Post Office - Horizon scandal

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, is it not the case that the PO were effectively acting as judge, jury and executioner in these cases and as such any of the judgements made by them in light of new evidence should be called into question? No different to new evidence being introduced that exonerates a party previously found guilt.

Ive not watched the drama yet or read up too much beyond what is in these pages (I do certainly intend to but two kids under 3 limits my time somewhat!) but as an accountant in a large company I find it hard to believe that what is essentially an accounting system could be so open to manipulation and free-entry without, seemingly, much of an audit trail for each of the entries made. The fact that entries were able to be changed remotely without an auditable correction being made is a massive red flag to me.

According to the (caveat) drama…a Fujitsu Horizon Support Engineer testified in court that they could make adjustments to any sub-postmasters accounts without the sub-postmaster knowing. But it does seem a bit odd that Support changes would not be identifiable…unless Support used the sub-postmasters login credentials to access their accounts. And that seems possible as the Support were logging on to the live system and the system security is supposed to have been designed to ensure that ONLY the sub-postmaster could access their account. Support changes would then look like sub-postmaster updates.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I think for most, a quashing of the criminal records by whatever means is what they want most

I would still rather the quashing was done by the judiciary rather than by government. Notwithstanding it was the PO and not the judiciary who found guilty the sub-postmasters in the first instance, it has been the judiciary who have since quashed the convictions of some. And that for me is the right way for it…if at all possible in very short timescales.

 

[AmandaJR]

According to the (caveat) drama…a Fujitsu Horizon Support Engineer testified in court that they could make adjustments to any sub-postmasters accounts without the sub-postmaster knowing. But it does seem a bit odd that Support changes would not be identifiable…unless Support used the sub-postmasters login credentials to access their accounts. And that seems possible as the Support were logging on to the live system and the system security is supposed to have been designed to ensure that ONLY the sub-postmaster could access their account. Support changes would then look like sub-postmaster updates.

You'd still expect something in the audit trail to identify if a transaction was from a different computer/location?

What I can kind of understand is why some suffered huge discrepancies if the remote access was the sole cause. In the past when I've tested new software it's been usual to have one account number off by heart and just use that customer record to test rather than do a search and start from there. So a sub postmaster rings the helpline and the support use the same account number each time to go through the process and explain how it works...maybe.

It's hard to imagine how any company thought it was acceptable to use a live system for anything!

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I would still rather the quashing was done by the judiciary rather than by government. Notwithstanding it was the PO and not the judiciary who found guilty the sub-postmasters in the first instance, it has been the judiciary who have since quashed the convictions of some. And that for me is the right way for it…if at all possible in very short timescales.

I totally agree but to have it taken off your record and no criminal conviction against your name will still be a massive weight of many shoulders whichever way it happens. I fear a judicial quashing will take a long while yet

 

[HeftyHacker]

You'd still expect something in the audit trail to identify if a transaction was from a different computer/location?

What I can kind of understand is why some suffered huge discrepancies if the remote access was the sole cause. In the past when I've tested new software it's been usual to have one account number off by heart and just use that customer record to test rather than do a search and start from there. So a sub postmaster rings the helpline and the support use the same account number each time to go through the process and explain how it works...maybe.

It's hard to imagine how any company thought it was acceptable to use a live system for anything!

Indeed, when we've introduced large ERP changes in the past we've always run a "sandbox" alongside the live system for a period of time so that any scenarios, issues and resolutions can be tested without affecting the live data.

Furthermore, logging on using somebody else's account, whether they're supporting the end user or not, is a massive red flag.

I realise this was the early 2000's and this will have been unchartered waters for many but still...

 

[backwoodsman]

In reading this thread, I think folk need to tread warily in order not to confuse things. The accounting errors arose from the faulty software - not because changes were made made remotely (and so were unaudited) The PO's erroneous (malicious?) accusation was that remote access was not possible - so it had to have been the subpostmasters fault. The lies of 'no bugs' and 'no remote access' were used to gain the unfair convictions.

