POL00138167
POL00138167
Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme Programme Board
Date: Wednesday 12 February 2014
Time: 12:00 — 13.00
Place: Room 505, 148 Old street
Attendees:
Name Abbrev. I Job Title
Chris Aujard CA General Counsel (Chair)
Fay Healey FH Programme Board Non-Executive
Belinda Crowe BC Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, Programme
Director
Angela Van AVDB_ I Head of Partnerships
Den Bogerd
Sophie SB Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, Communications
Bialaszewski
Layla Wildon LW. Regulatory Risk Business Partner
Jess Barker JB Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, Mediation Lead
Andy Parsons AP Senior Associate, Bond Dickinson
David Oliver DO Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, Programme
Manager
Nicky Mal NM Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, PPM &
Governance Lead
Guests
Name Abbrev. I Job Title
Ben Maddison BM Initial Complaints Review & Case Mediation Scheme, Independent
Resolution of Future Cases Workstream Lead
Lorraine Finnie LF Finance
Apologies
Name Abbrev. I Job Title
Charles cc Finance
Colquhoun
Rodric Williams RW. Post Office, Legal
Andy Holt AH Business Solutions Manager C&lS
Mark Davies MD Communications Director
Meeting Agenda:
Budget
AOB
QPON>
Development of the Future Complaints Resolution Model
Performance Dashboard
Key Risks & Issues
Minutes and actions from 12/02/14 Programme Board
POL00138167
POL00138167
No.
Minutes/Action
Completion
Date
Status
Action
Owner
A good discussion was had to help determine the
scope and approach to developing the future
complaints model.
In general the Board was in agreement that the
future model should deal with contractual breaches
only and be the last resort after all internal
processes have been exhausted. However the
current process for dealing with contractual
breaches can involve the suspension or termination
of Subpostmasters (SPMRs) and DO challenged
whether the future model would act as a safety net
for SPMRs if it kicked-in after they had already been
suspended/terminated. AVDB said the future model
should act as a safety net for both the SPMRs and
the business.
Much consideration was given to how autonomous
the future complaints system should be and the
implications of having a fully independent model—
less control, reputational risk, scope creep,
governance requirements, and high operating costs.
However it was agreed that there needed to be a
feedback mechanism back into the business.
The Board was asked to consider whether the future
model should have an investigative capability. FH
raised the question whether the new function should
review or rehear cases. The latter would be more
expensive. CA pointed out that we needed to look at
the balance of power and independence in more
detail.
The Board was also asked to consider whether the
future model should be taskable if sanctioned by
ExCo. FH pointed out that accountability would need
to be clear and the concern regarding scope creep
was highlighted again.
Action — AVDB to provide a view on how many
transaction corrections the Post Office issues a
year.
14/02/14
Open
AVDB
The latest version of the performance dashboard
was shared for information purposes.
BC highlighted the concerns about Second Sight’s
role within the Scheme
BC will be seeking the Board's approval for PA’s
proposal and for a case manager to manage the
throughput of cases in the Scheme.
POL00138167
POL00138167
No.
Minutes/Action
Completion
Date
Status
Action
Owner
The Fact File will be issued to the Board next week
for review.
The Board was asked to review the Mediation
Training pack. Action: ALL to review the
Mediation training pack and brief and provide
comments to AP by COB Wednesday 19
February.
19/02/14
Open
ALL
Sumi
mary of actions
No.
Action
Owner
Due Date
Post Office issues a year.
AVDB to provide a view on how many transaction corrections the
AVDB
14/02/14
comments to AP by COB Wednesday 19 February.
ALL to review the Mediation training pack and brief and provide
ALL
19/02/14