UKG100009213
UKGI00009213
Lambert, Gavin (Advanced Manufacturing and Services)[
Sent: Sat 16/03/2019 1 00 AM (UTC)
To: Clark, Most. (BEISY F ' Tolhurst, Mpst...
(BEIS} oper, Tom - UKGIE
Cc: Clark Spad, M
and Services).
Miles, Annabelle (Communications & Partnerships)
Cecilia (Advanced Manufacturing and Services:
with SoS and Kelly Tolhurst
Subject:
Attachment: Annex 3 - Draft UQ Answer on Common Issues Judgement_Revised 15 March[1].docx
Attachment: Annex 4 - UQ Rebuttal on POL Litigation Judgementt1].docx
Attachment: Annex 5 - Written Ministerial Statement Draft[1].docx
Thanks Tom — very helpful.
Adding colleagues from our master thread on this given moving parts
To summarise next steps on the actions Tom has set out from SoS call just now:
* Will to work with Gavin and Tom to draft a Dear Colleague letter to send to SoS and Kelly this morning for
distribution this afternoon
© Will and I just spoke and we'll discuss when you’ve had a chance to look at the attached UQ statement
which could form the basis of a letter (annex 4). Could also add in material from annex 5
* Gavin and Tom’s teams to work with Kelly’s office to prepare a UQ rebuttal
© Draft UQ rebuttal and draft statement already done - attached as annexes 3 and 4. We can iterate over
the weekend as required
* Kelly to speak with POL today. No need for a further meeting on Monday
© Briefing done and all In hand
* Gavin and Tom’s teams to work with Kelly’s office and spads on Departmental a public statement
© Copying Annabel who has already been working on a comms line. Will pick up separately
Gavin
Gavin Lambert
= GRO ;
To: "Tolhurst, Mpst (BEIS}
Services)" <i
“Lambert, Gavin (Advanced Manufacturing and
Cooper, Tom - UKGI" <T” "Holloway,
UKG100009213
UKGI00009213
William (BEIS)" <i
Cc: Jeremy Lumb f
Subject: POL discussion with SoS and Kelly Tolhurst
'Willmer, Jacob (BEIS)" <J
All,
Thanks for joining the call this morning. Quick readout below with actions. Let me know if anything doesn’t make
sense and please circulate as appropriate. It seems to me the main product today will be the Dear Colleague that Will
agreed to draft. Gavin/Tom, are you OK to work with him to get a text to me and Hibaq this morning for clearance?
Will — it might be helpful to discuss who we send these to. I think SoS said he wanted these out this afternoon. I
presume by email is best?
Tom
Participants:
Sos
Kelly Tolhurst
Will Holloway
Jacob Willmer
Gavin Lambert
Tom Cooper
Tom Cartlidge (PS)
Hibag Said (PS)
Actions
© Will to work with Gavin and Tom to draft a Dear Colleague letter to send to SoS and Kelly this morning for
distribution this afternoon
* Gavin and Tom’s teams to work with Kelly’s office to prepare a UQ rebuttal
* Kelly to speak with POL today. No need for a further meeting on Monday
* Gavin and Tom’s teams to work with Kelly’s office and spads on Departmental a pubic statement
Detail
Kelly brought SoS up to date on the judgement against POL, indicating that the judgement was close to the worst-case
scenario.
Tom Cooper highlighted the case is the first of four involving POL and involved interpretation of its contracts with post
masters and mistresses. The judge found the contracts were relational which creates a deeper relationship between
the parties than in a typical business contract. The judge struck out the principle that any losses should be made up by
post masters/mistresses and indicated it would be necessary for POL to investigate losses before applying this
principle. The judge also made clear that terminations would need to take account of personal circumstances
including recent investments.
SoS asked about the prospect of an appeal by POL. Tom Cooper discussed the legal advice received by POL. This
advice will require careful consideration. Tom indicated that there are both legal and tactical reasons for POL to
appeal and that it is most likely they will do so. Appealing may be helpful in reaching a settlement.
SoS made clear his primary objective is to see justice done. Where postmasters and mistresses have been treated
improperly they should be treated justly. It will be necessary to consider the legal advice carefully to ensure no
activity by BEIS will prejudice any appeal.
SoS and Kelly discussed the possibility of making a statement. SoS resolved not to make a proactive statement. He
UKG100009213
UKGI00009213
asked that a UQ rebuttal be prepared for Monday morning. He also asked that the Department put out a statement
making the point that we are aligned with the interests of the postmasters but that we are still going through the legal
process. We should also do a Dear Colleague letter promising to revert to the House when the legal matters are
completed. It should be robust in tone and making clear that the litigation is ongoing and that HMG will keep the
House updated.
SoS made clear that where POL can fix problems internally before the conclusion of the legal process it should do so.
He agreed with Tom Cooper’s assertion that caution would be required to ensure that justice is done for legitimate
claimants, but that restitution may not be appropriate in all circumstances.
we Tom Cartlidge
Senior Pri
Department for
Business, Energy 1 Victoria Street, London SW1H OET
& Industrial Strategy www.gov.uk/beis I https://twitter.com/beisgovuk
State
Does this email or any attachments need to be “on the record” or available to others for their day to day work? If so, it
is the responsibility of the policy team to save information into SharePoint, in line with Cabinet Office and Departmental
guidance.
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com