Also it's fully understandable that the victims are wary of the judiciary. They were convicted in court and was the judicial system that convicted them. The difference is that it was the PO who were the so called 'victim', the investigator, and the prosecutor. They wanted to cover their backsides, and wanted convictions- so prosecuted regardless of the biased investigations and the lack of meaningful evidence. The police and the CPS weren't involved - if they had been (or someone similar) , then the chances are that the flimsy evidence (and/or lies) meant most cases wouldn't have got anywhere near a court.

I think it is good that the government are finally taking action. It's possible that in the 700 odd convictions there may be a handful that were indeed wrong doing by a subpostmaster - and they may get off scot-free. But that I think is a small price to pay in order that some 700 people lose their wrongful conviction.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Indeed, when we've introduced large ERP changes in the past we've always run a "sandbox" alongside the live system for a period of time so that any scenarios, issues and resolutions can be tested without affecting the live data.

Furthermore, logging on using somebody else's account, whether they're supporting the end user or not, is a massive red flag.

I realise this was the early 2000's and this will have been unchartered waters for many but still...

Thing is the fact that the Fujitsu Support Engineer stated that the support team were doing loads of bug and data fixes overnight suggests that the system was put into ‘production’ prematurely. And something was behind that. As you say…you can run a sandbox system for thorough testing, and if there are significant risks around going live with a new system you might even consider double keying/ entry is possible short while so that cross- he king of new against old can be done. But that might not have been logistically possible.

All that notwithstanding. No responsible customer acceptance manager would sign off system testing and accept into production a business critical system riddled with bugs - especially when bugs were in standard and critical functionality. All that beggars questions around the user acceptance testing.

 

[bobmac]

I think the money that the victims were wrongly forced to pay should be repaid by the end of next week.
Compensation should be paid out by the end of the month
And the convictions should be reversed by the end of February.
There must be an emergency fund somewhere that can be used for these payouts.

Then the people who did nothing wrong can at least put an end to it (if it's not too late) and move on with their lives.

Then and only then, the experts and lawyers can argue the toss about whos fault it was and who should pay back the emergency fund.

And to those who say it can't be done that quickly, imagine if the shoe was on the other foot?

Bottom line is the victims WHO DID NOTHING WRONG MUST come first.

 

[Red devil]

I think the money that the victims were wrongly forced to pay should be repaid by the end of next week.
Compensation should be paid out by the end of the month
And the convictions should be reversed by the end of February.
There must be an emergency fund somewhere that can be used for these payouts.

Then the people who did nothing wrong can at least put an end to it (if it's not too late) and move on with their lives.

Then and only then, the experts and lawyers can argue the toss about whos fault it was and who should pay back the emergency fund.

And to those who say it can't be done that quickly, imagine if the shoe was on the other foot?

Bottom line is the victims WHO DID NOTHING WRONG MUST come first.

The cynic inside tells me these people will be waiting a while for their justice and their compensation. Governments, as they do promise the world and deliver not so much.
Don't forget they haven't just found out about this because of the TV programme, this scandal has been known about for years. They've been shamed into it by the swell of public anger, as they were over Windrush and Grenfell,whose victims are still waiting for their justice.
However if your on the PPE VIP lane, just give us your bank details.

 

[road2ruin]

It's possible that in the 700 odd convictions there may be a handful that were indeed wrong doing by a subpostmaster - and they may get off scot-free. But that I think is a small price to pay in order that some 700 people lose their wrongful conviction.

Agree with this, I’m fairly sure that out of the 700 there will be the odd 1 or 2 who were on the fiddle however for the overwhelming majority to have their convictions quashed it’s a price worth paying.

 

[Red devil]

Agree with this, I’m fairly sure that out of the 700 there will be the odd 1 or 2 who were on the fiddle however for the overwhelming majority to have their convictions quashed it’s a price worth paying.

And please don't take this the wrong way but their convictions should be overturned by the judiciary not by Parliament. If Parliament starts declaring who is innocent and who isn't you're opening Pandora's box.
We are still a country of belief in the rule of law

 

[Hobbit]

And please don't take this the wrong way but their convictions should be overturned by the judiciary not by Parliament. If Parliament starts declaring who is innocent and who isn't you're opening Pandora's box.
We are still a country of belief in the rule of law

There‘s been quite a play on words by several politicians as they’ve recognised the separation of Parliament and the judiciary. It’s semantics but several are say there’s a difference between convictions being quashed, exonerations, pardons and overturned. It would seem churlish, under the circumstances, to go to a halfway house before overturning a conviction. However, the separation must be upheld as it’s a slippery slope before parties make a mockery of overturning convictions for political purposes.

