Post Office - Horizon scandal

[Jimaroid]

I think you said it above. The data is the issue and unless they know what each individual data error was then trying to work backwards to calculate each overpayment individually would take a while and just delay the whole process. I can't see Fujitsu co-operating on this as the Post Office project sponsors will have signed off on the work.

Again, completely agree. As I’m sure we both know, but I will say for the general audience, one of the biggest mistakes in IT outsourcing is assuming that it doesn’t need oversight, interrogation or constant management. While I know Fujitsu are culpable technically I think the blame lies more on the PO side for dismissing and signing off on the issues.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

When the Government Ministers stand up and talk talk talk about this in Parliament they seem to be oblivious to the fact that they [and their previous ilk] are/were the only owners of the Post Office.
They are responsible for seeing that it is run correctly and ultimately they are the only people who can right a wrong.
They appear to be trying to blame everyone except themselves.

 

[bobmac]

It's not difficult, the victims must have bank statements showing they paid the PO £5,000, £10,000, £15,000 whatever the PO said they owed.
Pay that back first, the money doesn't belong to them it belongs to the victims who did nothing wrong.
Sort out the compensation for loss of earnings/lawyers fees etc next on an individual basis as each case will be different.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I feel they should give all sub masters/mistresses a Royal pardon, and everyone who Has suffered be given £1 mill comp payment and close the matter for them. The monies paid should be sought from ALL the PO board (of any time during this farce) in repayment of any bonuses and their own pension pots. Fujitsu also need to be made to pay up as well.
Those in charge and selling their product need to be made an example of. In China they would already be in prison and unlikely to see freedom for a very long time. We may not get that, but hit them financially so they suffer just as those who have been screwed over by the PO have suffered.

 

[chellie]

Now being reported that bonuses were paid to investigators for every conviction

 

[Billysboots]

Now being reported that bonuses were paid to investigators for every conviction

My god, just when you think it couldn’t get much worse.

The whole investigation was biased to the core, and now this? I’m speechless.

 

[IanM]

I worked on enough large IT deployments, in enough large organisations to be absolutely certain that,

1) The Fujitsu Service Centre would have known immediately something was wrong. This would have gone to the tech dev side really quickly and up the chain of command.
2) Post Office Audit function would have seen a spike in cases soon after go live. So they knew. The PO Programme Team would have known something was up immediately, there would have been daily calls between them and the Fujitsu Service Centre.

All of the above is standard on any project.

What only those involved know for sure is where the decision to block the dialogue, pretend it was isolated cases and invoke the "all losses are up to you" clause in their contracts was made. (without properly investigating the claims) AND, how high up the cover-up actually went. The involvement of MPs in their constituents cases suggests this was blooming high.

Pay the folk asap. Then the corporate lawyers can sort out the rest. For some it's too bloody late!

 

[Hobbit]

Without knowing the full details and complexity of the faults with the software and how it manifested itself in shortfalls, the who paid what back will be easy to determine. That should be paid back in weeks. The loss of salary/income for the self-employed subbies should be just as easy to determine, and could be paid back in weeks. A matrix of compensation based on sentences should be easy to determine, e.g. x days in prison equals. And that should be paid by mid-year.

The hard bit is compensation for emotional distress/divorce etc etc. A matrix of amounts ‘v’ each type of issue could give a decent ballpark figure. Pay that by year end. Finer details by mid 2025.

Just throw bodies at getting it resolved. It isn’t rocket science. It needs the will to drive it forward. Imagine an Alan Bates driving the resolution… it is doable.

There’s no reason why a separate team can’t be looking into who was to blame and provide evidence for the CPS.

 

[Hobbit]

I worked on enough large IT deployments, in enough large organisations to be absolutely certain that,

1) The Fujitsu Service Centre would have known immediately something was wrong. This would have gone to the tech dev side really quickly and up the chain of command.
2) Post Office Audit function would have seen a spike in cases soon after go live. So they knew. The PO Programme Team would have known something was up immediately, there would have been daily calls between them and the Fujitsu Service Centre.

All of the above is standard on any project.

What only those involved know for sure is where the decision to block the dialogue, pretend it was isolated cases and invoke the "all losses are up to you" clause in their contracts was made. (without properly investigating the claims) AND, how high up the cover-up actually went. The involvement of MPs in their constituents cases suggests this was blooming high.

Pay the folk asap. Then the corporate lawyers can sort out the rest. For some it's too bloody late!

