YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Alan Bates - Day 117 AM (09 April 2024) - Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry

Alan Bates - Day 117 AM (09 April 2024) - Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry — Transcript

by Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry · 23,140 words · 3,533 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:17Mr be can I explain that
0:22um uh one of our assessors is uh joined
0:27in remotely this morning and I
0:30understand that before we begin hearing
0:34evidence you wish to
0:36raise the issue of
0:39disclosure yes um it's a matter of
0:42importance that I wanted to update you
0:44and uh the core participants on before
0:48we call Mr Bates to give his oral
0:50evidence and commence the substance of
0:52the hearings in phases um five and six
0:57the core participants were sent an email
1:00by the solicitor to the inquiry
1:02yesterday that contained relevant
1:04correspondents from the post office uh
1:07that um dates between the 28th of March
1:10and the 5th of April sent to the inquiry
1:14that consists of nine
1:16letters I would propose to give you a
1:19brief background before moving to the
1:21current issue I'm going to try and keep
1:23it as succinct as possible but I also
1:25think that putting the issue the current
1:28issue in context May assist you
1:31so you'll recall that the post office's
1:33late and problematic disclosure of
1:36documents has been a constant theme in
1:39this inquiry resulting in you ordering
1:42that we hear oral evidence from the post
1:44office and it's inquiry representatives
1:47in two disclosure related hearings held
1:50in July and September last year on the
1:5312th of January this year the inquiry
1:56held a further hearing on disclosure and
1:58called post offices recognized legal
2:01representative Mr Jackson of Burg salmon
2:04LLP to give oral evidence you will
2:08recall that by and large the key issue
2:10that was discussed at that hearing was
2:12how the post office had discovered a
2:15further post office repository or data
2:18source known as Microsoft Exchange
2:23365 you'll recall that the
2:25Microsoft Exchange 365 um uh repository
2:30was brought to the inquiry's attention
2:32during the phase four hearings and as a
2:35result the inquiry received numerous
2:38sometimes voluminous last minute
2:40disclosure of documents said to relate
2:43to phase four Witnesses on some
2:45occasions only days before some
2:47witnesses were due to give their
2:49evidence during the January hearing Mr
2:52Jackson Jackson said that such last
2:54minute Disclosure by the post office
2:56during the phase four hearings had been
2:58quote subop
3:00optimal those late disclosures had put
3:03immense pressure on the inquiry Council
3:05and solicitor teams who worked extremely
3:08hard to ensure that the phase four
3:10hearings could in fact continue as
3:13planned in some instances regrettably a
3:16decision was made to postpone or
3:18reschedule a witness at short notice
3:20including you'll remember Mr Jenkins and
3:22Mr Longman both of whom the inquiry has
3:25now scheduled to hear during phases five
3:28and six whilst other matters were
3:31discussed at the hearing held on the n
3:33on the 12th of January the focus was on
3:35the post office's work related to the
3:37Microsoft Exchange
3:40repository on the 31st of January this
3:43year and following the hearing you made
3:45directions which were published on the
3:47inquiry website those directions
3:49provided that firstly a meeting would be
3:52held between the representatives of the
3:53inquiry and the post office to discuss
3:56disclosure issues as soon as reasonably
3:58practicable and in any event well before
4:00the commencement of oral hearings in
4:03phases five and six you directed that
4:05the meeting would be minuted and that
4:07the minute should be agreed and
4:09thereafter disclose the core
4:10participants and secondly you ordered
4:13that a further disclosure hearing should
4:14be con uh convened either before or
4:17during uh phases five and six of the
4:21inquiry on the 28th of February 20124
4:24members of the inquiry team um and
4:27information management team um met met
4:30with the post office and its
4:32Representatives um in this building as
4:34directed by you and the inquiry later
4:37circulated a copy of the minute of that
4:39meeting as agreed with the post office
4:40to core participants I'll not read the
4:43minute in full but I note that paragraph
4:45three of the minute as circulated says
4:48as follows at the outset of the meeting
4:51leading Council to the
4:53inquiry that's me uh noted that from the
4:56inquiry perspective the aim of the
4:58meeting was to ensure that the post
5:00office are doing as much as possible to
5:03ensure phases five and six can proceed
