APPENDIX 13
Memorandum by Postwatch
— the extent to which the refinancing
package announced by the Government will help Royal Mail to pay
for modernisation and deal with its pension fund deficit;
— the structure of the "shares"
scheme proposed by Royal Mail managers, and its implications for
the future of Royal Mail Group; and
— the future of the Post Office
Card Account and the effects on the Post Office network.
1. Postwatch welcomes the opportunity to
contribute to the Trade and Industry Committee's timely review
of the Royal Mail Group with an informed customer view of developments
in the postal services market.
2. The review comes at a period of considerable
change in the UK postal market:
(i) Full liberalisation of the postal market
was introduced in January, and, whilst full competition will not
happen rapidly, the competitive market continues to develop.
(ii) Royal Mail has chosen to introduce "Pricing
in Proportion"; and will do so on 21 August, representing
a major change to the way the company charges for postage, and
a significant challenge to increase customer understanding and
awareness of the change and its implications.
(iii) Royal Mail continues to improve both
its financial and quality of service performance. However, important
customer concerns remain, including the company bringing forward
many post box final collection times, inconsistent delivery times,
and mail security issues.
(iv) There is continuing uncertainty over
the long-term future of rural and urban deprived post offices,
with a government consultation on the "social" network's
future originally expected in late 2005, but yet to be published.
3. We would also like to take this particular
opportunity to point out to the Committee that, if the DTI's current
proposals on the restructuring of consumer representation, including
Postwatch, were implemented unchanged, it seems unlikely that
the Committee—and other interested parties such as Postcomm—would
in future be able to access such knowledgeable sector-specific
advice from the perspective of the consumer. Postwatch invites
the Committee to consider this matter and make its views known
to the DTI. We would be pleased to provide further information
on how Postwatch could be maintained but restructured and made
more cost-effective.
The extent to which the refinancing package announced
by the Government will help Royal Mail to pay for modernisation
and deal with its pension fund deficit
4. It is understood that Royal Mail is facing
a pension fund deficit in the region of £5.6 billion, and
it has warned that without some form of assistance from the government
the company will be unable to compete in a fully liberalised postal
market. Raising prices was, on its own, regarded as insufficient
to fund the £2 billion investment programme needed to compete
with other postal operators, as well as making inroads into the
pension fund deficit.
5. We welcome the financial package as set
out by the government. Postwatch is pleased that Royal Mail has
approached the shareholder for the investment funding the company
needs. This is preferable to Royal Mail asking customers again
to pay more. Stamp prices are already set to increase above the
rate of inflation for each of the next three years. Customers
are doing their bit so it is therefore encouraging that the shareholder
should also contribute.
6. We recognise that Royal Mail needs to
invest in automation to be a world-class postal service provider
and this £1.75 billion package will provide the necessary
funds for Royal Mail to catch up with the likes of Deutsche Post
and the Dutch based TPG who have both invested substantially in
machinery.
The structure of the "shares" scheme
proposed by Royal Mail managers, and its implications for the
future of Royal Mail Group
7. Royal Mail management introduced "Share
in Success", a profit-sharing scheme. The company recently
announced that 2005-06 was the second successive year in which
employees would benefit from this scheme (including, for the first
time, subpostmasters).
8. Postwatch wants to see an effective Royal
Mail underpinned by a stable, workforce, and we therefore welcome
efforts to motivate and retain staff, including subpostmasters.
Similarly we are pleased to see a reduction in industrial action
among Royal Mail staff.
9. Postwatch understands that Royal Mail
management wants to give the workforce a stake in the business
through the distribution of shares. We understand the desire to
gain employee buy-in when going through a period of change.
10. The structure of the "shares"
scheme is not a matter for Postwatch. However, we are aware that
this is a controversial issue for the Communication Workers Union,
and that there is currently no negotiated agreement between the
union and Royal Mail on any such share scheme. We would urge that
every effort be made by the partners to work together on this
matter to avoid disruption of service to customers.
The future of the Post Office Card Account and
its impact on the post office network
11. The Department for Work and Pensions
(DWP) has announced that it will not renew its contract to fund
the Post Office Card Account (POCA) in 2010. The introduction
of this card and its use by 3.4 million people has helped Post
Office Ltd retain some of the £400 million worth of transactions
that could otherwise have been lost through the government's change
to the direct payment of pensions and benefits.
