Source · Select Committees · Business and Trade Committee
Recommendation 10
10
Rejected
Introduce binding timeframes for each stage of the Horizon Shortfall Scheme process.
Recommendation
Sub-postmasters should not be left in limbo, waiting years for the redress that they are due with no light at the end of the tunnel. Ongoing delays are unacceptable and action must be taken to rectify this. The Committee reiterates the recommendation of its predecessor—binding timeframes for each stage of the Horizon Shortfall Scheme process must be introduced to draw this saga to a close. To ensure that claimants are not adversely 25 impacted, timeframes should only be imposed on the administrators of the scheme, so that claimants have the time they want to consider their positions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 39) Group Litigation Order Scheme
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation for binding timeframes, stating that the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board believes they would not speed up claims, and instead outlines various practical actions it is taking to make the scheme more efficient.
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
• The Government does not accept this recommendation. • The Government inherited a Horizon Shortfall Scheme that, amongst other criticisms, was seen as too legalistic and took too long to resolve claims. We are working hard to resolve these problems. But the time taken to resolve claims in future will not be affected by the imposition of timeframes, even if they are described as “binding”. The Horizon Compensation Advisory Board has commented: “Board members reiterated their position that the introduction of penalties for exceeding binding timeframes for redress schemes would not achieve the desired outcome of speeding the delivery of fair compensation to victims of the scandal. They saw the intuitive appeal of this idea but considered that it would not work. Such limits: ○ would not change the behaviour of those responsible for the schemes; ○ would not adjust to complex cases or allow for the variable quality of independent reports; and ○ would not be fair on those who had been paid within time. • Instead, what is required is practical action. The Government is working with the Post Office to make the scheme more efficient by introducing the £75k fixed offer; limiting the number of Dispute Resolution Process cases going back to Panel; minimising Requests for Information; improving case management; automating time- consuming, administrative processes ; and supporting the Post Office to increase the number of staff working on the scheme and to deploy resources where they are most needed. ...