POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
INITIAL COMPLAINT REVIEW AND
MEDIATION SCHEME
WORKING GROUP
14 NOVEMBER
Page 1lof7
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
Agenda
1.
2.
FACE TO FACE WORKING GROUP
14 November 2014
Matrix Chambers
Minutes of 17 October meeting
Letter from JFSA
. Progress on Part Two Report
Standing case agenda:
46
47
48
Priority Cases
Bankruptcy cases
Post Office investigation progress
Cases with Second Sight to review PO investigation reports
Cases Second Sight have reported on
(a) Proposal for Deferred mediation (Second Sight)
(b) Updating applicants where there is a delay in reaching Working Group
decision
Cases that have been passed to CEDR
Queries from applicants/advisors
AOB
Cases for decision:
a) Second Sight recommend mediation:
M003, MOOS, M013, M018, M021, M039, M063, M078, M126
Page 2 of 7
POL00212261
POL00212261
POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
AGENDA ITEM 2
Letter from JFSA
JFSA have written to the Chair (Monday 10 November) setting out their concerns
over the “current position and direction” of the Scheme.
JFSA complain that the Scheme has moved a long way from its original purpose and
specifically:
e restating their view that it is not the role of the Working Group to decide
which cases are approved for mediation (quoting selectively from then
Scheme ToRs and documentation);
e that no further cases should be released in draft until Second Sight’s Part
Two Report is completed;
e that depending on the contents of the revised Part Two report, all previous
cases may need to be reconsidered;
e making a number of pointed comments about Chris’s request to Kay Linnell
(letter of 14/10) to check her records for any new information relating to
prosecutions;
e suggesting that cases are being decided on the issue of “where the money
went” rather than the full range of “systemic failures / thematic issues”
affecting them;
e that POL have become defensive and entrenched, abandoned the concept of
“seeking the truth” and undermined the spirit in which the Scheme was
entered into; and
e questioning whether there was any point in continuing with the Scheme.
It is likely that the Chair will seek to address the issues with JFSA although he is
also likely to turn to POL for some responses.
Post Office’s Position
Our responses should be high level rather than getting into detail — especially given
the meeting with MPs on 17/11 — but if needed:
e the Chair has been clear on the role of the Working Group and how suitability
for mediation should be determined;
e there is a strong sense that the starting point for people involved in this
process is that PO and the Horizon system are or somehow simply must be at
fault — after 2 years’ investigation no evidence has been found to suggest that
this is the case;
e Post Office cannot be expected to accept responsibility for matters in
circumstances where there is no evidence that it is at fault;
e Post Office has taken its responsibilities very seriously — indeed were there
any fault with Horizon it would be in our interests to know about it —
specifically:
Page 3 of 7
POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
o we have reviewed almost 2000 pieces of evidence, completing over
100 investigation reports totalling around 1,500 pages of text;
© we are committed to completing all the investigations by 22/12;
o we have invested significant human and financial resource to
supporting this Scheme and the applicants, and continue to do so
(£3.4m todate, Scheme forecast total spend of £7.4m);
e itis disappointing that the confidentiality of the Scheme is being consistently
breached (not least by the reports from mediation contained in para 2 of
JFSA’s letter);
¢ itis also disappointing that JFSA are choosing not to play a full part in
Working Group discussions. There are a number of cases today where the
judgement is quite balanced and their input would be valuable.
e should those in whose interests the Scheme was principally established
(JFSA and its members) no longer feel it is capable of meeting their needs,
this is something upon which POL will need to reflect very carefully.
On specific point of Chris’s letter to Kay, this was in response to a specific comment
Kay made in September’s Working Group suggesting that she “had seen information
that would undermine the Post Office prosecutions”. It turns out that she had not.
How POL discharges its statutory duties relating to prosecutions is not a matter for
the Working Group.
It is possible that JFSA’s letter is set up for them to walk out of the meeting and
potentially the Scheme. We should take care not to cause them to do so by being
too aggressive in rebutting their points. Equally, should they choose to it may help
with our longer term aims to revise the Scheme.