12. Post Office Ltd has said that Post Office
Card account business is falling away already, less than six months
since the DWP's announcement.
13. Postwatch has a responsibility for monitoring
the number and location of post offices. We are therefore concerned
about the impact of the DWP's decision on the future viability
of individual branches and the network as a whole. A further reduction
in footfall may jeopardise the viability of post offices, and
therefore the accessibility of postal services.
14. Postwatch wants customers to have a
choice in the ways they are able to receive their pensions and
benefits. We recognise that payment into bank accounts is the
most suitable option for the majority of people. However, the
fact that there are more than three million POCA holders underlines
both the importance of the product, and also the popularity of
collecting benefits at post offices.
15. From 2002, Postwatch, in conjunction
with other organisations, campaigned nationally and through its
regions to influence the DWP and Post Office Ltd to take proper
account of customer interests when migrating some 14 million pension
and benefit recipients from payment by order book and giro cheque
to payment electronically directly into a suitable bank account,
including the POCA.
16. One of the tasks undertaken by Postwatch
was monitoring and advising the DWP on the material provided to
customers. This material did not advise that the card account
was only going to be in place until 2010.
17. Additionally, as a result of information
received from the DWP in the past, Postwatch, in its education
and informing role, has never described the POCA as an interim,
time limited, solution when speaking to customer groups about
their options for receiving benefits.
18. Postwatch is also concerned about the
timing of the government's decision to discontinue funding the
POCA. In a letter dated 23 December 2005 to the Postwatch Wales
Chairman, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State wrote that
"it is too early to decide what our customers'
needs will be in 2010".
Yet less than two months later, the government
had announced the end to POCA funding—in effect, the government
had decided that its customers did not need it to fund the POCA
post-2010. Postwatch is unaware of any research or consultation
undertaken in this interim period that informed this decision.
ANNOUNCEMENT WITHOUT
CONSULTATION
19. Postwatch and its Counters Advisory
Group[26]
was not consulted on the decision to discontinue government funding
of the POCA, or the likely impact on customers of this decision.
20. Postwatch raised the Group's concerns
about the future of the POCA and the proposed pilots in a letter
to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (see annex).
21. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State, James Plaskitt MP, responded by saying that all existing
POCA customers will still be able to use the post office to collect
their benefit or pension if they wish by using a bank account
there.
22. For many DWP customers, this means that
they need to change their bank account to one that can be accessed
at post offices. Postwatch considers many customers may be resistant
to such change; having already applied for and opened a POCA,
they are likely to feel changing to a bank account to be unfairly
burdensome.
23. For vulnerable customers, the Secretary
of State said that his department would work with Post Office
Ltd to make sure that there is an appropriate alternative product.
Postwatch believes such a product should have been developed prior
to any announcement. This would have prevented the current levels
of uncertainty and concern among stakeholders. This may also have
helped Post Office Ltd retain customers.
24. Postwatch agrees with the DWP that a
range of products could meet customers' needs but is concerned
that there is an assumption that the costs of migrating customers
can be externalised on to them.
25. We consider that the DWP should not
invite any other customers to migrate from POCAs until alternative
products have been developed or identified.
26. Postwatch understands that three types
of products or services are required to meet the needs of three
types of customers:
(a) Those who cannot open a bank account:
These individuals will need a basic account that can be accessed
in every High Street. A continuing partnership between the DWP
and Post Office Ltd appears the most suitable and sustainable
answer to these customer needs—preferably with a product
that offers greater functionality than the Post Office card account.
(b) Those who have a bank account but have
chosen to have their benefits paid into the Post Office card account:
The motivation of these customers is not fully understood. Their
needs could be met through the development of the basic account
suggested in (a) and if all bank accounts were made accessible
at post office counters (at present 60% accounts cannot be accessed
there).
(c) Those who use the Post Office card account
as an easily accessible savings account, ring-fenced from their
current account: These customers would benefit from a post office
savings account that offers them interest.
27. Products should be developed in consultation
with relevant stakeholders and Post Office Ltd, and should be
actively promoted to POCA holders and new benefit and pension
recipients.
28. Alternative products should be available
for all customers who do not wish to, or cannot, use a bank account
to receive their benefit or pension. For example, customers who
have a bank account, but for budgeting reasons wish to have an
additional account into which they can receive benefits, should
be able to do so. The POCA currently allows them this option;
any future replacement should do likewise.
