MINUTE
INITIAL COMPLAINT REVIEW AND MEDIATION SCHEME
WORKING GROUP 20 MAY 2014
ATTENDEES
Sir Anthony Hooper
Alan Bates (JFSA)
Kay Linnell (JFSA)
lan Henderson (Second Sight)
Ron Warmington (Second Sight)
Chris Holyoak (Second Sight)
Chris Aujard (Post Office)
Belinda Crowe (Post Office)
Angela Van Den Bogerd (Post Office)
David Oliver (Post Office)
Andy Parsons (Bond Dickinson)
1. Part One of the Mediator’s Briefing Pack
The Chair opened discussion of the draft Part one report tabled by Second Sight.
The report was reviewed page by page and a number of amendments were agreed
by the Working Group.
ACTION Chris Aujard to speak to CFO at the Post Office to establish whether a
surplus from reconciling between ATM records and Bank of Ireland records is ever
taken into profits by the Post Office.
ACTION AVDB to confirm the annexes are accurate
ACTION Second Sight to provide a revised Part one report by close of business on
22 May.
2. Second Sight Reports
It was agreed that the comments on the draft reports would be annexed to the final
report for both parties to see.
It was agreed that the covering letter would be agreed with CEDR and the Working
Group would send the final copy of the report, this letter would also seek
confirmation of the advisor being used. It was agreed that the letter would be
circulated to the Working Group for agreement.
It was agreed that Second Sight would turn round comments on the draft in up to
seven days.
e M022 the Working Group agreed that M022 was suitable for mediation.
POL00026659
POL00026659
POL00026659
POL00026659
e M127
It was agreed that there is a need to focus on the issues that are relevant to the loss,
it was suggested that 1.6 should be amended to make clear which factors
contributed to the loss and which did not and focus on who is responsible for the
loss.
Post Office commented that the stylistic comments made on M022 apply to this
report as well. Further Post office made two overarching comments:
e They agreed on the need for focus.
e Secondly they commented that paragraph 4.4 assumes a relationship
between the SPMR and Post Office which if correct would have far reaching
implications for the financial model that Post Office is operating and who
bears responsibility for the loss.
ACTION stylistic comments to Second Sight by close of business 21 May.
e M054
It was agreed that M054 would be issued in draft directly to the parties and Second
Sight commented that it would be ready by close of business on 28 May.
3. Mediation
The Working Group reviewed the two CEDR documents (mediation process and
mediation procedure) tabled for review. In the discussion the following points were
made:
e Unquantified Claims — Working Group would prefer remedies sought to be
set out in the mediation statement and agreed that Alan Bates would circulate
a circular to applicants asking them to prepare for this.
e Bankruptcy — it was suggested that point 4 be replaced with
“The applicant should provide an agreement with the other party (Post Office) that
there is authority for the party to make the claim and settle it subject to the party
reporting back to their trustee in bankruptcy”
ACTION Post Office to consider the issue of bankruptcy and revert to the
Working Group
e Bankruptcy — it was suggested that the process would be amended to state
that there would be a separate process for bankrupts.
e Timing — it was agreed that the date for mediation should be set within 4
POL00026659
POL00026659
weeks of the mediator being appointed
4. Howe and Co travel expenses
The secretariat updated the Working Group that Howe and Co have invoiced for
expenses incurred without prior authorisation in contravention of the previous
Working Group process. It was agreed that the Chair would review the invoice and
make a recommendation to the Post Office.
5. New Tracker
Belinda Crowe updated the Working Group on the new tracker. The Working Group
commended the new tracker format.
Action forward projection for the Scheme duration to be completed once Second
Sight have reviewed their production rates.
6. Keeping Applicants Informed
The Chair opened the discussion by raising the issue as to whether the
Working Group was doing enough to keep applicants informed. AB
commented that there was not a great deal to say at this point. Chair asked
Alan to let the Working Group know if he felt there was more to do in this
area.
POL00026659
POL00026659
Standing Agenda
7. New Case Questionnaire Responses
nase Status WG Decision
M064 Accepted 6 weeks deadline
MOo68 Accepted 8 weeks deadline
M074 Accepted 6 weeks deadline
M087 Accepted 8 weeks deadline
8. Post Office investigation progress
Case WG Decision
No. Status
Mo06 Finalising report as a priority.
