Post Office - Horizon scandal

[Hobbit]

The govt has awarded the law firm Addleshaw Goddard a £10m 3 year contract to advise on the compensation scheme. They’ve already advised on the GLO compensation scheme.

Compensation paid out under the GLO scheme = £57.75m.
Legal fees paid to defence legal teams = £46m.

Average payout received by the 555 ex-SubPostmasters involved in the GLO = £21,200

At least the ex-SubPostmasters are (slowly) winning legally but are they receiving the nett value of what they lost?

 

[rulefan]

Average payout received by the 555 ex-SubPostmasters involved in the GLO = £21,200

At least the ex-SubPostmasters are (slowly) winning legally but are they receiving the nett value of what they lost?

Hmmm

 

[Hobbit]

In other news Nick Reed, Post Office CEO, has handed in his notice and leaves the business in March next year. Known as Nick Greed because of the frequency he demanded pay rises and extra bonuses. He’s already had to pay some bonuses back as they had been, er, wrongly calculated… His general performance and interactions with staff have been severely questioned by some. He had a major bust-up with Alasdair Cameron, Post Office Financial Director, who was placed on gardening leave and subsequently accepted a £1.5m pay off to resign.

Read is due to give evidence over 3 days from the 9th October. He wasn’t shy when he was before the Common Select Committee when sat with the boss of Fujitsu. I expect Sir Wyn Williams to get involved in calming things down.

Ben Foat, Post Office General Counsel(head of law), is now scheduled to appear on the 18th October. Those following the Inquiry will have seen Jason Beer KC ripping him to shreds, repeatedly calling him a racist, during his last appearance. Foat had sent an instruction to the Post Office investigators to concentrate on those with negroid features typical of colonial types from the 1800’s. Foat was ‘granted sabbatical leave’ following his last appearance.

Foat has been with the PO for quite a number of years, working his way up in the organisation. I’m sure he knows where a number of bodies are. Could be a fiery day, if he turns up.

 

[Hobbit]

Varchasanraj Patel is very ill. His conviction was overturned 4 years ago. He received interim compensation yesterday.

 

[rulefan]

Disgraceful

 

[Hobbit]

One of the main defence teams has announced that one of their clients is the first to receive the £600,000 full and final compensation settlement. Her conviction was from 2003 for a £7,000 shortfall. She paid off the missing £7,000 within one week of it coming to light, as per the terms of the SubPostmaster’s contract, but she was still prosecuted. Subsequently, she had to sell the shop very quickly, well below market price, as she no longer had the PO income and debts were mounting.

It also announced that a number of clients have decided to accept the £200,000 interim settlement but to have their claim assessed for further damages beyond the criteria set for the £600,000 fixed settlement. Typically, this includes further compensation for bankruptcy, loss of the family home and imprisonment.

Only another 3,499 cases to settle…

 

[Hobbit]

A cracking depiction of who/where…

https://tvcs.co.uk/googlemaps/mysql/postofficetrial.php?focus=&zoom=8

 

[Hobbit]

I’ve only managed one brief dip into the first two days of phase 7 of the Inquiry - friends visiting from the U.K. - although I have read a few précis/articles by journalists who’ve been following the scandal for years.

Monday morning’s session saw a representative of YouGov giving evidence. The Inquiry had commissioned a survey, inviting current & past SPM’s to share their views on the Post Office. The YouGov rep went to great lengths to explain how the questions were phrased to try to take out any bias. Well, either it didn’t work or the SPM’s, past & present, have a healthy disdain for the PO.

Next up saw 2 current SPM’s who have been appointed as Non-Executive Directors giving evidence. Bearing in mind the Inquiry has also interviewed other NED’s whose background is either external commercial or Civil Servants, you’d expect to hear similar evidence or would you…

Just a few brief notes; the board as a whole, and especially the senior executives have adopted a siege mentality. That siege mentality extends to their own remits as they are inclined not to share information with other directors. The inner circle is very secretive and also shares very little, preferring to pass edicts down rather than seek consensus on issues.

Steve Bradshaw, one of the (notorious) PO investigators, gave evidence to the Inquiry immediately after the Mr Bates ‘v’ the Post Office drama. His evidence was horrendous. His performance was discussed at the next board meeting. There’d already been complaints about his investigative style. One board member had asked how is he still employed by the PO. For info, he is still employed by the PO.

Brace yourselves… it was revealed yesterday that one SPM has received £16 in compensation.

A question often asked is “when did the PO know that Horizon was altering balances.” An SPM in the midlands invited Fujitsu & the PO to visit his branch. One Fujitsu IT engineer & manager, and one PO IT engineer and manager saw with their very own eyes the Horizon terminal in that branch alter the balance by £40,000. That was in 2001. If I trawled back through this thread there is evidence given to the Inquiry by the network director who told the board at that time that there was a fault with the Horizon system that was altering balances.

