Post-harvest operators claiming to represent 75 per cent of the industry have distanced themselves from The Kiwifruit Claim court case in a letter to Prime Minister John Key.

Those signing the letter include Ray Sharp, Chairman of EastPack Ltd, but his views appear at odds with those of EastPack's deputy chairman Grant Eynon, who has joined the grower committee which launched the proposed legal action.

Psa on the vine during the outbreak in 2010.

Grant, who is also a former chairman of New Zealand Kiwifruit Growers Incorporated, says all kiwifruit growers and post-harvest operators who have been adversely affected by Psa have an obligation to their families and shareholders to seriously consider signing up to The Kiwifruit Claim against the former Biosecurity NZ.

'Since litigation of this nature was first considered by NZKGI, Zespri and others more than two years ago, new DNA evidence has identified that a shipment of material MAF allowed into New Zealand in June 2009 is the source of the Psa incursion,” he says.

Another major post-harvest and orcharding company, Seeka, has joined the claim, saying as New Zealand's largest kiwifruit grower it has been significantly affected by Psa, with costs conservatively estimated at more than $45 million.

The letter to the PM signed by 10 individuals on behalf of post-harvest companies and the Maori Growers Forum, which together have more than $450 million invested in orchards and post-harvest infrastructure and employ 8,500 people, says they do not support The Kiwifruit Claim.

The letter says: 'We strongly caution growers against signing up to the claim until all appropriate information is available to the industry.

'To this end we call upon the committee representing the claim to act in the interests of the industry and publicly release all information regarding the claim so growers can have all of the facts when considering this matter.”

The kiwifruit industry has had a very close working relationship with successive governments. This close relationship, which is underpinned by the Single Point of Entry industry structure (Zespri's marketing structure) is of great benefit not only to the kiwifruit industry but to the wider New Zealand economy, the letter adds.

'We believe the approach taken by the group behind the claim puts this relationship at risk for us all.”

In 2012 a number of post-harvest operators sought and received advice from the same lawyers involved in this claim that any legal action on this matter would be unlikely to succeed.

It continues: 'In our opinion, as there appears to be nothing new in what those promoting the claim are presenting, the claim appears to have no sound legal basis.”

The signatories to the letter say they recognise that their growers have gone through both financial and emotional turmoil since Psa was discovered in New Zealand four years ago and the pressure that has been put on growers, their families, and communities.

The letter adds: 'We understand that some growers will want to seek compensation through the legal system. We respect that it is their right to do so.

'However, we believe attacking the Government through a one-off speculative litigation case is not the right approach to securing our collective future. We now have a clear pathway forward with the more Psa resistant G3 variety, and the industry is on a strong growth path.”

Grant says growers and post-harvest operators have nothing to lose from participating in the case, beyond their initial contributions of between $500 and $10,000.

He says: 'Once growers have paid initial contributions, they cannot be asked to pay any more for the proceedings. In the unlikely event the claim were ultimately unsuccessful and the Crown were awarded costs, these costs would be met by LPF.

'As a result of this arrangement, there is no financial risk to growers or post-harvest operators beyond the initial payments – but only growers and post-harvest operators who become part of the class action can benefit from any settlement or award of damages.”