Horizon IT - Post Office - Public Enquiry

[Mikey1874]

 

[periodictabledancer]

9 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Fujitsu would need to prove within reasonable doubt that the the system worked and data wasn't retrospectively edited by them.  

That'll fail at the first hurdle when they have to disclose (which they have already) circa 30 people at any one time in Fujitsu could access SPMs accounts in real time and change their accounts - without their knowledge.

[henrysmithsgloves]

Wonder if they knew this day was coming,hence the cheap sell off of the post office 🤔

[periodictabledancer]

2 hours ago, Tommy Brown said:

I was wondering if that had been edited in.

No it did actually happen in reality although they attributed some of the questioning (abuse) of Vennells to him for dramtic effect (the dialogue is as per Hansard/video evidence, so is accurate ) . 

[WorldChampions1902]

This weeks New European running an article on what an utter f****** disgrace the MSM in this country is. It highlights the Post Office scandal in great detail but there are so many other topics it could use to emphasise the point. Written by Liz Gerrard.

 

How Fleet Street missed the Post Office scandal 

Our national newspapers’ lack of interest in a multiple miscarriage of justice raises disturbing questions

 

Once upon a time, you returned to work after Christmas and talked about Angela Rippon doing high kicks for Morecambe and Wise or Del Boy becoming a millionaire. All good for a giggle.

But this year, the show that has captured our imagination is Mr Bates vs The Post Office and there is little to laugh about.

It is the dramatisation of a truly shocking story: hundreds of sub-postmasters persecuted and prosecuted by the Post Office over non-existent cash losses generated by a faulty computer system.

The human cost of what has been described as the most widespread miscarriage of justice in our legal history has been enormous. And still the victims – or their surviving families – await proper reparation, nearly a quarter of a century after the first prosecutions and a decade since the last.

“Why still no justice?” demanded the Mirror in its front-page splash on Wednesday last week. By the weekend, the Times was leading on a possible police inquiry, with Jo Hamilton its Saturday interview subject inside, while the next day its sister title focused on “Post Office fury intensifies”. Come Monday, it was the splash for the Mail and Metro, too, after Rishi Sunak piped up with more on-the-hoof promises/opinions to try to capture the prevailing mood and endear himself to voters.

Quite the haul for a scandal that had only previously secured top billing on a national front page only once in the 15 years since it surfaced. That was the Mail’s “33 die without justice”, Tom Witherow’s opening-day report on the public inquiry that started in February 2022. Indeed, Witherow has been responsible for a third of the splashes generated by the saga up to Monday – he now works for the Times and his name appeared alongside law specialist Catherine Baksi on Saturday’s lead.

A week into that (still ongoing) inquiry, Melanie Phillips asked in the Times: “Where’s the outcry over postmaster scandal?” and mourned “public indifference to the victimisation by officials of ordinary people”. Well, there’s an outcry now – and it’s quite clear that the public is far from indifferent. But for an answer to her question then, she might look to her own trade and her own newspaper.

The Times has certainly been on the case over the past couple of years – and more so since Witherow moved across from the Mail last year. There have been magazine features, quite a bit in the law section, and some strident leaders. But this level of interest did not surface until after the postmasters had fought and won their two biggest battles: first, their civil claim in which 550 were awarded £58m in a class action in December 2019, and then the quashing of 39 convictions on one day in April 2021. Before that first court victory, the paper had carried just four items on the subject – the biggest courtesy of Panorama – with a combined total of 470 words.

The fourth of those items was what newspaper people call a “nib” (news in brief) headlined “Post Office legal bill”, which read: “The Post Office has spent an estimated £5m in a legal battle with sub-postmasters. More than 500 people say computer glitches mean they were wrongly accused of false accounting and theft. The case will be heard in the High Court on Wednesday. The Post Office denies that the system was at fault. It may have to pay up to £1bn if it loses.”

Well, that’s not much of a story, is it? Five hundred people suing, a possible £1bn bill – which would fall to the taxpayer. And it’s all kicking off in a couple of days. Not worth sending anyone to court to have a listen.

And when the judgment finally came in a year later? A small double on page 31. “‘Fraud’ case costs Post Office £58m”. It’s all about the business. Nothing about the people. Where, as Phillips might have asked, was the outcry?

The Times was not alone in this. Most Fleet Street titles were blind to the story when the postmasters really needed them to open their eyes.

Meanwhile, a journalist called Nick Wallis had been plugging away since 2010. Private Eye had been on it since 2011. And before both of them, Rebecca Thomson of Computer Weekly magazine had broken the story – complete with seven case studies – after a six-month investigation back in 2009. Her colleague, chief reporter Karl Flinders, has been pursuing the story ever since.

Wallis has become the go-to man on this case. He has written countless articles, made radio and television programmes and written a book. It was his efforts for Radio 4 and Panorama that inspired the minimal national press attention before 2018. And, after that, the fact that he managed to get Geordie Greig’s personal email address.

As with the Stephen Lawrence case, a Mail editor’s personal link galvanised his paper. Greig had been having his ear bashed by a postmaster in the village where he had his weekend cottage, so was receptive to Wallis’s approach. Chief reporter Sam Greenhill was put on the case and stories started appearing with regularity.

To be fair, the Mail had already been ahead of the pack. It even reported Jo Hamilton’s original conviction back in 2008 – not because of the scandal that would later unfold, but because it recognised that 60 people turning up and cheering a defendant in court is pretty unusual. In 2013 it “exposed the glitch that wrecked dozens of lives” when the Post Office withdrew some prosecutions and announced a review (a move also reported by the Mirror). And it was back a couple of years later with a leak of the Second Sight forensic accountant’s review, following that up with a spread headlined “Decent lives destroyed by the Post Office”.

---

But until Greig set his hounds on the chase in late 2018, these stories – always deep inside the paper – had generally been flagged up by other media. Still, when the postmasters started winning, it was naturally the result of the Mail’s “campaign”: “Our £58m victory”, “Victory for the Mail as first postmasters cleared”, and the culmination of “The Mail’s 10-year fight for justice” (its first story had actually appeared only eight years earlier).

Now everyone’s on the bandwagon. The fight is for speedy compensation (can it be speedy when it’s already so belated?) and for former chief executive Paula Vennells to be stripped of her CBE. Both of which have been occasional refrains from Fleet Street ever since it properly woke up to the story five years ago.

But where was it before? Not one paper reported the awarding of that honour outside of the tiny-type complete list of names – Dame Twiggy was far more interesting – even though by that time they all knew about the devastated lives and the fact that postmasters were taking her organisation to court. And long after the story had finally broken through, the Sunday Express was alone in reporting last year that the Post Office was extending its contract with Fujitsu for the Horizon computer system at the heart of the scandal.

The nationals like to think they are important, that journalism is important. It is, but are they? Where were they when it mattered? If they’re so effective, how come this story came as a shock to all those new year TV viewers?

The Mail, which published just one front page lead in 15 years in its “victorious campaign” for the postmasters, ran seven splashes on the bounce on Keir Starmer having a beer and a curry during the pandemic. I bet people don’t need reminding about that.

There is a pattern here, where the big titles are constantly beaten on important issues by the trade press, the docudramas and the Panoramas. Rebecca Thomson first wrote about the postmasters four years before any national paper. Peter Apps of Inside Housing was writing about the dangers of cladding on high-rise buildings years before the Grenfell Tower disaster.

Jessica Hill of Schools Week wrote about crumbling buildings almost a year before RAAC caused schools to stay shut at the beginning of term in September. Shaun Lintern, now of the Sunday Times, turned up scoop after scoop – not least the Mid Staffs scandal – for the Health Service Journal and Nursing Times.

Don’t newspapers have specialists any more? People who read the trade press relevant to their beat and pick up and develop stories? And even if they don’t, everyone reads Private Eye. Why don’t news editors follow up its stuff? Is it because it’s too lefty? Too dangerous?

Do they really believe readers want a diet of royals, culture wars and Westminster bubblegum? Haven’t they noticed that while their circulations are falling off a cliff, publications like the Eye, Byline Times and – yes – TNE, publications that tell readers more than what whoever happens to be Tory prime minister this week wants them to hear, are putting on sales month by month?

It’s time Fleet Street woke up and did its job, instead of claiming kudos after everyone else has done theirs.

JANUARY 2024 12:00 AM

[RobboM]

1 hour ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

This weeks New European running an article on what an utter f****** disgrace the MSM in this country is. It highlights the Post Office scandal in great detail but there are so many other topics it could use to emphasise the point. Written by Liz Gerrard.

 

How Fleet Street missed the Post Office scandal 

Our national newspapers’ lack of interest in a multiple miscarriage of justice raises disturbing questions

 

Once upon a time, you returned to work after Christmas and talked about Angela Rippon doing high kicks for Morecambe and Wise or Del Boy becoming a millionaire. All good for a giggle.

But this year, the show that has captured our imagination is Mr Bates vs The Post Office and there is little to laugh about.

It is the dramatisation of a truly shocking story: hundreds of sub-postmasters persecuted and prosecuted by the Post Office over non-existent cash losses generated by a faulty computer system.

The human cost of what has been described as the most widespread miscarriage of justice in our legal history has been enormous. And still the victims – or their surviving families – await proper reparation, nearly a quarter of a century after the first prosecutions and a decade since the last.

“Why still no justice?” demanded the Mirror in its front-page splash on Wednesday last week. By the weekend, the Times was leading on a possible police inquiry, with Jo Hamilton its Saturday interview subject inside, while the next day its sister title focused on “Post Office fury intensifies”. Come Monday, it was the splash for the Mail and Metro, too, after Rishi Sunak piped up with more on-the-hoof promises/opinions to try to capture the prevailing mood and endear himself to voters.

Quite the haul for a scandal that had only previously secured top billing on a national front page only once in the 15 years since it surfaced. That was the Mail’s “33 die without justice”, Tom Witherow’s opening-day report on the public inquiry that started in February 2022. Indeed, Witherow has been responsible for a third of the splashes generated by the saga up to Monday – he now works for the Times and his name appeared alongside law specialist Catherine Baksi on Saturday’s lead.

A week into that (still ongoing) inquiry, Melanie Phillips asked in the Times: “Where’s the outcry over postmaster scandal?” and mourned “public indifference to the victimisation by officials of ordinary people”. Well, there’s an outcry now – and it’s quite clear that the public is far from indifferent. But for an answer to her question then, she might look to her own trade and her own newspaper.

The Times has certainly been on the case over the past couple of years – and more so since Witherow moved across from the Mail last year. There have been magazine features, quite a bit in the law section, and some strident leaders. But this level of interest did not surface until after the postmasters had fought and won their two biggest battles: first, their civil claim in which 550 were awarded £58m in a class action in December 2019, and then the quashing of 39 convictions on one day in April 2021. Before that first court victory, the paper had carried just four items on the subject – the biggest courtesy of Panorama – with a combined total of 470 words.

The fourth of those items was what newspaper people call a “nib” (news in brief) headlined “Post Office legal bill”, which read: “The Post Office has spent an estimated £5m in a legal battle with sub-postmasters. More than 500 people say computer glitches mean they were wrongly accused of false accounting and theft. The case will be heard in the High Court on Wednesday. The Post Office denies that the system was at fault. It may have to pay up to £1bn if it loses.”

Well, that’s not much of a story, is it? Five hundred people suing, a possible £1bn bill – which would fall to the taxpayer. And it’s all kicking off in a couple of days. Not worth sending anyone to court to have a listen.

And when the judgment finally came in a year later? A small double on page 31. “‘Fraud’ case costs Post Office £58m”. It’s all about the business. Nothing about the people. Where, as Phillips might have asked, was the outcry?

The Times was not alone in this. Most Fleet Street titles were blind to the story when the postmasters really needed them to open their eyes.

Meanwhile, a journalist called Nick Wallis had been plugging away since 2010. Private Eye had been on it since 2011. And before both of them, Rebecca Thomson of Computer Weekly magazine had broken the story – complete with seven case studies – after a six-month investigation back in 2009. Her colleague, chief reporter Karl Flinders, has been pursuing the story ever since.

Wallis has become the go-to man on this case. He has written countless articles, made radio and television programmes and written a book. It was his efforts for Radio 4 and Panorama that inspired the minimal national press attention before 2018. And, after that, the fact that he managed to get Geordie Greig’s personal email address.

As with the Stephen Lawrence case, a Mail editor’s personal link galvanised his paper. Greig had been having his ear bashed by a postmaster in the village where he had his weekend cottage, so was receptive to Wallis’s approach. Chief reporter Sam Greenhill was put on the case and stories started appearing with regularity.

To be fair, the Mail had already been ahead of the pack. It even reported Jo Hamilton’s original conviction back in 2008 – not because of the scandal that would later unfold, but because it recognised that 60 people turning up and cheering a defendant in court is pretty unusual. In 2013 it “exposed the glitch that wrecked dozens of lives” when the Post Office withdrew some prosecutions and announced a review (a move also reported by the Mirror). And it was back a couple of years later with a leak of the Second Sight forensic accountant’s review, following that up with a spread headlined “Decent lives destroyed by the Post Office”.

---

But until Greig set his hounds on the chase in late 2018, these stories – always deep inside the paper – had generally been flagged up by other media. Still, when the postmasters started winning, it was naturally the result of the Mail’s “campaign”: “Our £58m victory”, “Victory for the Mail as first postmasters cleared”, and the culmination of “The Mail’s 10-year fight for justice” (its first story had actually appeared only eight years earlier).

Now everyone’s on the bandwagon. The fight is for speedy compensation (can it be speedy when it’s already so belated?) and for former chief executive Paula Vennells to be stripped of her CBE. Both of which have been occasional refrains from Fleet Street ever since it properly woke up to the story five years ago.

But where was it before? Not one paper reported the awarding of that honour outside of the tiny-type complete list of names – Dame Twiggy was far more interesting – even though by that time they all knew about the devastated lives and the fact that postmasters were taking her organisation to court. And long after the story had finally broken through, the Sunday Express was alone in reporting last year that the Post Office was extending its contract with Fujitsu for the Horizon computer system at the heart of the scandal.

The nationals like to think they are important, that journalism is important. It is, but are they? Where were they when it mattered? If they’re so effective, how come this story came as a shock to all those new year TV viewers?

The Mail, which published just one front page lead in 15 years in its “victorious campaign” for the postmasters, ran seven splashes on the bounce on Keir Starmer having a beer and a curry during the pandemic. I bet people don’t need reminding about that.

There is a pattern here, where the big titles are constantly beaten on important issues by the trade press, the docudramas and the Panoramas. Rebecca Thomson first wrote about the postmasters four years before any national paper. Peter Apps of Inside Housing was writing about the dangers of cladding on high-rise buildings years before the Grenfell Tower disaster.

Jessica Hill of Schools Week wrote about crumbling buildings almost a year before RAAC caused schools to stay shut at the beginning of term in September. Shaun Lintern, now of the Sunday Times, turned up scoop after scoop – not least the Mid Staffs scandal – for the Health Service Journal and Nursing Times.

Don’t newspapers have specialists any more? People who read the trade press relevant to their beat and pick up and develop stories? And even if they don’t, everyone reads Private Eye. Why don’t news editors follow up its stuff? Is it because it’s too lefty? Too dangerous?

Do they really believe readers want a diet of royals, culture wars and Westminster bubblegum? Haven’t they noticed that while their circulations are falling off a cliff, publications like the Eye, Byline Times and – yes – TNE, publications that tell readers more than what whoever happens to be Tory prime minister this week wants them to hear, are putting on sales month by month?

It’s time Fleet Street woke up and did its job, instead of claiming kudos after everyone else has done theirs.

JANUARY 2024 12:00 AM

The article, of course, lists many of the instances where journalists have been investigating. Indeed the ITV drama itself wasn't an investigative piece but a dramatisation of the work that journalists had done over the extended period. Listening to The News Agents on this suggested that possibly what the story had lacked previously, and the drama instead provided, was an "event", a focal point that clarified the culmination of the detail.

The story is an accumulation of lots of smaller stories, individual dramas and miscarriages of justice. I wonder if what it really highlights is the death of local newspapers and their role in highlighting cases at a community level. If there had been local newspapers following cases, starting to join up with other similar miscarriages, maybe that would have been an earlier catalyst for this story?

[Dawnrazor]

[Jambo-Jimbo]

11 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

Seen this on the news this morning, it just goes to show the culture that was and still is within the post office, they think they can do what they want without any fear. 

 

Not only does there need to be a massive clear-out of PO management but also a complete overhaul of their entire structure, so as nothing like this can ever happen again.

[WorldChampions1902]

13 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

So, the Post Office’s own annual accounts have to be prepared by some of the big Accountancy firms eg. Ernst Young and Price Waterhouse et al, for which the PO pays a small fortune. Those accounts are accompanied by various ‘fit for purpose’ and due diligence statements, which these firms sign off on. Which prompts two questions. 1) How can so-called top accountancy firms prepare and sign-off on accounts which on the face of it, seriously breach HMRC rules? 2) If this was an ‘oversight’ on the part of those accountancy firms, why should they be allowed to continue to practise, given such serious and shambolic ineptitude? (Assuming of course that HMRC are correct in all of this).

 

Which brings us nicely on to the PO’s external auditors ‘concerns’ over the years, with regards to what they (and PO) knew about Horizon’s failings. How could that not possibly raise questions about the PO financial data they were supplied with in order to complete PO’s Annual Accounts over 20+ years?

[The Mighty Thor]

1 hour ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

Which prompts two questions. 1) How can so-called top accountancy firms prepare and sign-off on accounts which on the face of it, seriously breach HMRC rules? 2) If this was an ‘oversight’ on the part of those accountancy firms, why should they be allowed to continue to practise, given such serious and shambolic ineptitude? (Assuming of course that HMRC are correct in all of this).

 

Donations to the party, non exec directorships etc. 

 

If you went to the right school it's a grift for life

[periodictabledancer]

7 hours ago, RobboM said:

The article, of course, lists many of the instances where journalists have been investigating. Indeed the ITV drama itself wasn't an investigative piece but a dramatisation of the work that journalists had done over the extended period. Listening to The News Agents on this suggested that possibly what the story had lacked previously, and the drama instead provided, was an "event", a focal point that clarified the culmination of the detail.

The story is an accumulation of lots of smaller stories, individual dramas and miscarriages of justice. I wonder if what it really highlights is the death of local newspapers and their role in highlighting cases at a community level. If there had been local newspapers following cases, starting to join up with other similar miscarriages, maybe that would have been an earlier catalyst for this story?

Look at the disgraceful articles online/in the printed press this week from various pro Tory sources who have chosen to make political capital by attacking  Davey/Starmer/SNP on the matter, as though the Tories haven't been in power for fourteen years and done nothing. .  That tells you where their loyalties lie and why there's bee so little coverage , never mind outrage. The London based media doesn't have any interest in attacking the establishment (see Hillsboorough) and certainly not when their main job is to cheerlead for the Tories and trash the opposition at any/every  opportunity. 

[Armageddon]

I cannot believe this ITV drama, sooooo ****ing angry watching this.

 

Folk should be hung for what’s happened here.

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, Armageddon said:

I cannot believe this ITV drama, sooooo ****ing angry watching this.

 

Folk should be hung for what’s happened here.

Ausseh's running a bus post independence to the Lions pen at Blair Drummond Safari Park, I'm sure he'll make space for them!

[Dagger Is Back]

29 minutes ago, Armageddon said:

I cannot believe this ITV drama, sooooo ****ing angry watching this.

 

Folk should be hung for what’s happened here.

Exactly how we felt when we watched it.

 

Can't begin to imagine how these families felt as they suffered through this.

 

Utterly shameful

 

 

[WorldChampions1902]

On 11/01/2024 at 06:41, The Mighty Thor said:

Just how do Fujitsu continue to secure these contracts against a backdrop of failure?

I'd love to see who they make donations to or 'entertain'. I suspect that will answer a lot of questions.

 

For context they've 'won' contracts worth over £6 billion during Sunaks time as Chancellor & PM

Fujitsu have a great track record in using legal means to achieve ‘business outcomes’. Their £500-£700 million settlement from the NHS for NHS ‘failings’  10+ years ago, is a prime example. 
 

There seems to be growing political and public expectations that Fujitsu have a case to answer and a financial settlement is ‘inevitable’. Much will depend on evidence still to be heard.

 

It may be that should Fujitsu be told that they are out of the running for future U.K. government contracts, they will challenge that by whatever legal route, including citing existing Procurement legislation. Again, they have a formidable reputation in that regard. Here’s a recent example at the Foreign Office - despite having their original bid rejected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67944525

 

 

Edited January 13 by WorldChampions1902

[ri Alban]

I wonder if there's a way to con your way to some compy. 'Hello, is that you Michael' (Gove)

[periodictabledancer]

The public inquiry has been grilling various PO employees on the basis that PO took an aggressive approach to prosecuting SPMs in order to get losses down (and ergo, profits up).