 

[Hobbit]

Just a very brief post - normal service will be resumed next week.

Fujitsu wrote to the PO on the 24th May this year advising that they would no longer provide Horizon data to aid prosecutions.

Bearing in mind it is the Horizon system that manages the branch accounts, and it’s been comprehensively shown that the system is seriously flawed, is any balance in any branch accurate?

Sadly, the PO is still enforcing the contract terms with SPM’s to make good any shortfalls, AND the PO is still prosecuting SPM’s for shortfalls. Who is checking Horizon to prove the shortfalls are accurate or it’s a system generated error if the Fujitsu Help Desk/engineers are not looking at those transactions?

The PO is still prosecuting SPM’s, and using Horizon data to support those prosecutions.

 

[Hobbit]

This morning’s witness was Amanda Burton, non-Executive Director at the PO. Her remit, pretty much from her appointment was Head of the Remuneration Committee. Right from the off it was reviewing bonus elements for the senior Directors.

Just to give an idea how director bonus elements work. Let’s say the on-target bonus payable is £100,000. It will be made up of a number of elements pertaining to the business targets for that year. 30% for hitting the profit target, a percentage paid from 80% of target achieved. Overpayment can be made for overachieving. 40% for hitting a staffing target, again there’ll be a percentage payment for achieving 80% of target. That leaves 30%… pick a target….

One of the bonus elements devised by the PO was for delivering all requested documents to the Inquiry on time. This is where it gets a bit juicy for the cynics amongst us. As the Inquiry was upgraded to a statutory Inquiry the PO dropped this bonus element, moving the money to another measurable area. Why? First of all, bonus elements are devised as stretch targets but are usually achievable. The PO has been severely censored on a number of occasions for late delivery and missing documents. Would the PO have devised that target if it was so horrendously difficult to hit?

Amanda Burton came across very sincere and transparent to any questions. However, she did squirm on a few occasions. She said that the PO dropped the bonus element because it didn’t look good to be seen paying a bonus for working with the Inquiry. There was a (bizarre) suggestion that as it was Sir Wyn Williams name on the doc requests he could be seen as being part of the bonus being achievable. Really? Surely something that encourages the PO to meet deadlines set by the Inquiry is a good thing?

She also revealed quite a bit about Nick Read, CEO at the PO. His session is going to be very lively. He was very evasive and aggressive when he was in front of the Commons Select Committee.

Another PO employee who is duplicitous? I don’t know but I didn’t find her 100% convincing. Maybe I’ve seen too much of the Inquiry, specifically the directors.

I didn’t see this afternoon’s session but I do know Donnelly wasn’t great when in front of the Commons Select Committee.

 

[Hobbit]

The PO are pushing SubPostmasters who haven’t yet put in a claim to accept a one-off full and final payment of £75,000 but with a condition being they don’t seek independent legal advice.

Unless I’m mistaken there is an offer on the table of £600,000 as a full and final settlement for those that don’t want the hassle of asking for more. The Business Sec/Minister has also settled a case that stipulates that all costs, inc legal costs, will be covered by the PO.

Time and again we’re hearing spin about all the good things that are being pushed through only to hear yet another action by the PO that raises huge questions.

 

[Hobbit]

This morning’s witness was Henry Staunton, Chair of the PO. Many May remember that he was sacked about 9 months ago by Kemi Badinough, the then Business Minister. He appears to have little love for the PO in terms of being gentle with his evidence. The issues around his sacking are well worth listening to at around 4 hours 25 mins. A bit tetchy and heated.

There’s also an undercurrent of racism to it too, which also crops up around 10-15mins earlier. A comment made by a board member about a conference call/meeting, echoed by Ben Foat, him of the “negroid types” comment, in which a reference was made to “yet another Mohammed.” Staunton insisted that Nick Read, CEO, and Ben Foat, Head of Law, apologises for the comment.

I’m very tempted to say that as well as the SPM issue, there’s also an issue of racism by senior staff that needs a long hard look at.

A very colourful last hour from Staunton.

This afternoon’s witness is Alisdair Cameron, ex-Chief Financial Officer. He was the CFO who was placed on gardening leave following a big bust up with Nick Read, CEO, and subsequently paid £1.5m to resign. Cameron had previously given evidence, today’s just being a tidy up. Very little of any note, inc when questioned by the Core Participants legal teams.

