POL00407537
POL00407537
From: Susan Crichton[{_
Sent: Fri 12/07/2013 1:24:08 PM (UTC)
To: Rodric Williams{i. ; Parsons,
Ce: "}; Jarnail A
Subject: FW: Thoughts from the meeting this morning
Rod and Andy — this is an email chain which starts with Alan Bates — could you take a look at his
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 12 July 2013 13:41
To: Susan Crichton
Subject: FW: Thoughts from the meeting this morning
Don’t know if Paula has sent you this already
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons I Company Secretary
® 148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V SHQ
‘ostline: 5460 2145
) @postofficenews
POL00407537
POL00407537
From: Paula Vennells
Sent: 12 July 2013 12:50
To: Alwen Lyons
Subject: Fwd: Thoughts from the meeting this morning
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Alan Bates 4
Date: 11 July 2013 21:22:52 BST
To: Paula Vennells}
Subject: Re: Though
Reply-To: Alan Bates <_
Any time after 10 am and please keep trying my mobile as I will be in the valleys and reception can be
intermittent.
From: Paula Vennells
Date:
To: Alan Bates <7
Subject: Re: Thoughts from the meeting this morning
Alan, thank you very much indeed.
I will look at this properly, it is helpful to have a ‘starter for ten’.
A question for clarification: I think 4a suggests POL may agree to some sort of apology or settlement or
redress - is that right? And presumably, as you refer to convictions under 5, 4a implies an out of court
agreement? If that is correct, can we talk about what that could be?
This is simply for discussion with no commitment either way - but it will help shape my understanding.
lam happy to call you tomorrow? Is that possible?
POL00407537
POL00407537
Paula
Sent from my iPhone
On 11 Jul 2013, at 20:06, "Alan Bates"
Hello Paula,
Following on from the discussion this morning I drafted the following note on one possible
way forward to deal with the historic cases using a number of stages. I sent it to Janet for
James to see, but I understand that he will be in his constituency all tomorrow and knowing
time is pressing thought I should send it to you. It is only the barebones of a scheme and
much work is required if it is not unacceptable. Hence the email to find out if such a
direction might work for POL.
The approach would be to assess each of the cases, in the first instance on the
thematic/systemic failures/issues and secondly, the software/hardware problems. Weight
would be given to each document of supporting evidence provided by the exSPMR as well
as other factors surrounding their issue. By the same token, weight would be given to any
supporting documentation provided by POL in reply to the assertions made by the exSPMR.
Process
1. With the aid of JFSA, 2"? Sight would batch the cases by location and arrange to
interview each person in that batch at a small number of locations around the
country (time assessment required + interviews to arrange; other assessor to be
involved specializing in these types of issues, able to explain realities to victim).
2. 2° Sight + specialist assessor would prepare a summary of each case measured
against the systemic issues and other factors, producing a summary report to the
extent of damage claimed by the treatment by POL.
3. Each case report is sent to POL for comment and assessment/agreement, then POL
prepares a response and declares what they believe might be suitable (POL may
wait for all reports to be completed to assess liability). 2" Sight and JFSA would
assist if required.
4. exSPMR, possibly through 2 Sight, discusses (on telephone) response from POL,
and
a. Accepts POL’s response and implications
b. Refutes POL’s comments, adds their own and updated report then
returned to POL, starts point 3 again.
5. If victim chooses 4a, POL meets agreed settlement.
To be considered
a. If 4b continually fails there has to be a way to arbitrate the issue.
b. The matter of any conviction has to be addressed at some point.
c. Timescales required for:-
I. Dealing with historic cases
POL00407537
POL00407537
I. Responses from each of the parties
I. Accepting new cases
Personally I think such a scheme could run quite quickly once the finer details and
processes have been established.
Your initial thoughts would be welcomed, but it is one way to clear out the historic cases.
Regards
Alan
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.
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.