POL00407494 - Email addresses and telephone numbers as per GRO.

Evidence on official site

POL00407494

POL00407494
From:
Sent: Mon 01/07/2013 1:50:09 PM (UTC)
To: Parsons, Andrew,
Cc: Matthews, Gavir,
Subject: FW: Horizon Letters - Strictly Private & Confidential - Subject to Privilege - Do Not Forward
Attachment: Draft Letter to J. Mistry - 010713v3RI.doc

Andy — here’s the latest draft letter to branches re: the 14 Branch Anomaly.

Can you please produce the individual letters to the branches based on this template, then email them all back to me
in draft.

Thanks for your assistance.

Kind regards, Rodric

Rodric Williams I Litigation Lawyer

® 148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ

(=)) Post Office stories

@postofficenews

From: Rod Ismay

Sent: 01 July 2013 14:44

To: Rodric Williams; Simon Baker; Lesley J Sewell; Andrew Winn; Joanna Jacobson

Subject: Horizon Letters - Strictly Private & Confidential - Subject to Privilege - Do Not Forward

Hi, further to my conversations with Joanna in Communications and with Rodric in Legal I attach the latest redrafted
letter. Suggested actions:

1. Simon / Lesley — consideration of whether need to run the letter past Fujitsu

2. To consider briefing NFSP (George and Marilyn)

3. Rodric to liaise with Bond Dickinson as per the remainder of my note below

I have made one change from the v2 version which I sent round at 17:22 on Friday. That change is to expand the
introductory section for branches who have not previously had any communication about this issue. This is the bit in
smaller font at the start of the letter
POL00407494
POL00407494

Rodric has advised that Bond Dickinson are on standby to populate individual tailored letters from a master template.
The plan is therefore that Bond Dickinson will produce the 10 individual letters as variants to the attached example.
These should then be recirculated with myself and Andy as prime sign offs in terms of checking that the variants do

properly reflect the chain of events. We appreciate that this is not a straightforward situation.

I think there are a number of paragraphs requiring tailoring of wording or values or dates etc. These should include
the following areas:

Has there already been comms with this branch about it?

Gain or loss?

Does a previous branch owner need mentioning?

Is it right to refer to TP9 only?

Was the loss / gain made good locally or settled centrally?

If settled centrally, was it blocked or was payment made?

Are there other losses & gains to refer to?

How will it be resolved (pay run, or something else)
In terms of addressees, we believe that the addressees on the original draft of 10 letters produced by Andy are right
to use. The addressees are either the current subpostmaster or the nominee / multiple retailer head office contact

for branches which are owned by multiple partners.

There is one branch under separate review where a different agent was in tenure at the time when the original loss or
gain arose in the first place in 2010 (Bowness 266418)

The one missing address in the earlier 10 drafts was WHS (for the Houndslow branch). We will send that on shortly.

Thanks, Rod

Rod Ismay I Head of Finance Service Centre

alk, West Bars, Chesterfield, S49 1PF

/

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.
POL00407494
POL00407494

POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET, LONDON
EC1V 9HQ.