 

[harpo_72]

You’re into this, and reading a few posts I would say CFO,CEO and board member behaviour is as expected. Experience is that no one gets there without having some “game” .. most nice people don’t get to the top it’s the ruthless back stabber who move from senior organisational positions, to believe any have integrity would be naive.. without being too dismissive, if you dig deep enough they will have screwed someone and those who look convincing are the real psychopaths..
The irony is the parliamentary committee is much the same .. just be done with it by seizing assets and handing out prison sentences that require them to spend what they don’t have in appeal and when you have got everything.. give them a begrudging apology.
This is currently a waste of tax payers money. I am sure the post masters would prefer the solution that sees equal treatment and a fair compensation package that is not diluted by external parties who to be fair are only interested now and had no interest at the time.

 

[Hobbit]

You’re into this, and reading a few posts I would say CFO,CEO and board member behaviour is as expected. Experience is that no one gets there without having some “game” .. most nice people don’t get to the top it’s the ruthless back stabber who move from senior organisational positions, to believe any have integrity would be naive.. without being too dismissive, if you dig deep enough they will have screwed someone and those who look convincing are the real psychopaths..
The irony is the parliamentary committee is much the same .. just be done with it by seizing assets and handing out prison sentences that require them to spend what they don’t have in appeal and when you have got everything.. give them a begrudging apology.
This is currently a waste of tax payers money. I am sure the post masters would prefer the solution that sees equal treatment and a fair compensation package that is not diluted by external parties who to be fair are only interested now and had no interest at the time.

First read your post early this morning. Didn’t reply because I wasn’t sure where I stood on “you’re into this…” a very interesting proposition.

First of all, the vast majority of every witness’s evidence is actually quite tedious, and certainly the first 30 mins of the questions from the questioning barristers could put a glass eye to sleep. Of those whose evidence is at times shocking, it’s not a pleasant listen and I have on a couple of occasions paused the feed just so the blood pressure drops a few notches.

Secondly, it’s a very time consuming watch but as I don’t do a lot of TV I watch some feeds when Mrs H is watching Strictly get me out of here on ice. It’s around 5 hours a day but being a coffin dodger with a typically poor sleep pattern I watch/listen to a lot of it in the wee small hours.

Why did I get “into this?” I thought this issue had been resolved years ago, as did a number of people. But my bigger concern, following the TV drama, was/is in the ‘fast food’ society we live in it would be forgotten within a few weeks. All the impetus it gained following the TV drama would be lost as people focussed on the next big thing. Bizarrely, there’s quite a number of people across social media posting up a précis of each day’s evidence along with sharing articles and short clips of interviews etc. Bearing in mind the gross injustice, I didn’t want the thread to disappear. I wanted the SubPostmasters pain to be heard and for support for them to be generated.

But what do I ‘get’ from following the Inquiry and the social media around it all? There’s a number of facets to it all; in my last 15 years of work I worked for and, ultimately, alongside senior managers & board members. Seeing how the PO board & senior managers behaved is both intriguing and shocking. There’s the joining of the dots between evidence given on any given day with numerous bits of evidence given over the previous months. And then there’s been the opportunity to connect with several SubPostmasters and hear their stories. Lee Castleton, the SubPostmaster who paid £321,000 to the PO, is one of the nicest people you could ever meet. He could, justifiably, be extremely bitter but he refuses to let everything that he’s suffered colour his attitude to life.

I don’t subscribe to your view that all those that get to senior levels have a nasty side to them. Some are nasty but there are only a few. Many will sign off extra bonuses/overtime for staff. Many will give extra days leave. But all will sack those that deserve it. Equally, where redundancies are needed to keep a business or product line viable most will have sleepless nights over letting people go. Professional integrity cost two PO directors their job, and their health, and I have the utmost respect for them.

 

[Hobbit]

Tuesday 2nd Oct saw Chris Brocklesby, Chief Transformation Officer giving evidence to the Inquiry.

What a genuinely nice man. I think that the clearest picture of his performance working for the PO was given by one of the Core Participants solicitors at around 3 hours 20 mins. Brocklesby had interviewed quite a number of SubPostmasters as part of a redress scheme the PO have been operating. On hearing that he is leaving the PO many of those SubPostmasters are deeply saddened. What a loss from the PO, a senior manager who has sought out the subbies to hear first hand what they’ve gone through and then take back those experiences and share them with the board members…

For those following the proceedings, I recommend watching from 3 hours 10mins for around 20 mins or so. You’ll see what a decent manager can do to make a difference…

 

[Hobbit]

David Blakely & his wife Gill jointly ran a sub Post Office in Grimsby. David was convicted of false accounting in Dec 2004, and sentenced to 9 months in prison, suspended for 2 years. Horizon showed a loss of £65,000. No attempt was made by the PO to interrogate the Horizon data.