5:05in accordance with the inquiry
5:07timetable Mr Jackson confirmed that the
5:10post office agreed and noticed noted
5:13that the post office's starting point
5:14for the meeting was prioritizing and
5:17clarifying what needed to be done in
5:19line with your directions ensuring
5:21reasonable and proportionate disclosure
5:23whilst minimizing and hopefully avoiding
5:25disruption to the hearing timetable and
5:28the inquiries proceedings
5:30Council to the inquiry confirmed that
5:32the aim was not minimizing disruption to
5:35the hearings but eliminating it given
5:38the post office's highly disruptive late
5:41disclosure in phase four Mr Jackson
5:44confirmed that the post office also
5:45aspired to eliminate disruption wherever
5:48it was possible to do so and that the
5:50post office's recent structural work
5:53should have mitigated the likelihood
5:55that a new disclosure issue would come
5:57from Left
5:58Field in order to achieve that objective
6:01prior to the meeting the inquiry had
6:03provided the post office with a series
6:05of deadlines for any further late
6:07disclosure of Microsoft Exchange
6:09documents in correspondence in summary
6:13quote for all oral Witnesses but for
6:16those listed within the four weeks of
6:17the inquiry timetable the inquiry
6:20directed that any late disclosure must
6:22be provided by the post office no later
6:25than 6 weeks before the date on which
6:27the witness is due to be called to give
6:29evidence for the witnesses listed in the
6:32first four weeks separate specific
6:34deadlines have been set in March
6:372024 the inquiry in the post office also
6:39discussed other what the inquiry
6:41understood to be relatively ad hoc and
6:44less significant potential document
6:46sources I.E other than Microsoft
6:48exchange this was outlined in the
6:50meeting um minute at paragraph 10 quote
6:54Mr Jackson then took the inquiry legal
6:56team through the work completed by the
6:58post office regarding other potential
7:01document sources including mcast SMS and
7:05instant messaging and eia
7:08sources uh brackets corporate devices
7:11servers backup tapes and file stores
7:13post offices Representatives confirmed
7:15that they had sent and were still
7:16sending questionnaires regarding data
7:19sources to for specific former part uh
7:22specific former post office employees
7:24and board members material held by third
7:27party advisers and material Rel relating
7:29to whistleblowing was also discussed in
7:32short the inquiry understood that work
7:34was still ongoing in relation to some of
7:35the additional data sources but should
7:38post office have any material update and
7:40in particular should any particular data
7:42source contain highly relevant material
7:44post office would alert the inquiry as
7:46soon as
7:47possible on Distributing the minute to
7:50core participants the inquiry noted that
7:53as the disclosure process by the post
7:55office was continuing and the disclosure
7:57of additional documents to the inquiry
7:59only recently
8:00started uh I had advised you that the
8:03inquiry legal team ought to continue to
8:06monitor the post office's compliance
8:08with the inquiry disclosure requirements
8:10and report to you at regular intervals
8:13the reporting ought to include whether
8:14the post office continue to meet the
8:16deadlines the inquiry had set in order
8:19to enable the phase five and six all
8:22hearings to proceed and thereafter
8:24continued as scheduled at that stage I
8:27am the solicitor to the inquiry advise
8:28that we consider it premature for the
8:31inquiry to hold a further disclosure
8:32hearing prior to the commencement of
8:35phases five and six today you considered
8:38Our advice and confirm you agreed with
8:39it but in the light of the historic
8:41disclosure issues and the disruptive
8:44nature of the post office's late
8:45disclosure of Microsoft Exchange
8:47material in phase four you noted that
8:50you wanted to keep this on this issue
8:52under very close consideration you also
8:54noted that you would not hesitate to
8:56hold a hearing should it become
8:57necessary in due course throughout
9:00February and March the post office
9:01continued to disclose a large volume of
9:04material as a result of its Microsoft
9:06Exchange disclosure failings and the
9:09remediation exercises put in place to
9:11rectify them the last of these
9:13Productions was made on the 22nd of
9:14March
9:1520124 can I turn to the present issue
9:20then on Thursday the 28th of March the
9:23legal representatives for the Post
9:24Office notified the inquiry that the
9:27post office would be providing the
9:28inquiry with documents that day and the
9:31following week in relation to Witnesses
9:34giving evidence during the first week of
9:36phases five and six of the hearings and
