UKGI00003694
UKGI00003694
Alan Bates
Chairman
Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance
March 2015
Thank you for your email of 10 March regarding the Post Office mediation scheme.
Firstly, I would like to reiterate that the mediation scheme is independent of Government, and
decisions relating to the scheme or its operation are matters for the parties involved and not for the
Government.
Post Office announced on 10 March that they would put forward for mediation all cases remaining in
the scheme except those that have been subject to a previous court ruling. Post Office will consider
cases which have been the subject of court rulings carefully on a case by case basis.
This does not equate to Post Office closing the scheme. Cases which remain in the scheme will
progress to mediation as set out above, and more swiftly than under the previous situation where
cases would be discussed by the Working Group before proceeding to mediation. Given that all
parties involved have expressed concern at the length of time which has been taken to review cases,
these changes should be welcome in accelerating the process while ensuring that Post Office meet
the commitments they have made to applicants.
As a result of Post Office’s decision to mediate remaining cases, I understand that they have indeed
given notice of termination to Second Sight. Post Office remain committed to working with Second
Sight through the remaining period of their contract, and have stated that they will seek to continue
to make available to scheme applicants an independent review by Second Sight (where one has not
already been provided). Post Office have also stated they will work with Second Sight to support the
completion of their further thematic report in order that it is available to inform the ongoing
mediation process.
As you are aware, the Working Group has been in existence for some 18 months now, with an
independent Chair in Sir Anthony Hooper, and has been fully involved in developing the mediation
scheme, overseeing its operation and making decisions on whether particular cases should progress
to mediation. Regarding its closure, given that it no longer has a role in determining whether cases
are suitable to go to mediation or not, there is no need for its continued operation.
As I know you are also aware, details of the Working Group and its business are confidential, and I
am not privy this information. I am aware from the evidence provided in public to the BIS Select
Committee that Second Sight are working on a further thematic report and that this would not be
published but would, given the need for confidentiality, be issued to the Working Group in due
UKGI00003694
UKG1I00003694
course. The details of when the report is due to issue, what it might contain, and when it might be
discussed, were confidential to the Working Group. As I have said, Post Office have stated they will
work with Second Sight to support the completion of this further report, so that it can be used to
inform the ongoing mediation progress.
I am pleased that through Second Sight’s report and the subsequent investigations, we can remain
confident that there is no evidence of system wide problems with Horizon. I also welcome the
changes that Post Office has made and continues to make to ensure it best supports subpostmasters.
The priority must be to ensure that those applicants remaining in the scheme can have their cases
considered swiftly and fairly, and I am hopeful that all parties involved will continue to work
constructively to ensure this can happen.
JO SWINSON