They lost their business and had to pay the PO £65,000 + costs. Although the branch was in David’s name it was ran by Gill. David continued his job as an engineer. His employer sacked him. They had to sell their house and car to pay back the £65,000 + costs. David estimates that its cost them just over £400,000 inc legal fees.

David and Gill continued to fight his case, and had the conviction quashed in April 2021.

Sadly, Gill died yesterday morning…. To date, they’ve received no compensation, not even the £65,000 + costs.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

David Blakely & his wife Gill jointly ran a sub Post Office in Grimsby. David was convicted of false accounting in Dec 2004, and sentenced to 9 months in prison, suspended for 2 years. Horizon showed a loss of £65,000. No attempt was made by the PO to interrogate the Horizon data.

They lost their business and had to pay the PO £65,000 + costs. Although the branch was in David’s name it was ran by Gill. David continued his job as an engineer. His employer sacked him. They had to sell their house and car to pay back the £65,000 + costs. David estimates that its cost them just over £400,000 inc legal fees.

David and Gill continued to fight his case, and had the conviction quashed in April 2021.

Sadly, Gill died yesterday morning…. To date, they’ve received no compensation, not even the £65,000 + costs.

Mr Hobbit, you are a true gent bringing your precis of the hearings and this disgusting behaviour by the PO, thankyou.

They should be charged with corporate manslaughter for their actions and lack of actions for this poor womans death, becuase what they have done will have contributed to her death.

 

[Hobbit]

A brief note taken from this morning’s session… it’s shocking!!

The Post Office is investigating allegations that a Senior Executive instructed staff to destroy or conceal documents that could be of interest to the Post Office scandal Public Inquiry. The sixth witness statement of company secretary Rachel Scarrabelotti includes details of the whistleblowing matter being dealt with by the Post Office. She wrote that the issue was included in an update to the Post Office Board only last week. Under the heading: “Speak Up matter regarding destroying or concealing material,” Scarrabelotti's statement reads: “It involved allegations that a senior Post Office member of staff had instructed their team to destroy or conceal material of possible interest to the inquiry, and that the same individual had engaged in inappropriate behaviour.” She stated that she “understands that this is being dealt with appropriately given its serious nature.”

When will the PO senior leadership team learn to behave?

 

[Hobbit]

Today’s hearing saw two witnesses before the Inquiry, the current Company Secretary Rachel Scarrabelotti, and the immediate past Company Secretary Veronica Branton.

In both cases it appeared the Inquiry was keen to get a clear picture of how the board members interacted, almost looking for a wheels within wheels mentality. Listening to Scarrabelotti was like listening to someone who’d been assimilated by the Borg. There was a lot of corporate speak, the only thing of real note is covered in the post above. Bearing in mind she still works for the PO she appeared quite guarded, like a number of current employees who have been before the Inquiry.

Veronica Branton was more forthcoming. She alluded to the board being quite chaotic at times, especially with the churn of senior members. There was a difficulty in attracting the best as they knew it was a poisoned chalice, and those that did come and were good enough weren’t inclined to stay long, herself included.

Post #810 above relates to Amanda Burton, a non-executive director who headed up the remuneration committee pretty much from the day she joined the PO. As per the post she came across really well. One of the documents highlighted in her evidence showed how bonuses were earned. I thought the table in the document was an example of how the bonus element for documents provided to the Inquiry on time was earned. It wasn’t an example, it was part of the bonus statement. Bearing in mind the PO has never provided documents on time, Burton following off the record meetings with senior board members, including the Chair, approved the payment of that bonus element. Veronica Branton also said that other payments were approved which weren’t recorded in the proper manner.

I wonder if the Inquiry has not only uncovered fraudulent bonus payments but also nailed Nick Read, CEO, whose obsessive love of money, salary increases and bonuses puts him front and centre for this.

 

[Hobbit]

On the left is Seema Misra who was wrongly convicted and was imprisoned whilst heavily pregnant, giving birth to her child whilst in prison. Gareth Jenkins, Fujitsu’s expert witness, sent an email to Jarnail Singh, Head of Criminal Law for the PO, on the Friday before the trial started on the Tuesday. In that email Gareth Jenkins said he’d found 2 bugs that will have contributed to the shortfall. Singh did not disclose that to the defence nor the court. Jenkins didn’t speak of it when in the witness box.

Janet Skinner is in the centre. She was also wrongly convicted and imprisoned, leaving 2 teenage girls at home. Not only did the girls lose their mum, the home had to be sold to cover the shortfall & costs.

Flora Page, Core Participants barrister at the Inquiry, appearing at the Criminal Law Solicitor’s Association conference in Liverpool. All 3 received a lengthy, rowdy standing ovation when speaking at the conference.

Note: this is the first ever standing ovation at a CLSA conference…