There must be a way to fast track overturning of convictions. A review by barristers of all cases in which there is a conviction based on Horizon, then present them all to one judge in a short session akin to a class action.

 

[bobmac]

We are still a country of belief in the rule of law

What law did the victims break?
The victims who did nothing wrong have to sit back and wait while expensive lawyers, accountants and Fuji staff spend years arguing the toss about who is to blame?
That's garbage.
The victims did NOTHING WRONG.
Their plight shoukd be sorted out first and fast.

 

[cliveb]

Agree with this, I’m fairly sure that out of the 700 there will be the odd 1 or 2 who were on the fiddle however for the overwhelming majority to have their convictions quashed it’s a price worth paying.

Of course it's a price worth paying. Isn't one of the central tenets of justice the concept that it's better to acquit a hundred guilty people than convict one innocent person?

And please don't take this the wrong way but their convictions should be overturned by the judiciary not by Parliament. If Parliament starts declaring who is innocent and who isn't you're opening Pandora's box.
We are still a country of belief in the rule of law

Then it appears the Pandora's Box is about to be opened. Last I read about it said that the new legislation would simply require the convicted sub postmaster to sign a declaration that they are innocent.

 

[Hobbit]

What law did the victims break?
The victims who did nothing wrong have to sit back and wait while expensive lawyers, accountants and Fuji staff spend years arguing the toss about who is to blame?
That's garbage.
The victims did NOTHING WRONG.
Their plight shoukd be sorted out first and fast.

I’d like to think the overturning of convictions would be quite quick. And a calculation of most of the compensation quite easy - the return of monies paid to cover alleged shortfall, payment of salaries for years ‘lost.’ It’s the compensation for jail time, bankruptcy, loss of home and emotional loss that will take some sorting.

The first two + an interim lump could be paid in weeks. The govt could take out a bank loan then chase the PO & Fujitsu for the rest.

 

[Hobbit]

Then it appears the Pandora's Box is about to be opened. Last I read about it said that the new legislation would simply require the convicted sub postmaster to sign a declaration that they are innocent.

Hopefully it will be stamped by a judge to give some semblance of propriety.

 

[bobmac]

I’d like to think the overturning of convictions would be quite quick. And a calculation of most of the compensation quite easy - the return of monies paid to cover alleged shortfall, payment of salaries for years ‘lost.’ It’s the compensation for jail time, bankruptcy, loss of home and emotional loss that will take some sorting.

The first two + an interim lump could be paid in weeks. The govt could take out a bank loan then chase the PO & Fujitsu for the rest.

Exactly.
The victims WHO DID NOTHING WRONG should be compensated first and fast.

 

[Red devil]

What law did the victims break?
The victims who did nothing wrong have to sit back and wait while expensive lawyers, accountants and Fuji staff spend years arguing the toss about who is to blame?
That's garbage.
The victims did NOTHING WRONG.
Their plight shoukd be sorted out first and fast.

Sorry Bob I didn't make myself clear. The rule of law I meant was its up to the judiciary to quash these convictions, not Parliament no matter how wrong they are and a lot of postmasters/mistresses want this too is because if Parliament start declaring people innocent who knows where it could lead. I know these people didn't break the law and the judiciary will quash their convictions

 

[Red devil]

Then it appears the Pandora's Box is about to be opened. Last I read about it said that the new legislation would simply require the convicted sub postmaster to sign a declaration that they are inninnocent

Then this is a legal minefield. I know they're innocent but they should have their convictions quashed by a court not signing a piece of paper.
You could end up with a scenario of someone who did embezzle the Post Office then just sign a piece of paper saying they're innocent

 

[Red devil]

Exactly.
The victims WHO DID NOTHING WRONG should be compensated first and fast.

Yes, they did nothing wrong but compensation will be slow. There'll be a few get paid out first the rest will have to wait. If they've all been paid out in 12months I'll come on here and apologise