Now this in The Sunday Times from Tom Witherow (who started his crusade against the PO over a decade ago AFAIK). Witherow says he has 60 or so voice recordings of high level meetings involving PO snr management so there might be a steady drip over the coming weeks. 

[periodictabledancer]

A good point from Nick Walliss about Stephen Bradshaw the PO "Investigator" - the guy who thought it's be good to come dressed all in black : Bradshaw was (partly) responsible for sending lots of people to prison for what the Court of Appeal describes as "an affront to justice".

How can he STILL be employed by them ? At what point does PO clean its own stables ?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0h4c1b7

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

12 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

Fujitsu have a great track record in using legal means to achieve ‘business outcomes’. Their £500-£700 million settlement from the NHS for NHS ‘failings’  10+ years ago, is a prime example. 
 

There seems to be growing political and public expectations that Fujitsu have a case to answer and a financial settlement is ‘inevitable’. Much will depend on evidence still to be heard.

 

It may be that should Fujitsu be told that they are out of the running for future U.K. government contracts, they will challenge that by whatever legal route, including citing existing Procurement legislation. Again, they have a formidable reputation in that regard. Here’s a recent example at the Foreign Office - despite having their original bid rejected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67944525

 

 

They‘ll be incredibly toxic after this, and they’re going to get hassled by the media at every turn. Hopefully the people running them either end up in prison or get their houses set on fire

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 hour ago, periodictabledancer said:

A good point from Nick Walliss about Stephen Bradshaw the PO "Investigator" - the guy who thought it's be good to come dressed all in black : Bradshaw was (partly) responsible for sending lots of people to prison for what the Court of Appeal describes as "an affront to justice".

How can he STILL be employed by them ? At what point does PO clean its own stables ?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0h4c1b7

That thick twat sounded like English was his second language. Was ace when the KC butchered him at the end 

[periodictabledancer]

27 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

That thick twat sounded like English was his second language. Was ace when the KC butchered him at the end 

I was on social media during/after it and even Scousers were mortified at his "language".

Defo an advert for private education. 😄

[periodictabledancer]

The first casualty in CEO Nick Read's Senior Executive Team is RICHARD TAYLOR - the serving (until yesterday) Director of Communications expose the Tapes in 2 of 2 below Taylor was recorded on two separate occasions suggesting that campaigning SubPostmasters were probably thieves, that there was no evidence Horizon had caused discrepancies in branch accounts, and complaining the quashed convictions of Subpostmasters was getting disproportionate media coverage.

 

 

The cull begins, hopefully.

Let's see what else is on those tapes. 

[Harry Potter]

15 hours ago, Dagger Is Back said:

Exactly how we felt when we watched it.

 

Can't begin to imagine how these families felt as they suffered through this.

 

Utterly shameful

 

 

Had me in a seeth as well, ruined lifes, shocking and a disgrace.

[ri Alban]

@MoncurMacdonaldMercer Thinks they're all at it.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

16 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

@MoncurMacdonaldMercer Thinks they're all at it.

I said I didn’t know anything about it but it sounded like a conspiracy theory which it does 

 

why has there been no media coverage of this over years and years ?

 

it requires big business government AND the whole media to be colluding on this - we all know that’s not possible 🤷‍♂️

 

 

Edited January 14 by MoncurMacdonaldMercer

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

is there a previous thread on this?
 

one from back in the day when they were starting to get jailed and protesting their innocence?
 

 

 

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

is there a previous thread on this?
 

one from back in the day when they were starting to get jailed and protesting their innocence?
 

 

 

The above thread from almost two years ago is the only one I'm aware of, but I had been following the story for a few years before that. My interest definitely heightened after the Bates v Post Office judgements in 2019.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

4 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

The above thread from almost two years ago is the only one I'm aware of, but I had been following the story for a few years before that. My interest definitely heightened after the Bates v Post Office judgements in 2019.

I’ve been reading about it in Private Eye for what feels like about 10 years. Private Eye don’t get everything right but they’re the best in the business at taking on powerful arseholes.

[Lone Striker]

7 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

A good point from Nick Walliss about Stephen Bradshaw the PO "Investigator" - the guy who thought it's be good to come dressed all in black : Bradshaw was (partly) responsible for sending lots of people to prison for what the Court of Appeal describes as "an affront to justice".

How can he STILL be employed by them ? At what point does PO clean its own stables ?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0h4c1b7

Nick Wallis is  absolutely right.   Bradshaw's character  typifies what seems to have been a "get the b'stards" culture at management level.

 

3 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

I said I didn’t know anything about it but it sounded like a conspiracy theory which it does 

 

why has there been no media coverage of this over years and years ?

 

it requires big business government AND the whole media to be colluding on this - we all know that’s not possible 🤷‍♂️

 

 

Some journalists have kept at it for over 10 years (like Nick Wallis and some jornos at Computer Weekly), but for some reason MSM editors decided not to send any of their investigtive journos to get a grip on it.    Contrast that inaction with the recent front page splashes after the ITV drama.

 

 

Here's an interesting timeline and history of how Fujitsu expanded into the UK via a takeover of ICL, and some of their project failures in Japan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61020075

 

 

.... and a recent contract awarded to Fujitsu by the Foreign Office in spite of  competition from Vodafone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67944525

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

2 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Nick Wallis is  absolutely right.   Bradshaw's character  typifies what seems to have been a "get the b'stards" culture at management level.

