The Post Office Scandal

Between the years 1999 and 2015, more than 900 Post Office managers were accused and prosecuted for false accounting, fraud, and theft of money from their respective branches. The entire ordeal led to devastating impacts for the accused and their loved ones – many of whom faced prison sentences, and later, unemployment, divorce, bankruptcy, and a severe deterioration of mental health.

The evidential basis for these claims?

An accounting and stock-taking software that had technical faults, erroneously displaying shortfalls and discrepancies in the company’s finances.

Horizon, a computer software developed by Japanese company Fujitsu, was introduced to the Post Office for accounting and stock taking purposes in 1999. The electronic system worked via touch-screen, where managers would key in sales, with the accounts being automated as the information was added. This was a significant transition from the previous paper-based system, where discrepancies could be traced.

Users of the software discovered faults almost immediately, with the accounts displaying shortfalls that could not be explained. Despite the complaints, no investigation into the software took place, and instead, prosecutions ensued swiftly. The employment contracts under which the managers operated cast a wide net of liability for any loss and damage to the Post Office and its stock. Thus, many of the accused quickly became the convicted – sentenced to jail, or community service, wearing electronic tags, and living with a criminal record for a crime they did not commit.

Here are two examples, chosen out of hundreds, to highlight the individual human impacts of the convictions:

Seema Misra was sentenced to 15 months in prison for the theft of £74,000, whilst 8 weeks pregnant with her second child in 2010. She describes her experience as ‘horrendous’ and admits to suicidal thoughts and immense guilt and shame despite her innocence. She gave birth to her second child whilst wearing an electronic tag. It took 11 years to prove her innocence, and her conviction was eventually quashed at the Court of Appeal in 2021. Her legal team specifically highlighted the unreliability of the data provided by Horizon’s system.

Alan Bates is the founder of Justice for Sub postmasters Alliance (JFSA), whose campaign is depicted in ITV television series ‘Mr Bates vs the Post Office.’ His contract with the Post Office was terminated after he was unable to pay the several thousands in shortfall caused by the system. In total, he lost around £60,000 in investments he had made on his shop. He gathered evidence and led the group litigation proceedings which took several years, ending with a £42.5 million settlement in 2019, when the High Court acknowledged that the Horizon System was full of ‘bugs, errors, and defects.’ He is considered integral in bringing the Post Office Scandal to light, and relentlessly campaigns for justice till date, as many more convictions are still yet to be overturned.

Described by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak as ‘one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in our nation’s history,’ it is evident that the Post Office Scandal stemmed from numerous systemic and procedural failings. The legal issues are inherently complex and multi-layered. This article will only assess one small fraction of those failings from a litigation perspective.

During the process of litigation, each party is required to reveal documents to one another. This could be anything from bank statements, email and phone records, correspondence and any other information deemed relevant to the case. This ensures fairness and transparency across both parties.

Ahead of criminal trials, appeals, and now the public enquiry, there have been several significant disclosure failings along the way, many of which have been acknowledged by the Post Office’s legal representatives. At the ongoing public enquiry, Gareth Jenkins, an architect of Horizon software, had his appearance delayed twice due to the Post Office’s legal team handing over 3,045 documents the evening before his scheduled appearance. A further two key witness testimonies were delayed due to the alleged ‘discovery’ of 363,000 relevant email records found on an old mailing system that then needed to be examined ahead of questioning.

A failure to disclose the relevant documents in a litigation trial can be catastrophic to both the process and the outcome of the case. Not only are there consequences for failing to comply with disclosure rules set out in Part 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), but the failings add further unnecessary costs and delays associated with surprise evidence and the need for adjournments. Both parties will need to revise their key arguments in full, considering the new information. This highlights how crucial it is that a full and fair disclosure of the relevant documents is made ahead of the trial to ensure that the outcome is decided on a robust and complete understanding of the facts.

The devastating impacts of the wrongful prosecutions will affect the Post Office managers for the rest of their lives. Now, both the Post Office and the Government are tasked with addressing the unfairness, and attempting to quantify, and then compensate the damages done to the eligible 4000 currently estimated. This has already been attempted in various ways. The Group Litigation Order Scheme was created as a claims-based scheme for the members of Mr. Alan Bates’ group litigation, for those who do not have a Horizon-related conviction. The Government also offers a voluntary settlement scheme where an upfront sum of £600,000 is paid without the need to bring a formal complaint to the Post Office. The Post Office launched the Horizon Shortfall Scheme for those affected who may not fall in the other two categories. There are many speculations as to whether the current schemes are satisfactory in delivering justice for the affected.

The public enquiry is currently approaching Phase 5 and 6 – where they will be analysing all the information at hand in response to the scandal. There are new developments each day, and more are anticipated in the future, adding further layers of complexity. The ongoing saga serves as a stark reminder of the need for a vigorous system of checks and balances at every stage of legal proceedings, in order to uphold its integrity to the highest standard.

For more information about the current events see below:

A timeline of key events: https://corporate.postoffice.co.uk/en/horizon-scandal-pages/horizon-it-scandal-timeline/

Updates on the Independent Public Inquiry: https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk

UK Parliament publications: https://committees.parliament.uk/work/97/post-office-and-horizon/publications/

Latest Government data on compensation: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/post-office-horizon-compensation-data-for-2024

Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA): https://www.jfsa.org.uk/about-us.html

Other independent sources: