POL00040253
POL00040253
DRAFT - PRIVILEDGED
LOGIC NOTE — CIRCULATION OF THE SECOND SIGHT PART TWO REPORT
Summary
This note sets out the process by which the Working Group overseeing the Initial
Complaint Review and Mediation Scheme (the Scheme) came to issue the Second
Sight Part Two Report (dated 21 August). This note should be read in the context of
the Board’s decision to continue to operate within the terms of reference and the
downstream impact that entailed. The note also records the steps both considered
and discarded and taken by Post Office to improve the quality of the Report and
minimise the potential reputational damage.
Background to the Part Two Report
The Part Two Report was first suggested by
early 2014. The rationale behind the repo
difficult to produce individual case repo!
very repetitive. Instead Second Sight si
the case reports more managed
Group.
Second Sight committed,.to deliver ae : larch 2014 (the first
draft was received g 5 onsidered a partial first
draft in March 20 a he Chair as being so
lacking in content t if a review by the Working Group. It then
seemed that the propo Second Sight focussed on
attempting ader pressure from JFSA this focus
change Is was produced on 16 June 2014
The A approved By Post Office or the Working Group but
under tF eminated to applicants on XX date — Post Office
did not objé the report carried a clear rider and although
further steps to © i ave been unlikely to succeed and would have irritated
and potentially ani ¢ Chair and delayed the mediation of applicants’ cases.
The process for taking fésward the development of the Part Two report was
discussed by the Working Group on XXX. Second Sight were directed by the Chair
to increase their engagement with Post Office to ensure that their Report was
factually accurate. On this basis Post Office repeatedly sought a meeting with
Second Sight to discuss the content. Second Sight agreed to meet to discuss the
ATM section and on the day of the meeting provided a hard copy of the draft Part
Two Report.
The full draft Part Two report was formally submitted on 5 August and Post Office
convened a conference call with Second Sight to discuss the issues with the report.
Second Sight refused on the call to engage in substantive discussion of the Report
repeatedly asking Post Office to hold back their detailed comments and only to
POL00040253
POL00040253
DRAFT - PRIVILEDGED
provide factual corrections at this stage. Post Office pressed Second Sight on this
issue and they agreed to receive and try and accommodate Post Office’s comments.
Post Office provided a letter from the Legal Department making clear in detail the
problems and failings of the report. These comments were partially taken on board
in the Final Report which was received on 21 August. As had been expected from
the tone and tenor of Second Sight’s engagement on the conference call the report
was still inaccurate and of a poor quality.
The Post Office response has focussed on a number of areas:
1. Improve the quality of the Report
2. Increase the assertive management of the relationship with Second Sight
3. Attempt to influence the Working Group Sign
4. Minimise any potential reputational damage,
Post Office considered whether it could take it publication of the
report if it remained inaccurate but decide: out below not to
pursue this approach.
1. Improve the Quality
Post Office has been engaged i ity designed to increase the
Sight attempting to
ground all sis and strong referenced
evidence. iit scond Sight with a methodology for
s raised by Second Sight (P&A Fraud, ATM
d One-sided transactions).
balance of the ri report) Post Office led a line-by-line review of that section
before the Working Group seeking improvements from Second Sight.
e Post Office provided case reports to a form and standard agreed by the Chair
of the Working Group — these reports should have provided the core material
for the Part Two report to draw upon.
e Provided detailed comments on each case report Second Sight delivered —
Post Office has consistently sought to ensure Second Sight produced
evidenced work
e Post Office repeatedly attempted to meet with Second Sight to discuss the
draft ATM report following up the earlier technical notes and series of emails.
e Post Office offered to draft or hold a drafting workshop with Second Sight
POL00040253
POL00040253
DRAFT - PRIVILEDGED
Post Office repeatedly attempted to secure a line by line review of the Part
Two report both as it was developed and after a draft was provided.
Post Office convened a teleconference after the first draft was received, made
clear their dissatisfaction with the report in detail and again sought to work
collaboratively on the report to ensure it was factually accurate.
Second Sight declined to engage on the report on the conference call instead
attempting to focus on a process discussion and ask Post Office to solely
provide factual comments. Under Post Office pressure Second Sight agreed
to consider substantive comments in writing.
Post Office sent a letter from the Legal Department on 14 August making
clear Post Office dissatisfaction at the service Second Sight were providing
and providing detailed feedback on the draft Pa
Second Sight took some of the feedback on by
comments.
Post Office then lobbied the Chair for, i of the Part Two Report
— the Chair rejected this as he coul, i discussion and used
his casting vote to direct that the
The General Counsel called the CI j d course of
action and to stress Post Office’s co: i
but would not intervene g
ality of the Part Two
nd Sight expressed
seek to rectify the errors
lace from 1 July 2014
‘angements introduced from the July 2014 invoice
In line with the Post Office Chair’s direction Post Office commissioned Second
Sight to provide a revised billing schedule to be in place from 1 September.
Second Sight have failed to deliver this so Post Office are developing their
own proposal which can be imposed if required.
Formal letter to Second Sight drafted by Linklaters setting out concerns with
their engagement — this letter will be XXXX
. Influence the Working Group Sign Off
POL00040253
POL00040253
DRAFT - PRIVILEDGED
e Post Office has attempted to shape the Working Group discussion and
approach to the Part two report on a number of occasions and successfully
obtained a direction from the Chair to increase the level of engagement.
e Post Office has achieved limited success by:
a) Securing agreement to initially proceed with cases without the Part
Two Report — enabling Post Office to demonstrate good will in
resolving cases.
b) Forcing Second Sight to document their concerns in a number of areas
(eg ATMs) allowing Post Office to provide a clear explanation of the
facts in the case.
4. Minimise Potential Reputational Damage
e Brunswick engaged since early June ani
on how to handle the Scheme, Secon
specifically.
e POL comms working alongside t
making and external comms.
e Confidentiality agreements in place
e All recipients of report ha
of their entry into the Sc’
Post Office briefed Fujitsu @ i iments on the Report and
n providing ongoing advice
obtain an injunction to restrain future
equire the author to take different action after the
aken place.
Sr an injunction will usually fail if the defendant swears
(ie the statements complained of are true) or fair comment (ie
statements complained of are opinions expressed on matters of public
interest).
Seeking an injunction for Breach of contract (ie ToR) was unlikely to satisfy the
Courts requirements for an injunction:
o Serious question to be tried
o Damages not an adequate remedy
o Balance of convenience between parties’ positions
Conclusion
POL00040253
POL00040253
DRAFT - PRIVILEDGED
Overall to date the distribution of the Second Sight Report has not caused any media
interest and the only criticism received to date has been from Howe and Co about
the process the report has gone through.
The way Second Sight have responded to the increased pressure on quality,
timeliness and accuracy of content has strengthened Post Office’s hand. Post Office
is now in a strong position to impose revised financial arrangements, to circulate to
all applicants a report setting out its position on all of Second Sight’s concerns, and
to more assertively manage Second Sight moving forward as they have been
contrite (to the General Counsel) about the inaccuracies in the Report.
nN
RNS