Page 4of 7
POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
AGENDA ITEM 3
Progress on Part Two Report
The Chair has asked for an update on progress with Second Sight’s Part Two
Report. This is predominantly for Second Sight to respond to.
Post Office’s Position
e The Secretariat had a productive meeting with Second Sight (lan) on 4
November to discuss, amongst other items, progressing Part Two to
completion;
e atthe meeting, the Secretariat offered assistance from within the team to SS
to help them in completing Part Two;
e (Mark) subsequently drafted a plan setting out the timescales and
arrangements for its completion. SS, if in agreement with the plan and
timescales, may wish to share this with the WG; and
e this plan should allow Part Two to be finalised by 03/02/15.
Page 5 of 7
POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
AGENDA ITEM 4
Standing Case Agenda
4.1 Priority Cases
¢ M073 — to note, last Working Group meeting referred case back to SS for
Part Two issues
e M052 - to note, SS await advice from POL re: prosecution files
4.2Bankruptcy Cases
e To note — Rod Williams wrote to Moore Stephens on 7 November agreeing to
their appointment as Trustees in Bankruptcy in 4 cases — M001 (Castleton),
M100 (Thomas), M036 (Atkins), M029 (Foulger)
4.5 Cases that Second Sight have reported on
e To note — date for final report on M051 is incorrect on both the agenda and
the tracker. It should read 21 November.
a) Proposal for Deferred Mediation
Second Sight have made a proposal for a new recommendation in their final CRRs
of recommending a case is suitable for mediation but deferring mediation until after
their Part Two Report is complete as it may contain further relevant detail.
This has arisen out of the discussion at the last face-to-face Working Group where
the Chair was unwilling to cast his vote where the final CRR left open issue in the
Part Two report for further investigation. SS argue that a number of cases pass the
“threshold” for recommending without Part Two but that Part Two may also be
relevant.
This is a discussion in principal although SS have already used this formulation in
several final CRRs.
The tone of their letter suggests JFSA may simply seek to prevent further discussion
on cases until Part Two is complete.
Post Office Position
e Recognise that Second Sight are making a suggestion with the positive
intent to allow the Working Group to make progress.
e Reinforces the need to make progress on Part Two.
e Suitability will depend on each case.
« However, concerned that Second Sight’s threshold may be too low in
assessing suitability for mediation and that this formulation may be applied to
weak cases. In those circumstances, Post Office are unlikely to be able to
opt for mediation.
Page 6 of 7
POL00212261
POL00212261
CONFIDENTIAL - POST OFFICE INTERNAL
e Also concerned that delay may not be in the best interests of applicants
whose cases merit mediation without Part Two. Moving through the Scheme
more quickly offers a greater prospect of closure for the applicant.
b) Updating applicants where there is a delay in reaching Working Group
decision
e There are a growing number of cases that have been considered by the
Working Group but where decisions on suitability have not been reached
pending further information. The Secretariat recommend that a standard
letter be sent to applicants affected to provide an update on progress.
4.6 Cases where the Working Group has made a mediation recommendation
e To note — M066 was mediated this week (Tuesday)
4.7 Any other queries raised by applicants / advisors
Extensions
Extensions have been requested for comments on draft CRRs on M091 and M116
respectively owing to illness. No reason to object.
Conditional Leavers Payment
The Chair has received a letter from the applicant's advisor in case M114 objecting
to the condition that they leave the Scheme in order to receive a conditional leavers
payment.
4.8 AOB
Frequency of Working Group Calls
At the last WG call, it was suggested that calls be moved on to a fortnightly basis
now that the focus has moved on from scheduling. We support this. JFSA may
suggest leaving them on a weekly basis but cancelling each week if not required.
We could accommodate this if preferred by other parties.
M061 & M149
To note — Post Office has reflected further on the discussion at the last Working
Group and decided that despite being ineligible for the Scheme, cases M061 and
M149 may exceptionally proceed given the issuers of eligibility were only spotted
after the cases had made significant progress through the Scheme. The applicants
and their advisors have been informed.
Page 7 of 7