POL00147778
POL00147778
Message
From: Hugh Flemington [IMCEAEX-
_O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=HUGH+2EFLEMINGTON
9886-403D-BFSB-£08821F432B3@C72A47.ingest.local]
on Hugh Flemington <IMCEAEX-
behalf _O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=HUGH+2EFLEMINGTON
of 9886-403D-BF5B-£08821F432B3@C72A47.ingest.local> [IMCEAEX-
__O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=HUGH+2EFLEMINGTON
9886-403D-BF5SB-E08821F432B3@C72A47.ingest.local]
Sent: 18/03/2014 08:21:35
To: Chris Aujard {7
Subject:Fw: Fwd: Sparrow/Linklaters
Don't know if this list helps.
Chris Day has to produce a paper by tomorrow.
My guess is he will say “waiting for legal" to help speak to the insurance chap.
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 08:13 AM
To: Hugh Flemington
Subject: Fwd: Sparrow/Linklaters.
Here it is
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
Company Secretary
Begin forwarded message:
From: Alwen Lyons <
Date: 17 March 2014 16:52:12 GMT
To: ‘Alice Perkins'
Ce: Alwen Lyons <_
Subject: RE: Sparrow/Linklaters
Alice to make it simpler to read I have included your initial questions along with the answers below
1) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->The definitive view on all aspects of insurance ie
organisational and personal. What policies do we have; what in practice, do we believe they will
cover us for; and what have we been doing to fulfill our obligations under our policies?
Chris Day is providing a paper on insurance for the March Board, which will cover all these
aspects and will be circulated with the Board papers.
POL00147778
POL00147778
2) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->Are we safe from legal challenge in what we are/have
been doing? What is the position both since we became independent and before?
The advice from Linklaters will covers the Post Office's legal liability, both before and after
independence from Royal Mail Group. Advice
3) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->What is the worst case in relation to costs which could
result from this (both admin and settlements)?
Admin costs will be picked up in the cover Board paper to the Linklaters advice. Settlement
costs and their quantum will be in the Linklaters paper.
4) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->The position in relation to SS's costs and the absence of
an engagement letter - what is the recommended action and what are the potential
consequences?
The position with SS both costs and the absence of an engagement will be picked up in the
cover paper.
5) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->The position on the lessons learned review - timing.
We will put an update in the Board status report, but at this point, until we understand the
way forward and how we are likely to use SS, it feels as if we should wait before undertaking
this review. I understand Neil was of the same view, keeping the focus on managing the
current issues, with a full lessons learned review later in the year.
6) <!--[if !supportLists]--><![endif]-->What options do we have to mitigate 3) above?
Some elements of the options available to mitigate costs will be picked up in the Board cover
paper and the first Linklaters paper but the real savings will turn on what route we finally go
down with the mediation scheme.
Hope that help Alice
Thanks
Alwen
From: Paula Vennells
Sent: 17 March 2014 15:48
To: Alice Perkins
Cc: Alwen Lyons
Subject: Re: Sparrow/Linklaters
Alice, always worth checking. Yes, we will answer your questions and to be doubly sure have
checked with CA. As I'm off to FOS, Alwen will get back to you to confirm each point.
(Apologies for the sloppy English - Chris' Insurance paper will be issued in advance - I hate
getting caught out on language! :)
Paula
Sent from my iPhone
POL00147778
POL00147778
b wrote:
On 17 Mar 2014, at 13:22, "Alice Perkins"
Thanks Paula.
i just want to be clear about the scope of the March Board paper on this.
Are you saying that the paper for the March Board will NOT cover the full ground which
I outlined in my email of about ten days' ago and which originated from conversations
which I had with both Belinda and Neil shortly after the last Board (no time to look for
the exact date now}? ff so, I'd like to understand why!
1am also assuming that Chris's paper on insurance will be circulated with the Board
papers so we can read it in advance (ie not literally “tabled"),
I expect we're fine on both points but this is so sensitive, I just wanted to be completely
clear.
A
From: Alwen Lyons [mailto:
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 1
To: Alice Perkins; Neil McCausland
Please see below a note from Paula
Thanks
Alwen
Dear all, I thought it would be helpful if I reminded us of the chronology and brief.
At the Feb Board, the Executive were asked ‘where we were getting advice from' as we
look into the options available to us. We agreed we would engage a top law firm to
bolster our thinking, particularly with a view to understanding the legal position re,
compensation, but also horizon scanning legal impacts of any changes we might consider,
eg., settling outside the scheme, triage by type of complaint, etc. And, following the
advice from Sir Tony Hooper (for the Board to be patient whilst he evaluated the
suitability of reports coming in), we agreed we would come back to the Board in April
with next steps.
Additionally, Alasdair helpfully suggested we could also expand our thinking by
engaging off the record with the FOS. I am meeting their CEO this pm.
At the March ARC, I understand the NEDs asked to accelerate the most sensitive step in
the process, ie., to understand the legal ‘bottom line' re compensation exposure and our
ability to challenge. The Executives agreed and this part of the LL brief has now been
accelerated. We will therefore provide an interim report on this aspect to the March
board. I am reviewing tomorrow am.
Lastly, Chris D was asked at the Board and at the ARC to update and clarify the
insurance position. Chris is clear on this and will table a paper at the March Board.
Thope this helps clarify why the scope of the brief is as written. I think it is important that
we are clear on wider legal impacts as we consider options around the scheme, ie., to
make the outcomes better and the process more efficient by looking at different
approaches within it and/or approaches which may supplement the scheme.
Any questions at all, please call me.
Paula
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If
you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or
distribute the contents of this communication. If you have received this in error, please
contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any views
or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise
specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered
Office: 148 OLD STREET, LONDON EC1V 9HQ.
Click here to report this email as spam.
This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com
POL00147778
POL00147778