9:38in the latter part of April or documents
9:42which uh uh might otherwise be quote of
9:45interest to the inquiry the volume of
9:48documents was said to be in the low
9:49hundreds and no more than a thousand and
9:52to and to have come from quote a last
9:55check scoping exercise particularly in
9:59Rel to documents from third party
10:01advisers some such documents were in
10:04response to the inquiry section 21
10:06notice issued as long ago as the 21st of
10:09July
10:102023 known as section
10:12213 others were not responsive to a
10:15notice or a request from the inquiry but
10:18were otherwise of
10:20Interest as I say section 213 was sent
10:23by the inquiry to the post office back
10:25on the 21st of July last year in which
10:28the inquiry mandated that the post
10:30office disclosed several categories of
10:32material relevant to phases five and six
10:35of the inquiry I.E documents addressing
10:38what was defined in the notice as
10:39relevant issues the relevant issues
10:42including reviews of horizon carried out
10:44by erston Young deoe KPMG and Link lers
10:49the notice expressly stated the
10:52documents um that the documents be those
10:55created by sent to or received by that
10:59recorded a conversation or meeting
11:01involving or otherwise made reference to
11:0519 specific individuals within the post
11:08office the individuals named in the
11:10notice included but were not limited to
11:13Paula venel Alice Perkins OLN Lions
11:17Angela ven Bogard Mark Davis Tim Parker
11:20and Susan
11:22kryon at
11:24520 5:32 on Thursday the 28th of March
11:28the Post Office Center cover letter for
11:30a production of 1,071 documents the
11:33cover letter noticed that the post
11:35office had quote initiated two Assurance
11:39exercises the first being a review of
11:41specific third-party material sorry
11:44third party advisor material and the
11:46second being search and review of email
11:49inboxes of personal assistance PAs to
11:53the section 213
11:56individuals and other email inboxes of
12:00potential relevance were considered
12:02appropriate for this
12:04exercise the letter further explained
12:07that the post office is quote section
12:09213 search methodology focused on the
12:12relevant individuals data sources
12:15thirdparty advisor files and personal
12:18assistant emails have previously been
12:20reviewed for other Rule 9es and section
12:2221s as explained in previous dis interim
12:25disclosure statements however as part of
12:27assurance post office has now run such
12:30searches across specific third party
12:33advisor files as was set out in the
12:35letter so such thirdparty advisers
12:39included those who the inquiry had
12:40specifically named in the section 21
12:43notice including link lers deoe and
12:48KPMG the post office explained that
12:50within the production of 1,071 documents
12:54788 of them were said to be relevant to
12:56section
12:57213 of which 583 related to Witnesses
13:01and 15 documents were said to be quote
13:04High um of high relevance and
13:08material 44 documents were said to be
13:11documents of Interest being documents
13:13that the post office said were not
13:15directly responsive to the notice but
13:17were otherwise of relevance to the
13:19inquiry's terms of reference of those
13:21six related to Witnesses the remaining
13:23239 documents were family members of
13:27such
13:28documents the post office noted uh that
13:31a number of the documents could be
13:33apparent duplicates of previous
13:35documents already produced but that
13:37information to assist in identifying
13:39duplicates would be provided separately
13:42so the Easter break then took uh Place
13:44between Friday the 29th of March and
13:46Monday the 1st of April at around 10:00
13:49a.m. on the 2nd of April the post
13:51office's legal representative contacted
13:53the inquiry legal team to note that
13:55further documents were to be expected
13:58the post office requested a meeting with
14:00the inquiry to provide an update and
14:03discuss how the post office intended to
14:04disclose further
14:06documents at 11:47 on the 2nd of April
14:10the inquiry confirmed it would be
14:11grateful if the post office could please
14:13provide the inquiry with the information
14:15it should have or would be assisted in
14:17have in having in relation to the late
14:20disclosure that was relevant to hearings
14:22or Witnesses this week at 6:58 p.m. that
14:26day the post office sent the inquiry for
14:29Page Letter seeking quote to provide a
14:31brief update regarding the post office's
14:33further urgent witness focused review to
14:36best assist the inquiry with anticipated
14:38timings for further Productions that
14:41letter has been provided to cor
14:42participants and I'm not going to repeat
14:44it however it was in this letter
14:46received after hours on Tuesday that the
14:48inquiry was informed that the post
14:50office intended to make quote a small
14:52number of further Burgess salmon filled
14:54Fisher Productions in the near future of
14:57further documents relevant to to phases
14:59five and six uh it was said that most
15:01will be directly relevant to Witnesses
15:03scheduled to appear later in April and
15:05then in May to July but a limited amount
15:08will relate to Witnesses scheduled to
15:10appear during this week I.E starting
15:13today the letter said that the post
15:15office anticipated that the documents
15:17that relate to Witnesses appearing this
15:19week are likely to be low in number and
15:21or likely not likely to contain many
15:25documents that will give rise to
15:26potential questions for those Witnesses
15:29but will rather particularly for
15:31non-post office or Royal maale group
15:32Witnesses for the most part be documents
15:35that refer to them importantly the
15:38letter said that the post office
15:39anticipated making yet further
15:41Productions of material uh following
15:44five further reviews it confirmed that
15:47the reviews were not related to the
15:49Microsoft Exchange remediation process
15:53but as noted already the documents were
15:55relevant to phases five and six and to
15:58Witnesses sched to be called as early as
16:01this week those five reviews were
16:03summarized by the post office as follows
16:06first the third party advisor and
16:08personal assistant review secondly the
16:11NAS drive and file share review thirdly
16:15the supplementary precautionary mcast
16:18review arising from the five phase five
16:21and six remediation
16:23review the hard copy documents review
16:26and finally the Patrick Bork 17 mcast
16:30data review the post office did not
16:32provide the numbers of documents for
16:34Witnesses um uh commencing this week
16:38although they anticipated providing
16:40those numbers
16:41shortly between the 2nd of April and the
16:435ifth of April the inquiry received
16:45seven further letters about um one or
16:48more of those reviews those letters have
16:51also been provided to core participants
16:54and I shouldn't repeat
16:55them within those letters the post
16:58office disclosed the number of
16:59additional documents as follows on the
17:013rd of April 196 documents were
17:04disclosed said to be from the Nash Drive
17:07the post office said they were
17:08continuing to collect material from the
17:10post office file share that might be
17:12relevant to the phase five and six
17:15hearings however the inquiry understands
17:17such a measure to be out of an abundance
17:19of caution also on the 3rd of April
17:223,188 documents were disclosed said to
17:25be from quote uh further material Iden
17:29ified from third party advisor files and
17:31material identified as part of a second
17:33Assurance review involving searches of
17:36email inboxes of personal assistance to
17:39section 213 individuals and other
17:41inboxes of potential relevance where
17:44considered appropriate this was further
17:46to the
17:47171 document already disclosed to the
17:49inquiry back on the 28th of March on
17:53Friday the 5th of April so the Friday
17:55that's just passed the post office
17:57disclosed 18 89 documents following a
18:00review of post office's hard copy
18:02material 200 documents following an
18:05additional precautionary mcast review a
18:08further 374 documents were disclosed
18:11said to be the third tranch of documents
18:13including quote further material
18:16identified as part of a second Assurance
18:18review involving searches of email
18:21inboxes of personal assistance to
18:23section 213 individuals this was in
18:26addition to the 1071 documents disclosed
18:29on the 28th of March and the 3,188
18:32documents disclosed 2 days further the
18:35post office said that it was now quote
18:37urgently reviewing data for personal
18:39assistance to the section 213
18:42individuals who are witnesses and are
18:44due to give evidence from the 23rd of
18:46April onwards and they anticipated they
18:49would provide the documents to the
18:50inquiry on or before this Friday the
18:5312th of
18:54April so taking the five
18:57reviews about which the inquiry was W um
19:00informed on the 2nd of April in turn I
19:03understand the position to be as follows
19:05the third party adviser and personal
19:07assistant review has seen the disclosure
19:10to of a total of
19:124,633 documents since the 28th of March
19:15alone the post office has told us that
19:17that review is not yet complete the NAS
19:21drive and file share saw the disclosure
19:23of 196 documents from the NAS drive last
19:26week but the review is ongoing in
19:29relation to other
19:30Witnesses the supplementary
19:32precautionary mcast review arising from
