POL00254149
POL00254149
1* Floor
Finsbury Dials
20 Finsbury Street
London
Baroness Neville-Rolfe DBE CMG
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
and Minister for Intellectual Property
Department for Business Innovation & Skills
1 Victoria Street
London
SW1H OET
11 August 2015
Thank you for your time on Thursday 6 August 2015. I hope you found the meeting
useful. It was certainly very helpful from our perspective.
I thought it might be helpful as a follow-up if I gave you some more details of our
planned approach with regard to those applications to the Complaint Review and
Mediation scheme where we are hoping applicants will re-engage.
As you know, a Panorama programme is due to air on Monday 17 August 2015.
Ahead of that, having already engaged MPs with the report from the Centre for
Effective Dispute Resolution, we plan to write again to applicants urging them to
engage with CEDR and to arrange a time for mediation to take place.
In doing so we will refer to the key points from the CEDR report in order to support
applicants as they consider their next steps. We will do so carefully and clearly in
order to underline our commitment to the process.
We will stress that the Post Office is of course very sorry that some of those who
applied to the Scheme may feel that they have been treated unfairly by the business
in the past.
As you know, we believe we have made every effort to consider their grievances and
provide an avenue for them to be heard. Nonetheless we do regret of course that
our efforts in good faith may not been received as such.
We appreciate that some applicants may feel the Scheme has not worked as they
had hoped, and that they have concerns about the Post Office's approach. I do not
agree with this assessment but do of course accept the fact that some may have a
different view. This is partly why we asked CEDR to produce their updated report: to
provide applicants with more guidance about how mediation is working and how it
can work most effectively.
As you will know mediation has led to resolution in a number of cases, but not in all:
that is the nature of the process. My view is that whatever the other considerations
in the minds of applicants, it is surely worth them engaging in mediation on its own
Post Office Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered No. 2154540, .
Registered Office 148 Old Street, London, ECIV HQ postoffice.co.uk
Post Office and the Post Office logo are registered trade marks of Post Office Limited
POL00254149
POL00254149
merits. We also believe it offers both parties with the best opportunity to reach
agreement.
Not doing so will simply result in the applicants losing an entirely additional and cost-
free opportunity to resolve their complaints. Agreeing to mediate in no way prevents
these applicants from taking further action at a later stage if mediation is not
successful. If they find they cannot reach an agreement with Post Office, their
position remains unchanged and they remain free to explore all other avenues open
to them.
We recognise that some people will not be familiar with mediation and what it
involves. We want to ensure that people are able to make an informed choice about
whether or not they wish to take part. In our letter to applicants, as well as
including CEDR’s contact details, we have also directed applicants to CEDR’s “POC 4
- Mediation Procedure”, which was designed to give people taking part in mediation
an understanding of how it works. As you know we are also offering funding for
independent advice prior to any mediation taking place.
We have asked applicants to engage with CEDR by 4 September 2015. This date is
important in order that we and CEDR can plan ahead, but should any applicant who
decides not to re-engage subsequently have a change of heart any outstanding
issues will be taken forward in accordance with standard business practices.
We sincerely hope that applicants to the scheme who are not currently engaging
with the mediation process will consider the points we will raise with them over the
coming days. They are made out of a genuine desire to support those individuals
who may believe they have been treated unfairly and provide them with an
opportunity to set out their case.
In relation to those cases which have been referred to the Criminal Cases Review
Commission, we believe that the commission must be allowed to complete its review.
I hope this letter is helpful. My team stands ready of course to work with BIS
officials as appropriate over the coming weeks and months.
Paula Vennells
Chief Executive