 

Some journalists have kept at it for over 10 years (like Nick Wallis and some jornos at Computer Weekly), but for some reason MSM editors decided not to send any of their investigtive journos to get a grip on it.    Contrast that inaction with the recent front page splashes after the ITV drama.

 

 

Here's an interesting timeline and history of how Fujitsu expanded into the UK via a takeover of ICL, and some of their project failures in Japan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61020075

 

 

.... and a recent contract awarded to Fujitsu by the Foreign Office in spite of  competition from Vodafone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67944525

 

 

I think it wasn't until the Panorama programme aired in 2015 that the public became aware of what had been going on for years previously.

What has become clear in recent weeks is that the PO has tried every trick in the book over the last 2 decades to surpress and bury this story, they even threatened the BBC and Panorama to try and get them to shelve the programme in 2015.

 

Yes the MSM should have ran the story earlier and in greater details than they did, however in saying that we don't know what & if any threats had been made to the media if they reported what had been going on.

[periodictabledancer]

41 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Nick Wallis is  absolutely right.   Bradshaw's character  typifies what seems to have been a "get the b'stards" culture at management level.

 

Some journalists have kept at it for over 10 years (like Nick Wallis and some jornos at Computer Weekly), but for some reason MSM editors decided not to send any of their investigtive journos to get a grip on it.    Contrast that inaction with the recent front page splashes after the ITV drama.

 

 

Here's an interesting timeline and history of how Fujitsu expanded into the UK via a takeover of ICL, and some of their project failures in Japan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61020075

 

 

.... and a recent contract awarded to Fujitsu by the Foreign Office in spite of  competition from Vodafone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67944525

 

Fujitsu is the most commercially aware company I have ever worked with and they will aggressively pursue any/every opportunity to make money. Their people , their culture , their  behaviours in the workplace absolutely stink. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

7 hours ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They‘ll be incredibly toxic after this, and they’re going to get hassled by the media at every turn. Hopefully the people running them either end up in prison or get their houses set on fire

 

The people runing them should end up in the Thames or on fire.

[Footballfirst]

The warnings were there early in the life of Horizon. This one from 1999.

 

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

thanks @Footballfirst and @Lone Striker

 

sounds like this should be on the stranger than fiction thread

 

700 people start stealing (presumably a much higher number than normal) and the assumption is that these are independent events (albeit no doubt someone tried to blame general hard times as a non-independent driver) rather than something else

 

 

big companies have departments whose full-time purpose is correcting (system-caused) errors

for anyone who has seen that programme about the computer beating the GO champion (an extremely complex game apparently) some of the experts were saying the incredible achievement wasn’t building a system that beat the champion but building a system that didn’t have any bugs in it (that was said on the back of the system malfunctioning a couple of times ie it did have bugs but so few it was an amazing system apparently)

 

these people should turn up wearing tin foil hats when they get their compo not that it will ever be enough for the damage done 

 

 

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

1 hour ago, periodictabledancer said:

Fujitsu is the most commercially aware company I have ever worked with and they will aggressively pursue any/every opportunity to make money. Their people , their culture , their  behaviours in the workplace absolutely stink. 

wasn't extended beyond their probation period type-post

 

 

[Lone Striker]

Does anyone know if the Horizon  application  was coded  from scratch  by Fujitsu in the 1990s  (i.e. totally bespoke)  .... or is it a customised version of an existing (at the time) commercial software package (with modules such as accounting, retail, inventory, customer service etc) which could be configured and managed  by the PO   IT folk ?

 

I'm guessing its the former .... which would  say everything about the PO's  blinkered approach to IT projects and forward planning.  Basically hand-cuffing themselves to a Fujitsu maintenance contract for the long-term.  

 

 If the PO had ordinary  shareholders instead of the Govt,  would  this fiasco  have at least been seriously  questioned long before the 700th S-PM was convicted ?  Pretty sure it would.   

 

      All Govts from  Tony Blair's onwards   appear to be   guilty of negligence in allowing this damage to continue, probably due to the mantra of  "light-touch oversight of companies delivering public services"

 

 

[periodictabledancer]

🫂

[periodictabledancer]

7 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Does anyone know if the Horizon  application  was coded  from scratch  by Fujitsu in the 1990s  (i.e. totally bespoke)  .... or is it a customised version of an existing (at the time) commercial software package (with modules such as accounting, retail, inventory, customer service etc) which could be configured and managed  by the PO   IT folk ?

 

I'm guessing its the former .... which would  say everything about the PO's  blinkered approach to IT projects and forward planning.  Basically hand-cuffing themselves to a Fujitsu maintenance contract for the long-term.  

 

 If the PO had ordinary  shareholders instead of the Govt,  would  this fiasco  have at least been seriously  questioned long before the 700th S-PM was convicted ?  Pretty sure it would.   

 

      All Govts from  Tony Blair's onwards   appear to be   guilty of negligence in allowing this damage to continue, probably due to the mantra of  "light-touch oversight of companies delivering public services"

 

 

The PO didn't rate Horizon as the best solution (it wasn't even close) : they had savvy IT people doing the procurement who understoood the mess Fujitsu were proposing, BUT... why did they go down the Fujitsu route ? It's clearly government interference in the ICL/Fujitsu take over and subsequent flotation. We know two of the most senior Fujitsu ecexs had a private neeting with Blair on the matter. Fujitsu had spent millions & years of work but never received a penny and were gettinf p'd off at the impact on their bottom line and the possible impact of the share flotation in the UK. 

