POL00448608
POL00448608
Message
Amanda Burton!
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Saf, thanks for your email.
We instructed Pinsents to deal with the whistleblowing and employment i
The employment claim made by Jane contains the same allegations as raised in the whistleblowing, although
the employment claim raises other issues which are not classed as whisteblowing. Pinsents are dealing with the
wider issues. We have tried not to duplicate the work.
Unfortunately this has not been a typical whisteblowing process as Henry made its existence public, normally
these processes would be run confidentially to protect the whistleblower and to be fair to those involved. As you
know we have agreed to provide a summary to the Select Committee. In addition the shareholder wants to see
the full report. Nick has been under tremendous strain and we need to be mindful of that. There is a real
possibility that someone will leak the contents, and in my opinion it would be grossly unfair if Nick read about
the results in the press, rather than seeing them directly.
The report will show what areas are either upheld or not upheld by the barrister. The Board can’t change those,
they are the findings. The purpose of the NEDs meeting is to consider those findings, and decide whether any
action is required. And also what the communications strategy should be. Owen is going to instruct Cardew
who will also need to see the report.
Ben Foat instructed Pinsents initially and was as part of the process interviewed by the barrister. Since
Pineapple he has not been involved and Karen has taken his place as the instructing officer. To be clear, the
barrister has been given full rein to interview who she wanted and to ask for documents. No one has influenced
her. She has been truly independent.
Ben T and I don’t see the need to have cosec at the meeting, as we want NEDs to speak freely.
Amanda
Sent from Outlook for iOS
From: Saf ismail
Sent: Saturday,
To: Amanda Burton:
Subject: RE: Terms o'
Hi Amanda
Firstly, thank you so much for responding during your holiday. I appreciate it’s tough getting down time at the
moment and I am sorry if I am being a pain.
I have several concerns which are listed below:
POL-BSFF-WITN-021-0000022
POL00448608
POL00448608
1. Without seeing the TOR it is difficult to understand why the Barrister would be used outside the
"speak up' complaint, to deliberately defend an employment tribunal? Is this usual? I thought
the Barrister had been used because they were independent?
2. Presumably, everyone involved in the investigation has been made aware that the outcome is
to not only assess the merits of the whistleblower but to also be used in the employment
tribunal to defend the claims against Nick Read?
3. If this process is independent (and is about investigating serious allegations against Nick Read)
why are we sharing the initial report with Nick Read?
4. If the report is being shared with Nick Read, presumably somebody (and if so, who) has decided
that there is no case to answer against Nick Read? If not, would it not be inappropriate to share
it with him?
5. Iassumed the purpose of our meeting next week, was to discuss the findings and any
appropriate follow up actions. It feels odd therefore that Nick is included at this stage of the
process, unless we have already decided that he has done nothing wrong. Also, could you
clarify the purpose of next Wednesdays meeting and confirm if it will be minuted?
6. At what point has Ben Foat as our general council been involved in this process?
Just to clarify, given the potential media scrutiny, I am keen that we cover ourselves correctly and ensure that
full governance processes have taken place. That is why I am seeking clarity on the process we have
undertaken to ensure that we do not end up ina position where a barrister supports our case, but we still lose
a tribunal.
Regards
Saf Ismail
Non-Executive Director
100 Wood Street,
London, EC2V 7ER
postoffice.co.uk
From: Amanda Burton I.
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2024 5:29 PM
To: Saf ismail
Subject: Re: Terms of Reference
POL-BSFF-WITN-021-0000022_0001
POL00448608
POL00448608
af, Iam on holiday in France! GRO
[eRo}. I will be getting the report from the barrister on Monday which will include the terms of reference. The report is
‘over 100 pages long and despite being on holiday I have committed to read it and then distribute it to the NEDs and also
Nick. So you will have it in advance of Wednesday (but I can't guarantee the time as I don't know when I will get it
myself).
I have asked for an estimate of costs. Please remember that Jane has issued an employment claim against POL and Nick
and we have deliberately ensured that the work the barrister has done can also be used to defend that claim which will
probably be heard next year (these tribunals take ages).
lam sorry you were not satisfied with my response. Is there something particularly worrying you? Amanda
Sent from Outlook for iOS
From: Saf ismail
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2024 4:59:21 PM
To: Amanda Burton I
Cc: Brian Gaunt! GRO.
<>; Lorna
b Andrew Darfoor
Subje Terms of Reference
Hello Amanda,
Thank you for your email. I had expected the terms of reference for the solicitor to be readily available for a major issue
like this. I would have also expected the TOR to be sent to the board once the external legal firm was appointed along
with an update on the costs we were incurring.
As this investigation is likely to be discussed in the public forum at some point, I suggest sending the terms of reference
and the speak up complaint prior to our meeting on Wednesday. This will give the board a chance to review the complaint
and allow us to have an informed discussion on Wednesday.
Given the high-profile nature of the complaint and the possibility of media or government scrutiny, I request that we
ensure that the meeting on Wednesday evening is minuted. I feel this will help protect all parties involved.
Thank you
Regards
Saf Ismail
Non-Executive Director
100 Wood Street,
London, EC2V 7ER
postoffice.co.uk
From: Amanda Burton !_
Sent: Thursday, Apt
To: Saf ismail!
2024 9:14 PM.
Subject: Re: Terms of Reference
POL-BSFF-WITN-021-0000022_0002
POL00448608
POL00448608
Hi Saf, Iam on holiday at the moment (as is Ben). I one back next Wednesday pm and we then have our NED call. Can I
suggest we deal with questions on that call?
Many thanks, Amanda
Sent from Outlook for iOS
From: Saf ismail
s of Reference
Hi Ben / Amanda
Thope this message finds you well. Would it be possible for me to receive a copy of the terms of reference (verbal / email)
that were sent to the solicitors regarding the whistle blowing (Jane Davies) complaint against Nick?
Also, could you please provide me with an update on the costs incurred so far?
Thank you.
Regards
Saf Ismail
Non-Executive Director
100 Wood Street,
London, EC2V 7ER
postoffice.co.uk
POL-BSFF-WITN-021-0000022_0003