Once again today I have written to the Minister Gareth Thomas at the Department for Business & Trade since the previous two letters remain unanswered.

The first letter was sent dated 11th November 2024 and published on Nick Wallis' Post Office Scandal website here > https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/chris-head-an-open-letter-to-gareth-thomas-post-office-minister/

The 2nd letter was sent on the 7th January 2025 and can be seen on social media platform X here > https://x.com/chrish9070/status/1876609837255021008

Todays latest letter can be read in full and is attached below :- 

4th February 2025

Dear Minister Thomas,

I wrote to your office on both the 11th November 2024 and again on the 7th January 2025, copying in the Secretary of State, Jonathan Reynolds. It is disappointing that as of today there has been no acknowledgement nor response to either of those two letters. Again for reference I have attached a copy of both those letters.  

The rhetoric from the Department is that they are eager to settle claims as quickly and as fairly as possible. However if that were to be the case, they would be willing to attend an ADR process in good faith in order to hear the claimant side of the argument and to understand issues they have failed to fully grasp and take into account. On more than one occasion I have provided at the request of DBT and their legal representatives credible counterfactual scenarios which have then been subsequently ignored. There has been no credible counter arguments made by the department or why they believe the scenarios do not meet the balance of probability test i.e. greater than 50% chance of success, which as you will be aware is the evidential bar of the GLO scheme. In addition to that they are unwilling to attend an ADR meeting in order to reach a settlement of the claim, something which the claim facilitators Denton’s support, but won’t now approve because of the stance from DBT. That doesn’t strike me as being eager to reach quick and fair outcomes with claimants.  

Instead the Department is relying upon false representation that the scheme has safeguards in place, yet there has been no structural changes to the GLO scheme since its inception in March 2022. There is no equitableness between the various redress schemes. Why is it that the GLO scheme is the only scheme that has a 2nd binding panel assessment, yet the other schemes do not? With this it means the claimants are subject to a potential financial risk, which is where I find myself with a 6 figure risk if I progress to the next dispute resolution stage. I am effectively therefore being held hostage by a flawed scheme process that is in place. Had I been apart of any of the other schemes, this risk would not be there. Therefore I am being materially disadvantaged within this scheme. As I have stated in the previous letters, I am more than willing to utilise the dispute processes in place, but there needs to be a guarantee from the Department to act in good faith, and ensure the offer is not put at risk in anyway by continuing through the relevant dispute stages. Equally there cannot be different panel setup in each scheme. Sir Gary Hickinbottom has a far wider remit than that of Sir Ross Cranston in the GLO scheme, he chairs the pecuniary loss panel and can intervene to case manage throughout the process. Sir Ross Cranston must be given the freedom to intervene as he sees fit in order to both case manage and drive cases to a resolution, otherwise claimants will be forced to seek alternative options through the courts.  

In the coming weeks and months, the Department is going to have the largest cohort of GLO claimants receiving their first offers, all these cases being of a complex nature. It is likely that a large portion of those claimants will challenge their offers and enter the dispute resolution process that I am currently in. Bearing in mind my claim was submitted in June 2023, and further information provided in September 2023, we are 18 months down the line, still at an impasse, solely because of a failure by DBT to act in good faith and make a genuine attempt to reach fair settlements with claimants. If those claimants who challenge their offers go down the same route as myself this scheme will run until the end of 2026 at the earliest. The department has only dealt with 85+ claims outside of the Fixed Sum Award of £75,000, they will now be dealing with three times that amount. If it has taken 14 months since my first offer on the 28th December 2023 to get to where I am now when there was only 2 claims in dispute what is going to happen with over 200 in dispute?  

It was quite concerning to hear the line from the Department on your behalf that, “where some claimants may have aspirations to receive larger sums, I am confident that these arrangements ensure that all claims will be dealt with independently, fairly and on their merits.” Claimants do not have aspirations for higher sums, they wish to receive redress which is both full and fair as they have been promised on numerous occasions over the years from when this scheme was launched. The purpose of the scheme is to put the claimants back in the position they likely would have been and the position they likely would have achieved had it not been for the actions of the Post Office, using the balance of probability as the evidential bar. Claimants are rightly concerned and these concerns will only get worse as more claimants receive their offers, and start to navigate the adversarial dispute processes, designed to wear them down and accept offers which do not meet the principled objective of full and fair redress. They will then see that the schemes are not equal and fair across the board.

I again ask that the Department approaches claims in good faith, with a genuine willingness to reach settlements, that meet the above objectives and if they will re-consider their position on attending an ADR call. I have already demonstrated on my part that I have been both realistic and fair in my approach by adjusting my claim, applying my own fairness test and therefore reducing the claim accordingly in order to reach a full and final settlement. I would also request a further meeting with yourself as soon as possible to address these concerns.  

Yours Sincerely,

Christopher Head OBE

Please continue to support Postmasters, Postmistresses and their families by keeping pressure on your local MP's.  As I mentioned in my last update you can do that by following the link below :- 

https://members.parliament.uk/members/commons

Just type your postcode and your MP's name will appear.  Click on the MP's name and their email address will appear or you can send the letter addressed to their name and to the House of Commons address "House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA"

Thank you for your continued support.