Pants
Challenge Tour Pro
Many thanks Brian for your input and insight. It's been quite a revelation.
Post Office - Horizon scandal
- Thread starter Jensen
- Start date
AussieKB
Well-known member
Watched the first 30 minutes, very hard to believe that this could happen and is still happening,
think a lot of people at the top should be in jail.
think a lot of people at the top should be in jail.
Ministry of Justice reveals a further 48 individuals, with Horizon convictions, have come forward seeking exoneration and compensation.
Also, the Horizon Help Fund charity continues to help ex-SubPostmasters who are struggling financially…
Also, the Horizon Help Fund charity continues to help ex-SubPostmasters who are struggling financially…
The Post Office’s annual accounts were released yesterday, Thursday 19th Dec. A Couple of numbers to contemplate;
- To date there are 5,891 claimants of the Horizon shortfall scheme. That number seems at odds with the script used by staff on the Horizon Help Desk, “you’re the only one with a problem with Horizon.”
- The PO have spent £132 million on legal fees supporting staff attending the Inquiry. Bearing in mind the PO isn’t in profit, I wonder where that money comes from? You & me?
End of year Post Office Inquiry newsletter.
www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk
End of year newsletter: A review of the Post Office Inquiry in 2024 | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
Updates from Secretary to the Inquiry, Leila Pilgrim
Wrongdoings continue to surface. Unbelievable behaviour in terms of fiddling bonuses, but perhaps of greater concern is the instruction to use WhatsApp so as not to create a paper trail that might be required to be Disclosed.
www.postofficescandal.uk
Post Office CEO allegedly sought to put back redress target to secure bonus
Jane Davies, the former Chief People Officer at the Post Office claims that Post Office management, led by CEO Nick Read, attempted to delay a key compensation target date in order to ensure they q…
www.postofficescandal.uk
Who, if anyone, should be prosecuted for what is perceived to be the biggest miscarriage of justice ever!
I’ve had several PM’s through the summer and into the autumn asking x, y, z about who should…
I’m a retired electronics engineer, manager and upwards, not a solicitor. Whilst we might all want to be members of the pitchfork armed mob, wouldn’t we be guilty of a miscarriage of justice?
There are a relatively small number of obvious candidates but beyond that it has to be decided by the relevant authorities.
Whatever the high profile, not necessarily high in position, PO employees might have said, go the the Post Office Inquiry’s YouTube channel and watch some of the impact statements made by ex-SubPostmasters and their families. They’re only 15 minutes-ish long but they are truly heartbreaking.
I’ve had several PM’s through the summer and into the autumn asking x, y, z about who should…
I’m a retired electronics engineer, manager and upwards, not a solicitor. Whilst we might all want to be members of the pitchfork armed mob, wouldn’t we be guilty of a miscarriage of justice?
There are a relatively small number of obvious candidates but beyond that it has to be decided by the relevant authorities.
- Who didn’t stop Seema Misra’s trial, even though bugs had been identified before it went to trial?
- Who sent out an instruction to destroy all Horizon related meeting minutes? Note, there were (at least) 2 people at different times.
- Who gave an instruction to label any contentious Horizon material as legally privileged so that it was protected from Disclosure?
- Who withheld evidence to skew the case towards prosecution? Pick any number of people.
- Who refused defence teams access to evidence, as opposed to Disclosure issues, to load cases against the defendants?
Whatever the high profile, not necessarily high in position, PO employees might have said, go the the Post Office Inquiry’s YouTube channel and watch some of the impact statements made by ex-SubPostmasters and their families. They’re only 15 minutes-ish long but they are truly heartbreaking.
The Swift Report.
Following the Panorama documentary into the Horizon scandal the then CEO Tim Parker, colloquially known by the unions as the Prince of Darkness, commissioned a report into Horizon. The report was led by the top lawyer for the Treasury, Jonathan Swift, and was completed in 2016. Jane MacLeod, General Counsel at the PO, persuaded Parker not to release the report to the board, and also declared it legally privileged so that it was withheld from defence teams.