PILOT SCHEMES
29. Postwatch was informed in January that
pilots would be run during February to test approaches for moving
customers from the Post Office card account. The short period
between the DWP announcing the trials and their commencement did
not give stakeholders sufficient time to inform the development
or methodology of the pilots.
30. There were three pilots running during
February 2006, affecting up to 40,000 people across the UK. They
involved:
(a) removing the option for some customers
to open a POCA when they make a new claim to benefit;
(b) writing to some existing POCA customers
asking for bank account details; and
(c) converting some customers who have one
benefit paid by POCA and another already paid into a bank account.
31. Postwatch found the language planned
for the pilot's communication materials to be misleading. The
letters to be sent to customers imply that it is mandatory that
POCA users migrate to a bank account. For example:
"Those people who can use a bank (or building
society) account should have their [x benefit] paid into it, rather
than into a Post Office card account."
32. We requested DWP to clarify whether
it is obligatory for customers who receive such a letter to stop
receiving state pensions or benefits into their POCA. We also
sought confirmation that customers involved in the pilots would
be given comprehensive and accurate information about their options,
including retaining a POCA account if they wish to do so. Without
this information it would be impossible for the customer to make
an informed decision and take appropriate action to meet their
needs.
33. The DWP did not state in either its
promotional literature for the Payment Modernisation Programme,
or in scripts for use by the Customer Conversion Centre, that
the POCA is an interim measure for customers. However, Postwatch
is concerned that this was suggested in the letters being used
in the pilots, for example:
"As you have been using your Post Office
card account for some time, now is the time to make arrangements
to pay your benefit/pension into a bank (or building society)
account."
34. We consider that letters to customers
should have stated explicitly that customers are free to use the
POCA for as long as it is eligible for them to do so, regardless
of whether they hold an alternative bank or building society account.
35. The DWP has not been able to answer
our question of why different types of customer prefer to use
their POCAs rather than their bank accounts. We feel this question
is key to understanding customer needs, and to the development
of new products, and to the development of a customer migration
process.
36. Postwatch accepts Mr Plaskitt's assertion
that trials are more informative than surveys when trying to understand
what customers would do "if the POCA' weren't available".
However, these trials were undertaken before the alternative that
DWP announced would be developed was in place and therefore the
pilots did not present customers with a full range of options,
nor give the DWP with a comprehensive insight into customer behaviour.
37. The DWP has agreed to share the findings
of its research with Postwatch and our Counters Advisory Group.
[27]The
Group looks forward to informing future processes and communications
to ensure they meet the needs of all DWP customers.
EXISTING ALTERNATIVES
TO POCAS
38. The POCA is not a perfect product. Postwatch
would like any alternative account that replaces the POCA to have,
among other improvements, a simpler application process, and an
improved system for allowing temporary third party collection
of account funds.
39. We also consider it is vital that the
government undertakes every effort to encourage banks to make
available more current accounts at post office counters. Only
40% of UK current accounts are accessible at post offices. As
long as Abbey, HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Natwest
reject proposals to make their accounts accessible at post offices
the majority of citizens cannot access cash at their post office.
40. According to the British Bankers Association
(BBA), of the 5.93 million basic bank accounts in operation, 2.37
million are accessible at post offices. The BBA claims that "the
growth in the number of basic accounts which can be operated in
bank branches and post offices remains healthy and banks are fully
engaged with the government's Financial Inclusion Taskforce to
monitor progress toward the shared financial inclusion goal agreed
with the Treasury." It also notes the role played by the
POCA in financial inclusion.
41. Postwatch welcomed the government's
decision to introduce a Cheque Payment service for those customers
who do not want or who are unable to move to Direct Payment. This
service is used by approximately 400,000 people, despite no publicity.
The main features of the service are:
— Cheques are issued to the customer's
home address on a regular basis to match the frequency of their
benefit or pension payments.
— The cheque provides the facility
for a third party to cash the cheque on the customer's behalf.
The customer is required to sign the back of the cheque to indicate
consent, and the third party also signs the cheque and is required
to produce identification.
— Contingency arrangements will
vary according to individual circumstances, but may be: another
cheque being sent, a payment at a Benefit Office, a home visit
by a DWP officer.
42. Postwatch welcomes the DWP's decision
that the cheque payment service will remain in place.
