Answer

I can offer a few comments on legal aspects of this situation, and encourage other experts to offer advice regarding such things as how you might influence the Post Office.

As your village hall is a registered charity, the board of trustees (who might be called the management committee or similar) have certain duties and responsibilities – none of them to the Post Office.

The trustees need to consider the resources that are available to them, which will include the premises, volunteer time, and money, and consider how best these might be used for the community that the charity serves. This should always be done with reference to the registered objects of the charity, which are legally extremely important as they set absolutely the boundaries within which the charity may work.

So before the charity can even consider entering into an agreement with the Post Office it must satisfy itself that:

(a) it has the legal powers to do this – by reference to its objects clause; and

(b) such an agreement is the best use of the resources that would be committed.

If the proposed agreement fails either or both of these tests, there is just one other way in which the charity could still provide accommodation for the Post Office outreach service. This would be if the hall had surplus capacity; in this case, presumably that would mean that there were no community demands on the hall on the days that the PO wanted it. If that were the case, the charity could rent the hall to the PO at full market value, and treat this not as a charitable activity, but as income generation. However, if ever a community demand arose for the hall during those periods, the agreement with the PO should be terminated.

In any case the trustees must satisfy themselves that entering into such an agreement would be prudent: i.e. it must be not expose the charity to undue financial risk.

The Post Office cannot bully the trustees into signing any agreement. If the trustees are not satisfied that allowing the PO to use its space is neither furthering its charitable aims nor an acceptable income generation activity, or they conclude it is financial risky, then they must refuse to enter into such an agreement.

The Charity Commission in fact uses a similar case study to illustrate its guidance note “Village Halls and Community Centres”. Here’s what they say:-

"Non-recreational and commercial activities

The objects of village hall charities specify the provision of recreational facilities. However, the hall is likely to be used by a number of user groups whose activities can be diverse. These groups need not always be charitable in their own right but must be capable of improving the conditions of life for the public at large in the area of benefit, within the scope of the Recreational Charities Act 1958. Examples would include users such as line dancing groups or bridge clubs, or an MP holding his or her surgery at the hall. These are acceptable activities provided there is no distinction on, for example, grounds of race, sex or politics, and that no group is given a monopoly on the facility or is put in a privileged position vis-à-vis other groups.

Not all organisations or individuals wishing to use the hall will come within the scope of the Recreational Charities Act 1958. Our research findings echo other research which shows an increase in the number of non-recreational activities accommodated in village halls, such as training activities, clinics, IT centres, after-school activities, sub post offices, a village shop or a bar.

Successful accommodation of non-recreational or commercial activities depends upon careful consideration of whether the proposal will impinge on the running of the village hall as a charity or expose it to any financial risk.

Case study:
A village hall charity wished to rent out part of its premises to house the post office after the previous one had been destroyed in a fire. The Charity Commission considered the request together with the terms of the charity's governing document to establish whether the charity had the necessary authority to enter into such an arrangement. Once this was confirmed, the charity was advised that, as long as it complied with the provisos that the provision of a post office did not interfere with the charitable activity of the hall and did not expose the charity to financial risk, the proposal was acceptable."

As this case study implies, if your trustees have any doubts about the legality or wisdom of entering into an agreement with the Post Office, they can ask the Charity Commission for guidance.