[WorldChampions1902]

13 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Does anyone know if the Horizon  application  was coded  from scratch  by Fujitsu in the 1990s  (i.e. totally bespoke)  .... or is it a customised version of an existing (at the time) commercial software package (with modules such as accounting, retail, inventory, customer service etc) which could be configured and managed  by the PO   IT folk ?

 

I'm guessing its the former .... which would  say everything about the PO's  blinkered approach to IT projects and forward planning.  Basically hand-cuffing themselves to a Fujitsu maintenance contract for the long-term.  

 

 If the PO had ordinary  shareholders instead of the Govt,  would  this fiasco  have at least been seriously  questioned long before the 700th S-PM was convicted ?  Pretty sure it would.   

 

      All Govts from  Tony Blair's onwards   appear to be   guilty of negligence in allowing this damage to continue, probably due to the mantra of  "light-touch oversight of companies delivering public services"

 

 

The answer to your question lies in the ICL connection. The 1970s, 80’s and 90’s saw U.K. government procure ICL mainframes over IBM simply because of its support for British industry. Whether it was local or central government, if you looked at their IT systems, they were most likely ICL (later to morph into Fujitsu).
 

Fast forward to the mid 1990’s when Post Office were first looking to computerise their massive systems. This would require a significant recruitment effort to get the correct people onboard with the right technical skills. Those ICL mainframes required COBOL programmers with the various additional ICL-exclusive skills including Data Dictionary, IDMS(X), TPMS(X), SCL and a whole lot more. Where would those come from?
 

Many of the same people working on those myriad of central and local government systems at that time - that’s where. Some were taken on as permanent employees, and many were offered lucrative long term contracts for the duration of projects. Those people became IT contractors. When those contracts expired, some of those contractors returned to their previous employers as contractors and shared tales of their experiences at PO. The movement of those contractors to-and-froing between PO and their former public sector employers in some cases continues to this day. So when the first hints of problems with Horizon started to get out into the media, it didn’t come as a surprise to some.

[Lone Striker]

19 minutes ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

The answer to your question lies in the ICL connection. The 1970s, 80’s and 90’s saw U.K. government procure ICL mainframes over IBM simply because of its support for British industry. Whether it was local or central government, if you looked at their IT systems, they were most likely ICL (later to morph into Fujitsu).
 

Fast forward to the mid 1990’s when Post Office were first looking to computerise their massive systems. This would require a significant recruitment effort to get the correct people onboard with the right technical skills. Those ICL mainframes required COBOL programmers with the various additional ICL-exclusive skills including Data Dictionary, IDMS(X), TPMS(X), SCL and a whole lot more. Where would those come from?
 

Many of the same people working on those myriad of central and local government systems at that time - that’s where. Some were taken on as permanent employees, and many were offered lucrative long term contracts for the duration of projects. Those people became IT contractors. When those contracts expired, some of those contractors returned to their previous employers as contractors and shared tales of their experiences at PO. The movement of those contractors to-and-froing between PO and their former public sector employers in some cases continues to this day. So when the first hints of problems with Horizon started to get out into the media, it didn’t come as a surprise to some.

CHeers for that info. 👍  Yes, I was aware of the widespread use of ICL hardware in local Govt in the 80s.   The continuing devotion of Govt & local Govt to ICL/Fujitsu turned out to be unnecessary  (and unwise, with the benefit of hindsight)  because IBM overtook them in terms of innovation and reliability in the 80s.in both hardware & software.   IBM developed a huge presence in the UK and by 1990 were a  significant employer.    

[WorldChampions1902]

40 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

CHeers for that info. 👍  Yes, I was aware of the widespread use of ICL hardware in local Govt in the 80s.   The continuing devotion of Govt & local Govt to ICL/Fujitsu turned out to be unnecessary  (and unwise, with the benefit of hindsight)  because IBM overtook them in terms of innovation and reliability in the 80s.in both hardware & software.   IBM developed a huge presence in the UK and by 1990 were a  significant employer.    

Indeed!

 

There was a saying at the time that used to pervade the boardrooms of PLC’s which went, “Nobody ever got fired for buying ‘Big Blue’”. Meaning buying IBM was a safe bet - which of course came at a premium.
 

TBF to ICL, they pioneered some cutting-edge stuff, not least powerful search software such as NTS, which was way ahead of its time in the 1980’s. Most certainly though, since early 2000’s ICL hardware hasn’t kept pace.
 

Ironically, the brilliant VME 2900 and 3900 series mainframes of the late 80’s and 90’s ‘locked-in’ many government organisations to Fujitsu kit and that legacy continues to this day, whereby a number of central government departments still find themselves wed to Fujitsu.
 

To emphasise that point, Fujitsu refers to that legacy technology as quote, “the goose that keeps laying golden eggs”. It doesn’t take a genius to work out why. Which is just one of many reasons why, if the U.K. government chooses to banish Fujitsu from all its government services, they will have a Herculean task on their hands which will take many years to complete. All of which comes with massive risks and colossal additional cost to the taxpayer.
 

