Reference.
ACTION Alan Bates to provide Chris Aujard with documentation on the scope
of the Working Group that he referenced in the meeting.
POL00026641
POL00026641
ACTION Chris Aujard to review the documentation provided and bring back
the Terms of Reference to the next face to face Working Group.
In discussion of the revised clause 4.9 it was agreed by the Working Group
that it was not the role of the Working Group to offer an opinion on the merits
of a particular case. These clauses were accepted in principle by the Working
Group subject to redrafting to simplify.
ACTION Andrew Parsons to redraft clause 4.9
Clause 4.10 was discussed by the Working Group and accepted subject to
the Post Office commitment (which was reaffirmed in the meeting) that should
they make any firm admission during the mediation on the basis of a newly
discovered flaw or fault in Horizon or that there was a material change of fact
then they would report this back to the Working Group.
It was noted that it was unlikely that a new fact would come to light in
mediation as that was not the point of mediation which was designed to reach
a resolution of the issue. It was instead for Second Sight to report if there was
a problem and how Post Office had dealt with it.
The production of a final report was discussed with the Chair noting that he
felt that there should be a final report produced on the Horizon process.
There was a discussion of who should produce the report and under what
auspices it would be published and agreed.
ACTION Post Office to consider the production of a final report on the scheme
and report back to the Working Group at the next face to face meeting.
2.
Mediation Process
The Working Group discussed the mediation process map which had been revised
following their discussion on 3 January.
The following points were made in discussion:
It was clarified that the document referred to on the mediation map as the
“Second Sight report” would be the CQR, the POL investigation, the Second
Sight generic report and the case specific Second Sight report.
It is important that when the report is submitted to the Working Group for
consideration it is submitted directly to the whole Working Group and not to
Post Office preferentially.
It is important that the Working Group has sight of all Second Sight reports not
just those where there is a dispute as to whether or not Post Office should
POL00026641
POL00026641
mediate. It was noted that this was a change to the process discussed at the
previous Working Group but the change was agreed.
It was also agreed that the Working Group would fast track agreement to
mediation for any reports where Post Office and Second Sight were in
agreement.
ACTION Second Sight to submit all reports to the Working Group
The generic report was discussed by the Working Group particularly how it
related to the Post Office “factfile”. The factfile is designed to be a neutral
background document setting out the facts around POL’s business.
It was agreed that consideration should be given as to whether this could be
included in Second Sight’s generic report. Although it was made clear that
this could only be the case if Second Sight were content once they had seen
the document.
ACTION Post Office to provide Second Sight with a copy of the Factfile at the
earliest opportunity
For the first set of reports it was agreed that the Working Group would
consider them in a face to face meeting before they were submitted further. It
was the Chair’s view that this was necessary to ensure that the reports are
delivering on the objectives of the Scheme.
The status of the Second Sight report was discussed further and it was
agreed that the report should be submitted as a draft to both POL and the
applicant.
The draft report would be submitted simultaneously.
Recipients would have a tightly defined period of time to comment on the
report’s factual accuracy. The period of time would depend on the complexity
of the report but it was suggested that a week for straightforward reports and
two weeks for complex ones would be appropriate. It was agreed that if no
comment was received within the timescale then it would deemed that no
comment would have been made.
ACTION Andrew Parsons to draft template letter for circulation to the Working
Group
It was noted that this stage might be costly however both the Chair and KL
noted that POL had already set out their contribution to the applicant’s fees
and that there was no need for POL to provide any extra funding for this stage
as that was for the Professional Advisors to manage with the applicants.
POL00026641
POL00026641
e It was also noted that if substantially new information was provided by either
POL or the applicant at the draft report stage then it might be necessary to
give the other party a right of reply.
e Once the draft report had been considered and commented on by both parties
it was agreed that the final report should simultaneously be distributed to the
Working Group and the applicant.
e The role of the mediator was discussed in detail by the Working Group. It was
felt that the current process maps did not currently represent the role of the
mediator as some members of the Working Group felt it should.
e There was some disagreement about the exact role that the mediator would
take including around administration and distribution of the papers.
e It was agreed that further discussions would take place with CEDR and the
process would need to be updated in light of these conversations.
3. Data Protection
e This item was not discussed at the Working Group but was discussed
bilaterally between Alan Bates and Andrew Parsons.
4. Post Office Administration of the Scheme
e David Oliver updated the Working Group on the detail in the paper setting out
the improvements that had been made by POL.
e The Chair noted that this was good progress since the last face to face
meeting and should continue.
e Alan Bates raised an issue with the Working Group correspondence issuing
on Post Office headed paper. Alan explained that this was causing applicants
distress and he asked if it would be possible to send on a plain Working
Group header in future. This was agreed.