EFFECT ON
THE POST
OFFICE NETWORK
43. Post Office Ltd made an operating loss
last year of £111 million. Government business transacted
through post office counters is down £168 million year-on-year,
and this trend is expected to accelerate following the DWP's decision
to end funding for the Post Office Card Account from 2010.
44. The rural network is currently supported
by the "Social Network Payment", a payment of £150
million a year that helps Post Office Ltd meet the cost of maintaining
the non-commercial part of the rural post office network and to
test new ways of delivering services into rural areas. This payment
is only in place until March 2008.
45. In addition to the challenges facing
Post Office Ltd management, the reach of the network is reliant
on nearly 14,000 private businessmen and women. These subpostmasters
are concerned about their future; they cannot be expected to continue
to run a business that cannot cover its costs.
46. Further change to the network is inevitable
due to the decline in government use of the network and changing
customer usage. However, without clear government policy, and
notice of future funding (or otherwise), Post Office Ltd cannot
fully develop its strategy for curbing losses. The resultant uncertainty
and loss of income will result in further closures of individual
branches, whatever the efforts of Post Office Ltd and individual
subpostmasters to keep services open. No-one wants post offices
to close, but Postwatch wants to see any changes managed, in order
to avoid ad hoc closures and the creation of gaps in the
network.
47. The DWP's decision to discontinue funding
the POCA is likely to have a significant impact on the viability
of individual branches and the wider network, with 1 in 6 post
office customers using POCAs. The great unknown is whether people
will choose to undertake bank account transactions at post office
counters or whether the business will be lost to the network altogether.
48. Use of the accounts not only results
in a transaction fee for subpostmasters; it also brings in the
opportunity for sales of other products, either at the post office
counter or in the attached retail unit. Such sales help support
the financial viability of the retail unit as a whole.
49. The government's decision to discontinue
the POCA and continuing uncertainty about long-term future funding
for rural post offices inevitably affects customers. They are
uncertain about future methods of payment for their benefits,
and are concerned about the continuity of a valued local service
and the need to participate once again in a government-sponsored
migration campaign, which many may have found onerous during the
original Payment Modernisation Programme.
50. Postwatch believes the government needs
to recognise the impact of its decisions on the viability of the
post office network, and produce a coherent, cross-government
strategy for the network's future.
Annex
EXCHANGE OF LETTERS BETWEEN POSTWATCH AND
DEPARTMENT FOR WORK AND PENSIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE Post Office
CARD ACCOUNT
Letter from Postwatch
to the Rt Hon John Hutton MP, Department for Work and Pensions
13 February 2006
Dear Secretary of State
THE FUTURE
FOR THE
POST OFFICE
CARD ACCOUNT
Postwatch and its Counters Advisory Group (CAG)
is concerned about the approach being taken towards the Post Office
card account (POCA) by your department. As you know the Postwatch
CAG was extremely concerned about the lack of clear information
and choice given to customers during the migration to Direct Payment.
We have now been briefed about the pilots for migration from POCAs
to bank or building society accounts and are concerned about the
purpose and method of the pilots.
The Postwatch CAG is concerned about the future
of the POCA and its customers because:
— its demise could have a direct
effect on the number of post offices throughout the UK;
— the Group represents post office
customers, with a particular focus on those on low incomes, the
elderly, those with a disability, and people who live in rural
areas—the groups to whom the POCA most appeals;
— the Group also represents small
businesses' interests. Small firms depend on their local post
offices for many services. A threat to the survival of local post
offices is also a threat to SMEs and the local community as a
whole. The proposed change is of concern to business as well as
social customers, particularly because many local bank branches
have closed, leaving the Post Office as the only banking option
in some areas.
— As a consequence of information
we received from your department in the past, members of the Postwatch
Council and CAG members have never described the POCA as an interim,
time limited, solution when speaking to customer groups about
their options for receiving benefits;
— the communication around the
proposed pilots are not focused around customer needs, and do
not provide sufficient information about all of the options open
to the POCA account holder;
— The DWP has not provided details
about the help that it will provide to customers who are to be
migrated from POCAs, but do not have an alternative account.
— Alternatives to the POCA, including
basic bank accounts, are not designed and delivered around the
particular needs of disadvantaged consumers, resulting in problems
with access, appropriateness, affordability and availability of
these services for vulnerable customers.
Postwatch recently met your officials to discuss
this issue following the press interest surrounding the announcement
in the House of Lords. You will appreciate that it would have
been better if the department had made an official announcement
on this important public policy issue and had actively sought
the views of the CAG, as a well established interested party.