I’ve project led a number of large IT deployments and @IanM is spot on. KPI’s on the rollout will have highlighted the issues immediately. Someone seriously screwed up on the support/help desk by not drilling down into the issues the subbies were ringing in.

Without a doubt there’s been a cover up of monumental proportions. I’d hazard a guess Fujitsu tried to fix things on the hoof and were caught out by the enormity of it all. And when they told the PO they downplayed it. PO will have looked for an easy out based around what Fujitsu were telling them, and they too were caught out by the monster it became. They then tried to bury it with aggressive tactics and prosecutions.

Imagine the stress and stamina Alan Bates brought to the party to fight a corporate monolith like the PO, Fujitsu & the courts… what a man!!

 

[bobmac]

The monies paid should be sought from ALL the PO board (of any time during this farce) in repayment of any bonuses and their own pension pots. Fujitsu also need to be made to pay up as well.

And therein lies the problem, that could take years.
The victims haven't got years.
Set some money aside from the treasury now and pay back the victims what they are owed. At least that way the victims can pay their bills.
Then the treasury could argue with the PO and Fujitsu to claim that money back and about who owes what for the compensation payments.

The powers that be could do somthing really good here and earn lots of votes smarty points if they can get passed all the dour people who say you can't do that.
However, if they get it wrong and the victims are left out in the cold literally, they may themselves be out of a job soon.

 

[chellie]

Have a read of The Yorkshire Post on Twitter, James Mitchinson, Byline Times, Private Eye. It goes on and on.

Watch Ian Hislop on Peston last night.

 

[Jimaroid]

All of the above is standard on any project.

I’m in no disgreement here but it’s an established fact that good project and technical management practices that should have been in place were not. Retrospective application of latter day process into what started in 1996(!) is all too easy and ultimately pointless. This has been shown to be the fault of people first then process, because the wrong people were in place to enact and manage the right processes and, worse, they then worked to defraud and cover up.

 

[bobmac]

I suspect they will want to ensure it’s done properly and to ensure everyone is reimbursed the correct amount.

Who is ''they''?
And how long will it take to decide who they are and who is responsible, a year, 3 years, 5/10/15 years?
As I've said already the victims have bank records that shows exactly what was paid to who and when.
It's not rocket science

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Ian Hislop on Peston last night - he had the right idea. And he was raging.

Plus for some reason a BBC Panorama investigation in 2022 on the scandal didn’t seem to resonate with the public- or the government - whereas a ITV docudrama in 2024 did. I can only ask why.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Now being reported that bonuses were paid to investigators for every conviction

…and according to monies recovered.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

It’s going to take time let’s be honest - it’s not a case of just giving money back etc they will need to go through a period of due diligence and ensure everything is correct and also having some sort of oversight committee

It needs to be done correctly to ensure everyone is fully compensated

…and properly and fully cleared, not just in the eyes of the law, but in accordance with due judicial process.

 

[Billysboots]

Just watching a stream of the public inquiry and evidence being given by PO investigator Stephen Bradshaw. I’m just wondering whether he could possibly be more defensive or, indeed, more wrong.

He was specifically asked about the failure to disclose relevant information to defence lawyers. Without getting too technical, a prosecution is obliged to disclose to the defence any material which either undermines the prosecution or assists the defence.

Bradshaw’s considered response was that disclosure “was a matter for the lawyers”. What complete and utter cobblers. All investigators have obligations under disclosure rules. Yet more clues as to just how inept these investigations were.

 

[Jimaroid]

As I've said already the victims have bank records that shows exactly what was paid to who and when.
It's not rocket science

Genuinely don’t think this is as easy as it sounds. My bank can only provide me with transactions for the last 6 years (I checked) and any further back than that it gets vague. Anything from the last 10 to 20 years requires some sort of recovery from backup archives.

Honestly I think rocket science is actually easier than this.

 

[D-S]

Genuinely don’t think this is as easy as it sounds. My bank can only provide me with transactions for the last 6 years (I checked) and any further back than that it gets vague. Anything from the last 10 to 20 years requires some sort of recovery from backup archives.

Honestly I think rocket science is actually easier than this.

These aren’t historic events, these trials and the lack of disclosure that they are discussing took place a year or two after the ‘offences’ supposedly occurred.

 

[Jimaroid]

These aren’t historic events, these trials and the lack of disclosure that they are discussing took place a year or two after the ‘offences’ supposedly occurred.

I don’t follow you? The talk here is of refunding payments that submasters paid to PO via banking transaction records? The first payments to redress (the incorrect) shortfalls started occuring in the year 2000. That is 24 years ago and is most definitely historic in data terms?