ACTION POL to replace Post Office header with a Working Group header on
future Working Group correspondence
5. Second Sight draft terms of engagement
The Scope Section of the Second Sight Engagement letter was discussed by the
Working Group.
In discussion the dependence of this document on the scope of the Working Group
was raised by AB. It was pointed out that from his perspective this document
needed to reflect the previous documents and appeared too narrow. It was agreed
that this issue could not be resolved in the meeting but as with the Working Group
Terms of Reference would be considered by Chris Aujard outside of the meeting.
POL00026641
POL00026641
Chris Aujard explained that the intention of this Scope was to only reflect Second
Sight’s work on the mediation Scheme and that other issues were not covered by it.
Any other work would need to be covered by a separate engagement letter.
A number of drafting points were made in discussion in particular that clause 1.4.2
the word neutral should be replaced with objective and in Clause 1.5 the line “it is
..matters” should be deleted.
Action Post Office to amend drafting and consider the impact of any changes
to the Working Group Terms of Reference.
Status of
current
applications
that have not
AP updated WG on criminal cases:
M141: Letters sent out stating that no
further action would be taken by POL
M102 is accepted into Scheme.
AH will report back next Thursday
on the outstanding criminal cases
yet been so the application can come into the _I after discussing them with AP.
accepted Scheme.
M102: POL has taken a decision not
to prosecute so the application can
come into the Scheme.
Status of N/A
accepted
applications
awaiting a case
questionnaire
response
New case
questionnaire
responses
M005 and M013 accepted.
Post office
investigation
process
Cases under investigation
AVDB provided an update on POL's
investigation processes. Various
extensions of time were requested
and agreed.
Cases outside the Scheme
AVDB provided any update on cases
that were not yet accepted into the
Scheme because POL was dealing
WG granted extension for the
following applications:
M007 — 13 Feb 2014
M058 — 13 Feb 2014
M076 — 6 Feb 2014
M079 — 13 Feb 2014
The cases below should be with
SS next week:
Mo02
POL00026641
POL00026641
direct with the SPMR: Mo11
M017
M004 — AVDB met with the SPMR M019
and a letter has been sent out M022
confirming POL's investigation M028
findings. POL awaiting confirmation M029
that SPMR still wishes to proceed into I M030
Scheme before re issuing SLO1 letter I M031
/CQ. M038
M054
M037 — AVDB met with SPMR and a_ I M048
letter is ready for sending setting out
POL's investigation findings. Likely SS will examine the letters sent
that this case will enter the Scheme in I by POL on Huddle.
the coming weeks.
SS raised a query in relation to
information from POL about
settled/withdrawn applications. The
aim being to ensure that lessons
learned are fed back into the
Scheme.
AVDB noted that POL has sent letters
to SPMRs explaining the outcome of
their investigations. These were on
huddle and should provide the
information needed by SS.
Other updates
M094 — AVBB updated WG last
week. Due 6 Feb 2014 as granted
last week.
M114 — Extension until 6 Feb 2014
granted last week.
M126 — Extension until 6 Feb 2014
granted last week.
M144 — SPMR sent further info to
POL00026641
POL00026641
POL; AVDB is reviewing it and will
revert to SPMR shortly.
M117 — Withdrawn.
Second sight
investigation
process
SS informed the WG that its generic
report is taking longer than expected
and that this is impacting on
completing the individual case
reports.
SS requested a 3 week extension for
the 4 individual reports and a 4 weeks
extension for the generic report. :
After discussion, the WG agreed that
all SS' reports should be delivered by
27 February 2014 as the individual
reports and the generic report should
come through together. These
reports should be provided in good
time before the next WG face-to-face
meeting.
Time extended for SS reports
until 27 February 2014.
These early SS reports are to go
to WG before going to Applicants.
Any other
queries raised
by Applicants/
M087: Enquiry from financial
advisor re background training.
SS will send the training materials
Advisors to the financial advisor but no
other training will be offered.
Issues with No other issues to raise.
resourcing /
timings
Outstanding DO ran through all other outstanding
actions actions. These were either being
progressed or had been discussed
earlier.
AOB AB suggested his application be WG agreed to defer AB's
processed last by the WG.
KL noted that her and AH's funding
application to the end of the
Scheme.
POL00026641
POL00026641
from POL would shortly be coming to
an end.
WG discussed Scheme timings.
Current estimate is that POL's reports
will be finished by June/July with the
last mediation in October.
POL will report back on future
funding arrangements from KL
and AH.
Next meeting: 7 March 11.30am.