The report did not see the light of day till the Inquiry became a statutory Inquiry, and a formal Article 9 request was submitted. A request was also made for Jane MacLeod to attend but she refused. She could have been subpoenaed but the Chair of the Inquiry, Sir Wyn Williams decided that he
The report included a number of conclusions, including yes there were bugs, yes the convictions may have been unsafe and yes Fujitsu could access SubPostmaster’s Horizon terminals remotely.
Following the Panorama documentary into the Horizon scandal the then CEO Tim Parker, colloquially known by the unions as the Prince of Darkness, commissioned a report into Horizon. The report was led by the top lawyer for the Treasury, Jonathan Swift, and was completed in 2016. Jane MacLeod, General Counsel at the PO, persuaded Parker not to release the report to the board, and also declared it legally privileged so that it was withheld from defence teams.
The report did not see the light of day till the Inquiry became a statutory Inquiry, and a formal Article 9 request was submitted. A request was also made for Jane MacLeod to attend but she refused. She could have been subpoenaed but the Chair of the Inquiry, Sir Wyn Williams decided that he
The report included a number of conclusions, including yes there were bugs, yes the convictions may have been unsafe and yes Fujitsu could access SubPostmaster’s Horizon terminals remotely.
rulefan
Tour Winner
... what?
Please don't leave us in suspense.
Oops!
Sir Wyn decided he could get the evidence corroborated from other sources. MacLeod lives in Australia, and submitted a written statement but refused to travel.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
People went to jail and lost their lives and she can’t be bothered to travel .?
That’s not good.
Ross61
Challenge Tour Pro
I think I had read somewhere that she was offered to give evidence by video, but refused that also.
I think that is more condemning. I understand not taking a 24hr flight just to get ripped apart but refusing to give video evidence is blocking justice. Presumably she knew how she would look, knew how she had behaved.
Jane MacLeod took over as General Counsel following Chris Aujard who had held the role on a temporary basis. The day following Aujard’s second session at the Inquiry he resigned from all the directorships he held - his evidence was shocking in the extreme.
MacLeod Chaired a number of committees & sub committees during her time at the PO, including that which was set up specifically to manage the Group Litigation case raised by Bates and the SubPostmasters.
Restructures saw her promoted to Company Secretary. She would have been a key witness to the Inquiry. Her witness statement makes for a difficult read, not so much from its complexity but from the smokescreen she tries to deploy. Perhaps one of the best examples is her apparent incredulity to the PO’s use of legal privilege, in both its guises. Don’t forget, she was one of the very top legal people in the country yet she seemed to struggle with legal privilege and the PO’s use of it. She was the (legal) boss, she could have been the white knight leading the PO’s legal response back to ‘safe ground.’
Bearing in mind Chris Aujard’s evidence at the Inquiry, and MacLeod inherited the people and processes that continued to do the same, and her successor carried on in a similar vein…below is her witness statement…
MacLeod Chaired a number of committees & sub committees during her time at the PO, including that which was set up specifically to manage the Group Litigation case raised by Bates and the SubPostmasters.
Restructures saw her promoted to Company Secretary. She would have been a key witness to the Inquiry. Her witness statement makes for a difficult read, not so much from its complexity but from the smokescreen she tries to deploy. Perhaps one of the best examples is her apparent incredulity to the PO’s use of legal privilege, in both its guises. Don’t forget, she was one of the very top legal people in the country yet she seemed to struggle with legal privilege and the PO’s use of it. She was the (legal) boss, she could have been the white knight leading the PO’s legal response back to ‘safe ground.’
Bearing in mind Chris Aujard’s evidence at the Inquiry, and MacLeod inherited the people and processes that continued to do the same, and her successor carried on in a similar vein…below is her witness statement…
Ross61
Challenge Tour Pro
I’ve found where I had read it. Bullet point 3.
Chair's statement regarding former Post Office General Counsel, Jane MacLeod | Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
Lee Castleton, Jo Hamilton, Christopher Head & Seema Misra, all ex-SubPostmasters have been awarded OBE’s.
Rachel Thompson, the journalist who originally broke the story in Computer Weekly has been awarded an OBE.
Rachel Thompson, the journalist who originally broke the story in Computer Weekly has been awarded an OBE.