Investigation complete. Finalising I Agreed.
M013 report. Extension (not 1°) to 16"
June required.
Investigation complete. Finalising I Agreed.
M045 report. Extension (not 1*) to 16"
June required.
M063 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(1°) to 16" June required.
o71 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(1) to 16" June required.
M115 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(1%) to 16"" June required.
M122 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(1) to 16" June required.
M126 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(1) to 16"" June required.
M133 Investigation on-going. Extension I Agreed.
(18) to 16" June required.
M143 Finalising report as a priority.
9. Standing case updates
case Status WG Decision
Applicant has confirmed I Noted
that they wish to proceed
M004 I with their case. SLO1
pack sent 19" May.
Letter to be sent from No letter to be sent, response from the applicant
SAH with 2 weeks to should now have been received.
respond. If no response
Moo4 received, WG to
withdraw the case and
write to that effect.
Letter to be sent from No letter to be sent response from applicant now
M114 I SAH with 2 weeks to _I received.
POL00026659
POL00026659
respond. If no response
received, WG to
withdraw the case and
write to that effect.
Letter to be sent from Letter to issue from SAH.
SAH with 2 weeks to
respond. If no response
received, WG to
withdraw the case and
write to that effect.
M142
10. Second Sight review progress
Second Sight updated the Working Group on their progress. They noted that their ability to
produce reports was constrained by staff availability, the need to reflect on learning and that
they now estimated that it was taking 8 weeks to produce a report not 4 weeks. Second
Sight commented that no work had been done on the reports when originally posted except
the three reports discussed by the Working Group in March.
In discussion Second Sight commented that they will aim to produce three reports a week
but that next week they would produce two draft reports.
ACTION Second Sight to confirm which reports would be produced to the Working Group.
Second Sight’s role in hardening cases was also discussed. It was agreed that Second
Sight should make the hardening process a more focussed process which would ensure
there is a sufficient caseload for the Post Office investigators.
Second Sight updated on the Part two report they commented that no further work has been
done on Part two and that they needed to complete more reports before they can complete
Part two.
Action Second Sight to provide a schedule for completion of Part two and their case reports
by next Thursday (29 May).
It was agreed that vulnerable applicants should be prioritised within the Second Sight
scheduling.
Case Due Second Sight WG Decision
No. Date Update
224 Extension of 4 weeks I Second Sight to provide schedule for case
M007 .
May sought completion next week
Overdue — extension I Second Sight to provide schedule for case
th
M030 13" May of 4 weeks sought completion next week
Mo48 13 May Overdue — extension I Second Sight to provide schedule for case
of 5 weeks sought completion next week
Overdue — extension I Second Sight to provide schedule for case
th
Mos4 8" May to 28 May sought completion next week
Overdue — extension I Second Sight to provide schedule for case
5 weeks sought completion next week
M076 15" May
POL00026659
POL00026659
{127 I] 19" May I Received I
11. Any other queries raised by Applicants / Advisors
N/A
12. Issues with resourcing / timings
N/A
13. AOB
e Howe and Co extension requests It was agreed that Alan Bates would contact
MO96. It was agreed that the Secretariat would contact Howe and Co granting an
extension to the end of the month for M096 and requesting Howe and Co to
inform the Working Group what steps have been taken to contact the applicant
and why, M106 was granted an extension of 1 week.
¢ Aver — Aver’s continued failure to respond to approaches from the Working
Group was discussed. It was agreed that the Chair would ring Emma Porter to
convey the Working Group’s disquiet.
e CFAs - The issue of CFAs was discussed and the Chair updated the Working
group on the letter sent to De Nahlik highlighting the clause in the funding
agreement which ruled out the approach Mr De Nahlik was proposing. AB
commented that he had advised all applicants who had asked his advice to make
clear to their advisors that they had no funds available to them beyond the Post
Office contribution. It was agreed that the letter covering the final report to each
applicant should again draw applicants’ attention to both clause 4.2 and the
wording in the prospectus.
Next face to face meeting was agreed for Monday 16 June and subject to room availability it
will be held at Matrix Chambers.