19:35the phase 56 remediation review saw the
19:39disclosure of 200 documents but that's
19:41now sent to be
19:42complete the hard copy documents review
19:45saw the disclosure of 189 documents last
19:48week it's unclear if that review is
19:50complete or remains ongoing the Patrick
19:53Bor 2017 mcast data work appears to be
19:57ongoing we understand and the data is
19:59being collected and processed urgently
20:01the volume and timing of such disclosure
20:04is unknown but the post office said that
20:06they were working to disclose any
20:08further documents well in advance of uh
20:11Patrick bork's hearing on the 7th of
20:15May so we in the inquiry team wish to
20:18inform you and the core participants of
20:21uh these developments without delay they
20:25present issues with which the inquiry
20:28has become um extremely and
20:31unfortunately familiar uh with over the
20:34past three
20:35years I should also put the uh
20:37developments in a wider context since
20:40the end of the phase four hearings alone
20:44so that's since the closing submissions
20:47on the 2nd of February
20:492024 the post office has disclosed
20:5373,74 documents to the inquiry of which
20:57the inquiry legal team have
20:59characterized
21:0167,2 documents as possibly relating to
21:05phases five and six of the inquiry the
21:09inquiry has received um documents from
21:11other providers during that time orbit
21:13none as substantial in volume as the
21:15post office and the inquiry information
21:18management team have confirmed that as
21:20of late yesterday at least
21:2378,2 documents including but not limited
21:27to the post office's documents
21:29that likely or potentially relate to
21:31phases five and six of the inquiry may
21:34fall for disclosure to core
21:36participants the matters that the
21:38inquiry is investigating span two
21:40decades and a number of uh detailed
21:43issues in order to proceed with hearings
21:45in a meaningful way the inquiry has
21:48needed to prioritize its disclosure to
21:50core participants and will continue to
21:52do so it's with this in mind that we and
21:55the inquiry team specifically set
21:57deadlines for the receipt of the late
22:00exchange material likely to be relevant
22:03to the phase five and six um hearings on
22:06a witness by witness and week by week
22:09basis in order to ensure that the
22:11hearings could go ahead as planned this
22:14was communicated to the post office and
22:16the inquiry understood that the post
22:18office considered that it had completed
22:21its phase 56 exchange remediation
22:23exercises by the 22nd of
22:26March the obligation of disclosure to
22:29the inquiry is of course ongoing the
22:31inquiry had expected anded anticipated
22:35ongoing disclosure from providers of
22:36documents in certain instances documents
22:40can be found late hard copies or
22:42electronic files or messages may turn up
22:45in unexpected
22:46devices but the issues that the post
22:49office's disclosure to this inquiry have
22:51presented have been much more than minor
22:54ad hoc or additional disclosure in
22:58particular
22:59the post office's Assurance review as it
23:02has called it of personal assistant
23:05emails and other inboxes of potential
23:08relevance in response to the inquiry
23:11section 213 notice of last year is very
23:15concerning as I say that notice was sent
23:17in July of last year it lists the number
23:21of senior key post office uh
23:24individuals such individuals would
23:26undoubtedly communicate VI their
23:28personal
23:30assistance the inboxes of what are
23:33called uh inboxes of potential relevance
23:36have not been explained by the post
23:38office so we don't know to whom they
23:42relate even more concerning the inquiry
23:44emphasized that the inquire that the
23:47post office ought to apply a common
23:48sense approach to senior custodians as
23:52far back as a meeting with the post
23:54office in April
23:572023 so you asked for your team closely
24:00to monitor the post office's disclosure
24:03to the inquiry we have done so and will
24:05continue to do so whilst these new
24:08developments
24:10are to use a parliamentary word
24:13unwelcome your team is not
24:16unprepared we're committed to doing all
24:19that we can to ensure that the hearings
24:22can go ahead as planned and subject to
24:26your views that's what we intend to do
24:29to continue with the
24:31hearings the alternative further delay
24:35to allow the post office to get its
24:37disclosure house in order is not one
24:40which is
24:41acceptable it of course follows from
24:43that approach that there may be a need
24:46to recall some witnesses to ask them
24:48questions about documents which have not
24:51been processed in time for them to be
24:54asked questions about such documents in