How did the Swift Report come to light? Who knew about beforehand, and who said they didn’t know about it?
With reference to the quoted post, we know who ‘wrote it,’ who commissioned it and we know Jane MacLeod advised Parker not to share it. But who knew about?
The Treasury knew about it, as did McCall, a Civil Servant who was a non-executive director who also advised several directors that it was not in the best interests of the PO to share the report.
How did the Inquiry find out about the Swift Report? Amongst all the documents sent to the Inquiry was an email string that mentioned it, including McCall’s comment.
McCall was called as a witness, and questioned by Jason Beer KC. He was asked if he’d heard of the Swift Report? His answer was one he’d used throughout the session, he didn’t “recall it.” This labelled him in the press as “don’t recall McCall.” Jason Beer KC then showed McCall the email string….
To recap; The Swift Report unequivocally said there were bugs AND that back door access was doable. PO legal knew about it, some PO board members knew about it from McCall, Parker knew about it. The shareholder executive(govt) including its appointed non-executive directors knew about it. And between MacLeod, Parker & the shareholder(govt) appointed non-executive directors they conspired to bury it… it looks like the Civil Service, govt ministers and the PO are equally culpable.
But the govt ministers all said they were never had that level of detail shared with them. Going off at a tangent, every minister has been unable to access their official diaries from the official archive. Coincidence?
A quick post.
I follow a number of ex-SubPostmasters on Twitter(X), along with the likes of Nick Wallis, journalist.
From Lee Castleton this morning; redress needs speeding up. There are ex-SubPostmasters and their families still in relative’s back bedrooms & sofa surfing.
I follow a number of ex-SubPostmasters on Twitter(X), along with the likes of Nick Wallis, journalist.
From Lee Castleton this morning; redress needs speeding up. There are ex-SubPostmasters and their families still in relative’s back bedrooms & sofa surfing.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Nothing slower than the Establishment when it comes to paying out.
The Commons Select Committee set up to investigate the various compensation schemes released their report today. As expected the criticism is loud & prolonged. Every aspect of the operation of the schemes has been ripped to shreds.
Nick Read, CEO, & Simon Recaldin, Director in charge of the schemes, were both interviewed at length by the committee, and both spoke very sympathetically & positively about what they’re trying to achieve. Just as they did at the Inquiry. Recaldin, time after time, labelled the PO’s progress as appallingly bad, detailing a number of failings in key areas. You just can’t not like the guy… but….
The guy has been in post a lot longer than 5 minutes, and he’s got a lot of experience with managing compensation schemes. In theory, you couldn’t get a better guy. But a closer look at the compensation schemes he ran for NatWest/RBS tell a very, very different story. The FCA became involved, and then the govt stepped in. Short version; history is repeating itself - pretty much a mirror image.
I can’t make my mind up if Recaldin is just too nice but incompetent, or his niceness is a smokescreen for his very sharp practices that he honed at the NatWest/RBS. It doesn’t matter either way, you’d expect a company to try and argue compensation down. But, equally, the evidence is so damning the PO needed to just hold up its hands, roll over and cough up.
As well as the criticism from the committee, it proposed 5 recommendations.
Nick Read, CEO, & Simon Recaldin, Director in charge of the schemes, were both interviewed at length by the committee, and both spoke very sympathetically & positively about what they’re trying to achieve. Just as they did at the Inquiry. Recaldin, time after time, labelled the PO’s progress as appallingly bad, detailing a number of failings in key areas. You just can’t not like the guy… but….
The guy has been in post a lot longer than 5 minutes, and he’s got a lot of experience with managing compensation schemes. In theory, you couldn’t get a better guy. But a closer look at the compensation schemes he ran for NatWest/RBS tell a very, very different story. The FCA became involved, and then the govt stepped in. Short version; history is repeating itself - pretty much a mirror image.
I can’t make my mind up if Recaldin is just too nice but incompetent, or his niceness is a smokescreen for his very sharp practices that he honed at the NatWest/RBS. It doesn’t matter either way, you’d expect a company to try and argue compensation down. But, equally, the evidence is so damning the PO needed to just hold up its hands, roll over and cough up.
As well as the criticism from the committee, it proposed 5 recommendations.