Following the meeting we now have a better understanding
of why the DWP wants to contact POCA users who also have a bank
account. However, we remain concerned about the forthcoming pilots
for the following reasons:
1. There seems to have been a lack of sensitive
research into customer needs to support the path being pursued.
Your department knows why customers like POCAs, but has it undertaken
qualitative research to understand why different types of customer
prefer to use their, POCAs rather than their bank accounts? If
the research has been undertaken, then we along with other stakeholders
need to see the outputs to inform our views. If this research
has not been undertaken, then the pilots should be suspended until
this work has been carried out. The appropriateness of migration
to bank and building society accounts can only be established
with this information. It would be irresponsible to migrate POCA
customers to other accounts which fail to meet their particular
needs.
2. We believe the language planned for the
pilot's communication materials is misleading. The letters to
be sent to customers imply that it is mandatory that POCA users
migrate to a bank account. For example:
"Those people who can use a bank (or building
society) account should have their [x benefit] paid into it, rather
than into a Post Office card account."
We request clarification from DWP about whether
it is obligatory for customers who receive such a letter to stop
receiving state pensions or benefits into their POCA. We also
seek confirmation that customers involved in the pilots will be
given comprehensive and accurate information about their options,
including retaining a POCA account if they wish to do so. Without
this information it would be impossible for the consumer to make
an informed decision and take appropriate action to meet their
needs.
3. The DWP did not state in either its promotional
literature for the Payment Modernisation Programme, or in scripts
for use by the Customer Conversion Centre, that the POCA is an
interim measure for customers. However, Postwatch is concerned
that this is suggested in the letters being used in the proposed
pilots, for example:
"As you have been using your Post Office
card account for some time, now is the time to make arrangements
to pay your benefit/pension into a bank (or building society)
account."
Letters to customers need to be clear and consistent
with DWP policy, stating explicitly that the POCA is not an interim
account, and that customers are free to use it for as long as
it is eligible for them to do so, regardless of whether they hold
an alternative bank or building society account.
4. Despite the proposed removal of the funding
for POCAs, we welcome the government's assurance that anyone who
wants to draw their benefit or their pension from post offices
can continue to do so, but it must be noted that only 2.3 million
of 5.7 million basic bank accounts are accessible at POs and that
majority of current accounts are not accessible at POs. Additionally,
we understand from the DWP that Post Office Ltd is looking at
developing new accounts that will help people move from POCAs.
We look forward to these services being developed and introduced.
However, they can only be a real alternative to the POCA if they
are designed and delivered appropriately for the needs of disadvantaged
consumers and are introduced on a timescale that meets with the
planned migration from POCAs.
5. All customers should be free to choose
any of the range of account options that meets their particular
needs. For 4.5 million people the Post Office card account is
their preferred option. It is likely that this will continue to
appeal to disadvantaged customers. We seek your assurance that
individuals becoming eligible for state benefits or pensions will
be allowed to opt for a POCA and that it will remain one of the
options they choose from.
For these reasons it is inappropriate to start
the pilots now. It would be better to conduct pilots after adequate
customer research has been completed and suitable alternative
products have been made available. Conducting pilots at a later
time would be more instructive for government and stakeholders
on the needs and concerns of benefit and pension claimants.
The Postwatch CAG does not view the POCA as
a perfect product. Indeed, we have argued for improvements to
be made both to the product and its application process. However,
there is a clear demand for a simple product that allows customers
to access their pension and benefits payment free of charge at
post offices. We want all customers who need to access cash at
post offices to be able to do so, and we look forward to working
with you and other stakeholders in achieving this aim.
I understand that a DWP official has agreed
to attend the next Postwatch CAG meeting in March to explain the
decision and the DWP's short-term plans. As this is some time
away, and your department has given stakeholders so little notice
of the plans, I and other CAG members listed below would like
to discuss this concern with you at the earliest opportunity.
I understand that Citizens Advice, another member of the Group,
has also written with their concerns and is supportive of the
issues raised above.
I have copied this letter to Barry Gardiner
MP.
Yours sincerely,
Millie Banerjee CBE
Chair
On behalf of:
Age Concern.
Commission for Rural Communities.
Federation of Small Businesses.
Local Government Association.
National Consumer Council.
National Federation of Subpostmasters.
National Federation of Women's Institutes.
Postcomm.
The Royal National Institute of the Blind.
Letter from DWP, Department
for Work and Pensions to Postwatch
7 March 2006
THE FUTURE
OF THE
POST OFFICE
CARD ACCOUNT
John Hutton has asked me to thank you for your
letter of 13 February about the future of the Post Office card
account (POca).
May I begin by congratulating you on your recent
appointment—you have joined Postwatch at a time when the
Post Office network faces a number of challenges, but also has
great opportunities. The ending of Government funding for the
POca provides just such challenges and opportunities.
There has been a great deal of misleading coverage
and comment about this issue over the last few weeks. People have
suggested that the ending of funding for the POca will close thousands
of Post Office branches; that customers will no longer be able
to get their benefit or pension at the Post Office; and that we
have, in some way, gone back on commitments around the POca. None
of this is true and I am pleased to be able to put the record
straight:
— Government funding for the POca
will continue until March 2010 as always planned.
— All existing POca customers
will still be able to use the Post Office to collect their benefit
or pension if they wish by using a bank account there—25
or so different bank accounts can be accessed at Post Office branches
now, and we hope there could be more in the future.
— There is no reason why the viability
of Post Offices should be threatened if customers continue to
draw cash at the Post Office after moving on from the POca.
I understand the Post Office is developing new
banking and savings products which may be suitable for some existing
POca customers. We would like every DWP customer who currently
has a POca to do their banking at the Post Office if that is what
they want. Of course there must be appropriate products in place
for vulnerable customers when the POca ends in 2010. We will work
with Post Office Limited to make sure there are. But Post Office's
own research shows that POca customers are far from a homogenous
group. They range from some vulnerable groups, to those who do
not depend on their pension or Child Benefit and let large balances
build up. It is very likely, therefore, that we will be looking
at a range of accounts. For some people, using an existing bank
account may well be the right answer. I agree with you that it
was unfortunate that a Royal Mail Non-Executive Director drew
attention to the end of the POca before Post Office Limited themselves
were ready to say more about replacement products.
We must agree to disagree on the approach to
research. As you recognise, we have accumulated a great deal of
research evidence. But it is generally accepted that research
is not always a good way to answer hypothetical questions—eg
what would you do if the POca weren't available? For this, it
is widely accepted that trials are far more informative. We, are
therefore, undertaking some small-scale pilots to test real customer
behaviour. When we have the results, we will be happy to share
them with you. We, and Post Office Limited, will use the information
to plan the approach to 2010, and to inform the design of new
products.
There have been suggestions that our planned
changes are about shutting down Post Offices. In fact, we want
to work with the Post Office to plan how we can best manage the
change and ensure they are delivering services fit for the 21st
century. The Government has invested over £2 billion in total
since 1999 to help them to do so. The Government wants to see
a Post Office network that can prosper on the basis of today's
and future needs and not on those of 20 or 30 years ago. It is
important for the Government and Post Office to work closely together
to ensure customers are fully aware of developments and continue
to have a range of choices in how they access their money.
I know that Postwatch and the Counters Advisory
Group have a number of detailed questions about our pilots and
overall strategy. I think these are best dealt with by officials
at the meeting on 15 March as already planned.
I am copying this letter to Barry Gardiner MP.
Yours sincerely,
James Plaskitt MP
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
26 A stakeholder forum that informs Postwatch policy
and processes, with members including Age Concern, Commission
for Rural Communities, Federation of Small Businesses, Help the
Aged, Local Government Association (LGA), MENCAP (non-attending),
Citizens Advice, National Association of Local Councils (NALC),
National Federation of Sub-postmasters (NFSP), National Federation
of Women's Institutes (NFWI), Postal Services Commission (Postcomm),
Public Utilities Access Forum (PUAF), Royal National Institute
for the Blind (RNIB), Townswomen's Guild, Village Retail Services
Association (ViRSA). Back
27
The Postwatch Counters Advisory Group consists of a range of organisations
that act on customer concerns about issues affecting the post
office network. Members are Age Concern; Commission for Rural
Communities; Federation of Small Businesses; Help the Aged; Local
Government Association; Citizens Advice; National Association
of Local Councils; National Consumer Council; National Federation
of Subpostmasters; National Federation of Women's Institutes;
Postcomm; Public Utilities Access Forum; Royal National Institute
for the Blind; Townswomen's Guild; Village Retail Services Association. Back
| 
