POL00192725
POL00192725
From: Alwen Lyons{_
Sent: Mon 22/07/2013 9:
To: Susan Crichton’,
Subject: Re: James meeting
Good night!
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
-Company. Secretary... ’
Sent from Blackberry
Original Message
From: Susan Crichton
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 09:36 PM
To: Alwen Lyons
Subject: RE: James meeting
Alwen I have made some suggestions in CAPS - I have my notes at work so will just quickly check tomorrow first thing.
Good night..
Susan
-----Original Message-----
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 22 July 2013 18:57
To: Susan Crichton
Cc: Alwen Lyons
Subject: James meeting
Here are my initial notes. Can you have a look and let me know what you think. I will tidy up the formatting to or row
Notes of the meeting held on 22nd July at Old Street to discuss the proposed mediation process
Attending: PV, JA, RW, IH, SC, MD, AL
PV welcomed all to the meeting, want to work collaboratively, respond to learnings and put a process in place to move the cases
forward
POL has already committed to
Creating a working party To work collaboratively to complete the review of cases started by second sight last year.
A reviewed chaired by an independent figure to mediate in disputed cases.
A branch user forum to provide a way for subpostmasters and others to raise issues and I sights
Put right what had happened well in the past I WOULD NOT SAY THIS AS WE MAY NOT ACHIEVE IT SOUNDS LIKE
COMPENSATION and ensure there is a satisfactory process going forward
The meeting discussed the proposed process - SEE FLOW CHART
T.
JA considered it a good way forward AND SAID THAT this was very close to the process suggested by Alan Bates a week ago.
It had been sent to AB
SC suggested it was a chance to get resolution, with some changes in the Business it was hoped that this would stop new cases in the
future going into the hopper
JA pointed out that the 47 cases currently being considered were not the only cases, this was accepted but it was agreed that if we put
POL00192725
POL00192725
these cases through the process this would prove it worked and then the other cases could follow.
JA said he had had a lot of new cases since the statement in the house.
The Monthly Oversight Board would stay in existence initially for 12 months and the hope was this would be enough time to see the
cases through IH agreed that the process would bring the 'sides' together. Mediator would help. Good will on both side would give I
a chance.
JA had expected POL to suggest the review needed to be finished by the end of October and would not have been pleased if it had,
but he was pleased with the proposal IH was also pleased and said the spot review approach worked well with this approach.
It was suggested that a workshop be held on Wed or Thurs to flesh out the approach.
JA asked the workshop to consider the precise steps which need tO be taken for each different type of case. IT WAS AGREED
THAT AN EMAIL BE SENT TO JA from POL (agreed with SS) which sets out what will happen with MP cases which JA NCAA
CAN then send on to the MPs involved.
JA explained that the MPs had taken up the cases because their constituents could not see any other way. So he would want to be
able to send the email onto Jo Hamilton on his case to let her know what is happening, whether the final outcome is satisfactory or
NOT, each constituent will want to know.
JH said that any case submitted needed a level of detail before it could be investigated and some MP cases did noT have she required
level of detail.
JA needed to go back to the MPs and tell theM which cases did not have enough detail. SS to provide an email setting out what is
reared REQUIRED based on the JFSA standard of evidence.
SC explained that the process made provision for the SPMR to have an independent advisor
JA said that we needed to consider the consequences if cases get Over turned. RW pointed out that this advisor was very important
as some of the SPMRs found it difficult to explain their case
IH it will not take long to push some of the cases through, out those with tangible evidence to the front of the queue, but also ensure
that the cases of MPs who have attended the meetings are given priority
The workshop this week would look at different ways of working, then there would be an ongoing working group, working through
cases and meeting formally once a week to sort out any issueS.
Getting the information from Fujitsu had been an issue in the past. PV asked for evidence of this so that the business could challenge
FJ.
JA offered to intervene with the FJ Chairman, Simon Blagdon, if it would be helpful.
IH said the business needed THEIR their commitment to process and speed of getting data.
It was thought that Gareth Jenkins produced high quality and he may be able to help the process.
TH to provide JA with the email to call in the evidence, the lack of evidence would be a problem and we would have to filter out
cases where IT wasn't possible to take them forward.
SS would look at each case individually to see if the evidence available enabled it to proceed
SC explained that this process would not stop SPMRs taking a civil case against the PO if they thought that was appropriate, but that
would take them outside of the mediation
AL would call AB tomorrow morning and invite him or Kay Linnell to attend the workshop if possible
Consider if it would be good to put out a joint POL/ JFSA communication about the mediation process. Once the process is in place
need to contact each SPMR to ask them if they want. TO put their case through mediation.
ACTIONS In the meeting
After the workshop, POL/SS/JFSA provide an email for JA to send to MPs to explain the process ( the email needs to be able to
quoted or used in correspondence with their constituents )
SS to provide a list of MP cases which do not have enough evidence and an email for JA to send to MPs concerned explaining what
evidence is required, using the JFSP standard
POL00192725
POL00192725
Provide an email for JA which is an amalgamation of the two above for use with new cases, explaining the process.
ACTIONS outside the meeting
SC to propose to the workshop the terms of mediation to set expectations for those entering the process; DETERMINE THE TOR
FOR THE MEDIATION PLUS THE MOB AND THE WORING GROUP.
DISCUSS WITH BD THE MEDIATION PROCESS AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED AND COSTS .
Find a mediator
LETTER? COMMUNICATIONI to be sent to those entering the process possibly by the mediator, explaining, the process, the need
to sign an agreement, and outline the possible damages limit
Need to decide how we will resource the process from a POL perspective - SET UP NEW WAYS OF WORKING WITH SS AND
POL EG ROOM AND SUPPORT EG ANGELA.
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
Company Secretary