Oral evidence: The Post Office, HC 1501 Nick Read

The request was refused by Post Office Limited.

john o'sullivan

Dear Post Office Limited,Please can you provide meaning, context or proof of what Nick Read told this Committee on June 20th.1)I have a network of
50,000 colleagues ?2)In total, pay did rise for postmasters year on year?,3)We have over 11,680 branches operating,.Why has On the High Street has been dropped from this statement.4)As I said before, we have no cap. There is no limit to the
amount of personal loss that people can claim for.. There is no cap, not
only on what people can earn from particular personal loss, but also no
limit to the type of personal loss that people can have.5)We have been doing a
specific piece of work to identify whether there are any potential
appellants or potential individuals who have been prosecuted. We can
already say to them, “Come forward. We will not oppose you”.

Yours faithfully,

john o'sullivan

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

Our ref: FOI2023/00384

Dear John O'Sullivan,

Thank you for your email which was received on 30th June. Your email is
being considered under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

1 Attachment

Dear John O'Sullivan,

Please find the response attached relating to your Freedom of Information
request.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

Dear Post Office Limited,Please can you conduct an Internal Review of this FOI which has been refused on the grounds it is vexatious.Nick Read said this on 20/04/2022" Pick up any serious book about leadership and management and it will
tell you that the ability to deal with ambiguity is one of the attributes
most prized by the world’s employers.
94. And, rare though it may be, here at Post Office, it seems as though we
have turned it into a foundational skill."At best the justification provided to explain his huge bonus is ambiguous and merits explanation particularly when presented to a Select Committee by the very person who claims it(ambiguity) has been removed from Post Office Culture.I am aware of how many FOI requests I make usually as a result of startling facts coming out in the Horizon Inquiry but mostly due to SPM having no representation or a body to ask questions on their behalf of the Post Office.

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Post Office Limited's handling of my FOI request 'Oral evidence: The Post Office, HC 1501 Nick Read'.

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/o...

Yours faithfully,

john o'sullivan

information.rights, Post Office Limited

Dear John O'Sullivan,

Thank you for your email.

Given that you have not provided any reason(s) for your internal review, we have nothing further to add to our response letter of 4 August 2023, relating to FOI2023/00384.

You may wish to contact the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), who can be found via the following means:

Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF

https://ico.org.uk/

Kind regards,

Information Rights Team

show quoted sections