NEOPOST FRANKING MACHINES

That this House notes that Neopost have taken and continue to take all possible steps to eradicate any misrepresentation by staff, including dismissals and cancellation of contracts where misrepresentation has been substantiated; notes that the managers and directors of Neopost deny absolutely instructing sales staff to mislead customers; is concerned that a number of dismissed former employees of Neopost have joined a competitor of Neopost, Westmore Business Systems, who have been approaching Neopost customers and whose solicitors claim to represent all the Neopost customers detailed in EDM 791; notes that some of these customers deny that the solicitors have any authority to act for them; notes that despite requests from Neopost to provide the relevant information to enable a proper inquiry to take place, the solicitors have repeatedly refused; further notes that the general accuracy of EDM 791 can be gauged by the fact that Neopost does not and never has offered two year leases; is unsurprised in all the circumstances to discover that Neopost has issued legal actions against Westmore Business Systems and against its Director, David Weston, who was dismissed in March 1991 for gross misconduct and misrepresentation by Alcatel, from whom Neopost purchased the company in January 1992; and urges honourable Members, in particular Opposition Front Bench spokesmen, to establish the facts in cases involving commercial companies before signing grossly misleading Early Day Motions and serving as unpaid salesmen to unnamed competitors.