I might be wrong, but I just don’t see that happening - no matter what happens next.

[Footballfirst]

One of the compensation schemes, applicable to those postmasters who were part of the Group Litigation, appears to be going out its way to minimise payouts.

 

I believe that Jo Hamilton will be appearing in front of a Commons select committee tomorrow to talk about her experience. 

[Footballfirst]

The inquiry resumes tomorrow with evidence from the first of six current and former Fujitsu employees due this week.

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/phase-4-hearing-schedule

 

The Commons Business and Trade Committee is also meeting tomorrow morning to discuss compensation schemes, with several attendees including Alan Bates, Jo Hamilton as well as government, POL and Fujitsu reps.

https://committees.parliament.uk/event/20311

[smallfaces]

On 14/01/2024 at 13:52, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

why has there been no media coverage of this over years and years ?

Computer Weekly from 2004

I recall reading about it when CW was still a printed paper copy.

https://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Post-Office-Horizon-scandal-explained-everything-you-need-to-know

 

BBC Panorama broadcast eventually in 2015 after PO lawyers threatened and delayed.

[skinnybob72]

It might have been mentioned earlier so apologies if I am covering old ground,

 

What I find odd is that they introduced a new computer system and suddenly notice that hundreds of postmasters are on the rob? What are the chances of having such a high number of dishonest employees? Surely someone must have considered that it was highly unlikely and there was something wrong with the data they were seeing from their system? 

[Dawnrazor]

3 minutes ago, skinnybob72 said:

It might have been mentioned earlier so apologies if I am covering old ground,

 

What I find odd is that they introduced a new computer system and suddenly notice that hundreds of postmasters are on the rob? What are the chances of having such a high number of dishonest employees? Surely someone must have considered that it was highly unlikely and there was something wrong with the data they were seeing from their system? 

I've thought about that too, I don’t know how many sub postmasters there were or what percentage were accused, but would the new computer systme be credited with descovering wide spread but previously undetected thefts? 

[The Mighty Thor]

26 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

I've thought about that too, I don’t know how many sub postmasters there were or what percentage were accused, but would the new computer systme be credited with descovering wide spread but previously undetected thefts? 

You'd think that was odd but a number of these SPMs phoned the post office to get them to come and audit their branches due to the discrepancies.

Not really the tactic of a master criminal 🤔 

[Dawnrazor]

14 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

You'd think that was odd but a number of these SPMs phoned the post office to get them to come and audit their branches due to the discrepancies.

Not really the tactic of a master criminal 🤔 

I'm not in anyway trying to defend the Post Office, I just think that, at the start it could look like the new system found out something that the old paper system didn't and it would be easier to skim money in a paper system, I can see why they'd believe a multimillion pound computer.

[SectionDJambo]

1 hour ago, Dawnrazor said:

I'm not in anyway trying to defend the Post Office, I just think that, at the start it could look like the new system found out something that the old paper system didn't and it would be easier to skim money in a paper system, I can see why they'd believe a multimillion pound computer.

You’d like to think that they just thought that the new system was just catching dishonest people, but that was clearly not the case. Nobody was was more dishonest than the Post Office and their investigators for telling every person, that they were prosecuting, that they were the only ones that had shortages due to the Horizon system. An out and out lie.

They must have known, even early on that there had to be a problem with Horizon but carried on regardless. Too lazy to investigate properly.

The ultimate arrogance of power.

I do wonder, though, why none of the post masters got an independent person of social standing to be with them for a week, behind the counter, morning until night, to prove they were not stealing when these digital discrepancies were happening. Then they would have had an independent witness of influence to back them up.

[RobboM]

12 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

Fast forward to the mid 1990’s when Post Office were first looking to computerise their massive systems. This would require a significant recruitment effort to get the correct people onboard with the right technical skills. Those ICL mainframes required COBOL programmers with the various additional ICL-exclusive skills including Data Dictionary, IDMS(X), TPMS(X), SCL and a whole lot more. Where would those come from?
 

Many of the same people working on those myriad of central and local government systems at that time - that’s where. Some were taken on as permanent employees, and many were offered lucrative long term contracts for the duration of projects. Those people became IT contractors. When those contracts expired, some of those contractors returned to their previous employers as contractors and shared tales of their experiences at PO. The movement of those contractors to-and-froing between PO and their former public sector employers in some cases continues to this day. So when the first hints of problems with Horizon started to get out into the media, it didn’t come as a surprise to some.

I cut my teeth on all those ICL specialties in the 80s.
The IDMSx database system was running a Scotland wide NHS database with around 6 million patient details. It could go wrong and end up with corrupt pointers within the data (an internal pointer not something at a programming level). I remember we set aside the weekend to run a database integrity check procedure to correct it. It was the weekend Scotland beat Sweden in the 1990 World Cup as we watched it on a wee portable TV in the computer hall. We closed the live system early on the friday afternoon to start and the folks in the computer hall loaded tape after tape through the night as it requested them. Took till Saturday night to complete the full set of tapes and it asked for the first tape again. So they loaded the first tape again and throughout Saturday and on to Sunday night it processed all the tapes till it completed the last one ..... and asked for the first tape again. We had to abandon it, reload a backup prior to any corruption and re-do weeks of work to catch back up. 
Still, 100% reliable technology eh?
 

Edited January 15 by RobboM