Mr Thomas (Andy) Anderson, who lives in Sanquhar Road, had requested the annual trading and profit and loss accounts for the East End Post Office, which has been earmarked for closure by Post Office Limited.

The consultation period for public responses finished on July 8. People in Forres have made it clear that they do not want either office in Forres to close.

Forres Community Council, who recently submitted a consultation document around the town, asking people to give their opinions about the proposals, reported that the overwhelming majority voted in favour of keeping both offices open.

Meantime, Mr Anderson who featured in the 'Gazette' after reporting that he had been hit by a car crossing the road to visit the post office at the West End of the town, wrote to Post Office Limited in support of retaining the East End Office, which he claims has better disabled access and is nearer to more disabled parking spaces.

He also asked for financial information about the branch to establish whether there is a reason for closure. He received an e-mail response last week.

"I would like to thank you for the time taken to consider our proposals," said Peter Johnson, information adviser. "We view the six-week local public consultation as a very real and important opportunity for all interested parties to engage with us and let us know how our proposals impact on them, which will help inform and shape our final decision."

Mr Johnson went on to say that Post Office Limited does not record financial information in this way for its branches.

"It must be remembered that financial considerations are only one of a number of factors considered to decide which branches are proposed for closure," he said. "In reaching the proposals for the shape of the network in your area, Post Office Limited was required to apply strict criteria set down by the Government in making its proposals for the closure of branches."

He said they were required to consider the number of customers using each branch, the distance to the next nearest branch, the ability of neighbouring branches to accommodate additional customers, and the commercial benefit to the organisation of closing a branch.

He said that with respect to the specific financial information used as part of putting the proposal together, the branch access report provides a view of the typical number of customer sessions per week.

He added that Post Office Limited also considers what cost savings might be made to the business by closing particular branches.

"I am unable to provide you with this information, for the reasons set out below," he said. "I am, however, able to give you details of the types of cost which Post Office Limited incurs in connection with branches generally."

He listed systems and equipment, maintenance, delivery costs for cash and literature, training, compliance, support and monitoring, marketing materials, losses in branch and security costs, savings in head office support, management and other overheads.

"All the branches we are proposing to close give Post Office Limited financial savings," said Mr Johnson. "Branches may have costs that are disproportionate to their size. On average, the saving will be around £18,000 a year."

Mr Johnson said he could not provide specific cost savings for the branch, partly because of the inclusion of personal data and the prejudicial impact it would have on the commercial interests of both the sub-postmaster and Post Office Limited, as well as the fact that cost savings from closure of a particular branch would include payments which would otherwise be made to the individual sub-postmaster.

He said that disclosing financial information would also be against the commercial interests of Post Office Limited, especially if the proposed closure not take place, as it would effectively be giving competitors valuable information.

He said that an exemption is provided in Section 43(2) of the Act, concerning likely prejudice to commercial interests, and Post Office Limited believes the balance of public interest is, in all circumstances of the case, in favour of withholding the information.

The information officer said he recognised that the programme of network change currently in progress is of great interest to the public, but the information available and consultation process followed for each area provides for this.

"Post Office Limited considers that, in respect to the information that has been exempted from disclosure, the public interest is best served by maintaining the current market conditions for sub-postmaster businesses," he said, "and avoiding unnecessary pressure on any vulnerable branches, proposed to close, that remain open following consultation."

Meantime, Mr Anderson said that he suspected that Post Office Limited did not want to receive criticism of their proposals as the letter he had received back was written in such a way that it was difficult to understand.

"I was quite surprised to see that the response to the e-mail I sent to the consultation team came from the information commissioner's office in Aldershot," he said. "I didn't even know there was such a thing."

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---