Talk:Post Office Limited

Philately Low‑importance

	Philately portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philately, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of philately and stamp collecting on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhilatelyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilatelyTemplate:WikiProject PhilatelyPhilately articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 9 October 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Post Office Ltd to Post Office Limited. The result of the discussion was moved.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Brexit negotiations#The "no deal" scenario|"no deal" Brexit]] The anchor (#The "no deal" scenario) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled[edit]

this article is ripe for expansion (about the contraction)

didn't they used to be called Post Office Counters Ltd.? Morwen - Talk 10:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Re-structuring"[edit]

The government has given a £1.7 billion subsidy to Royal Mail Group so that it can get turn a profit by 2011.

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtrdind/593/593.pdf

Fair use rationale for Image:Post-Office-Logo.jpg[edit]

Image:Post-Office-Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies[edit]

Bearing WP:UNDUE in mind, is it necessary for this section to include details about a single travel insurance claim? Any insurers will have incidences where they refuse to pay out for claims, possibly harshly. Unless there has been widespread ongoing coverage about a recurring and / or unusual problem, it doesn't really warrant mentioning. Jellyman (talk) 11:50, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this is hardly a well reported major controversy that should be in the article. It's one minor event that did not even seem to get much coverage. ww2censor (talk) 13:16, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and deleted the section. Jellyman (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 October 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. per discussion consensus and appropriate naming conventions. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Shibbolethink ^(♔ ^♕) 22:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Post Office Ltd → Post Office Limited – Per its Companies House record, uses Limited, not Ltd. Kobarcreat (talk) 01:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Dr. Vogel (talk) 21:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This page was previously moved from Post Office Limited to Post Office Ltd in 2006 (log), and then from Post Office Ltd to Post Office Ltd. in 2010 (log).

Kobarcreat, I do support the merits of this move, per the following sources (1) (2) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies): "If the legal status is used to disambiguate, it should be included in the article title using the company's own preference for either the abbreviated or unabbreviated form (such as Caterpillar Inc. and Mars, Incorporated)".

However, perhaps there ought to be a consensus formed around this move, so the matter can be put to rest permanently before going in full circle with this move. -Frazzydee|✍ 16:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I SUPPORT this move. -Frazzydee|✍ 05:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support the official website consistently uses "Limited" (e.g. [1], [2]), WHSmith describe their partnership as being with "Post Office Limited"[3], UK Government Investments, the Cabinet Office and Ofcom all use "Limited" [4][5][6] too. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Banking Hub[edit]

Can someone please expand on this service, operated by Post Office Limited? The first of it's kind outside of the two trial Bank Hubs, was the Brixham Banking Hub, opened in November 2022.

There's enough info on the internet, including:

https://www.link.co.uk/about/news/five-new-banking-hubs-confirmed-following-community-requests/ 2A00:23C4:4630:D601:8415:B261:F7ED:254C (talk) 05:43, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Previous CEOs[edit]

The current CEO is Nick Read. Previous CEOs were: John Roberts (to 2003), then Adam Crozier (2003-2010), then Moya Greene (2010-2010), and then Paula Vennells (2012-2019). Should all these names and dates all be added somewhere? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the first three were CEOs of Royal Mail. Paul Vennells was the first CEO when the POL was hived off from the Royal Mail in 2012. DeCausa (talk) 20:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see. So perhaps that sequence is more appropriate at the British Post Office scandal article. But over the entire period, the employees, postmasters and sub-postmasters were still in the same Post Offices, they just worked for different corporate entities? Could this article at least say when Vennells took on her role? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it was the same corporate entity throughout - the owner of that entity just changed. Post Office Counters Ltd (the company the subject of this article, that ran the sub post offices) was set up in 1987 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Royal Mail which in turn was owned by the government. Confusingly Royal Mail was a company called the Post Office at that time. It subsequently changed its name to Royal Mail. But Post Office Counters Limited changed its name to Post Office Ltd in 2001. In 2012, POL was separated from Royal mail and became directly owned by the government - that's when Vennells took over. While POL was a subsidiary of Royal mail I assume there must have been a subsidiary CEO/MD reporting to Crozier et al but i don't know who that/they were. DeCausa (talk) 21:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to this the subsidiary CEO in 2005 was someone called David Mills, appointed in 2002. DeCausa (talk) 21:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps more of this detail needs to be included in a "History" section? Or did I just miss it? Could this article at least say when Vennells took on her role? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. I'm just getting this stuff off the web now. DeCausa (talk) 22:27, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to this Mills left in 2005 and the CEO role was axed and replaced by an MD. Seems to be just a change in job title. From 2010 the MD was Alan Cook according to this Times article from today. I think The times might have got that wrong because according to this 2006 report Cook was appointed as MD in 2006. DeCausa (talk) 22:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the History section to include all CEO/MD appointments 2002-2012 (Vennells). DeCausa (talk) 08:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. That history section is now much clearer. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a couple more from even earlier. Dormskirk (talk) 21:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]