Dear Post Office Limited,Shaun Turner has told Sir Wyn"specifically with Royal Mail if we did not meet certain levels of performance we were finacially penalised".What were these penalties and how do they differ from the answer you gave me to – FOI2021/00483"There were no financial penalties attached to Mails Acceptance or Segregation as
service credits were pre-agreed amounts POL was required to credit to RMG if
service levels were not met, as stated in response to Question 1 above, and such
pre-agreed amounts are not financial penalties. ?"

Yours faithfully,

john o'sullivan

Dear [email address],Thank you for a reply.I think you are spending more than you need to and creating work for yourelves. My concern is only with agreements between yourself and Royal Mail,you dont need to look at any other third party contracts or agreements.Shaun Turner clearly says that financial penalties existed with Royal Mail and you have said they dont.Which is the correct answer?

Yours sincerely,

john o'sullivan

Dear [email address],Thank you for a reply.Shaun Turner used this expression under oath and people would have understood it to mean Financial Penalty.This lack of precision or perhaps more accurately POL and its staff believing a phrase means something different to the wider collective is a common theme in the Horizon Inquiry.What do the expressions "good faith""best efforts""refresh legal team""full fair and final compensation" mean to Post Office LTD and its legal advisors and in what ways could this differ from what the general public might expect them to mean(as in Financial Penalty)?

Yours sincerely,

john o'sullivan

Dear [email address],Can you please answer this question.Thank you

Yours sincerely,

john o'sullivan