24:57the coming weeks so that's the the
24:59approach that we um intend to take and
25:02that's all I say at the moment about
25:04this latest late post office
25:07disclosure thank you thank you Mr Beer
25:12um the substance or a summary of what Mr
25:17Beer has just explained publicly was
25:21provided to me uh late last week
25:25together with Mr beers and his team
25:28team's advice that despite the problems
25:31which have occurred we should carry
25:34on I've had the weekend to think about
25:38that and also whether it would be
25:41necessary to invite core participants to
25:44provide their views to me about that and
25:48the decision I have reached is as
25:50follows first of all I don't wish to
25:53hear from the
25:54co-participants and secondly we're going
25:56to carry on
25:59now that is um perhaps a bold thing to
26:03do because it does mean that there may
26:07be occasions in which Witnesses are
26:10giving evidence where the documents
26:13haven't caught up with the witnesses so
26:16to speak and that is a highly
26:18undesirable State of
26:21Affairs but as Mr Beer has explained
26:25that can be cured or be it with some
26:29cost to the witness by recalling them if
26:33necessary the alternative is to have a
26:36substantial
26:37break and in my opinion dare I say
26:41judgment even though I'm not a judge
26:43anymore uh that is not
26:48desirable make no mistake everyone I
26:52understand fully
26:55that the problems with disclosure
26:59are capable of creating very significant
27:02pressures for all the participants in
27:05the
27:07inquiry but protracted adjournments so
27:11as to ensure that every relevant
27:14disclosable document is in the hands of
27:17all core participants prior to a witness
27:20giving EV evidence would also cause very
27:24damaging stresses to all the
27:27participants
27:29and so I have to exercise judgment and
27:33um come to a balanced
27:36decision and as I said my view is that
27:39at the moment the problems are not such
27:42that we need to call a halt and my um
27:47intention is to continue with the
27:50evidence sessions in accordance with our
27:53published timetable so far as is
27:56reasonably possible
27:59I stress as Mr Beer has stressed that
28:03the monitoring of disclosure which I
28:05promised would continue throughout will
28:08continue
28:10throughout and if I deem it appropriate
28:13I will certainly use one of our days off
28:16a Monday or sometimes a Friday to hold a
28:20disclosure hearing so there's a threat
28:23to you
28:27all
28:28I want to publicly acknowledge and this
28:31is the last of the observations which I
28:33wish to
28:35make that at least in part I may be to
28:39blame for some of the problems relating
28:43to
28:45disclosure there may be some in this
28:47room in fact there are some in this
28:51room and certainly there are some in the
28:54inquiry team who consider that the time
28:58tables which I set for the hearing of
29:01evidence are unrealistically
29:04tight on any view the volume of material
29:08to be disclosed to the inquiry and then
29:11by the inquiry to core participants is
29:15enormous I acknowledge that if the
29:18hearing phases had been spread out with
29:22greater breaks between between them as
29:25some have
29:27advocated then some of the disclosure
29:30pressures would be
29:32eased however I am acutely conscious
29:37that this public inquiry has been in
29:40existence for very nearly 3
29:44years although by the standards of some
29:48inquiries that is a comparatively short
29:51period of
29:53time I am unshakable in my belief that
29:57this inquiry should not last for a day
30:00longer than is strictly
30:04necessary and if that means that the
30:07pace at which we proceed causes
30:10significant work pressures for us all
30:14then I'm afraid that's a price we're all
30:16going to have to
30:18pay so thank you for your words Mr Beer
30:22and I think we're ready for some
30:23evidence well just before we do that can
30:26I turn to a brighter nose all right a
30:28brighter note thank you um as you know
30:30sir and was publicly announced um by the
30:34inquiry on the 9th of January this year
30:37the inquiry um jointly appointed Dame
30:40Sandra Dawson and Dr Katie Stewart to
30:44the role of governance expert
30:46Witnesses uh Dame Sandra is Professor
30:49emerita of management studies University
30:52College Cambridge and a fellow formerly
30:54the master of Sydney Sussex College
30:57Cambridge she acted as an expert member
31:01on organization governance and
31:02Leadership on the expert Advisory Group
31:05on the Windrush Lessons Learned review
31:08and regularly advises on leadership
31:10governance and organization structure Dr
31:13Stuart is a policy governance expert and
31:16was a visiting scholar at at Sydney
31:19Sussex College Cambridge Dame Sandra and
31:22Dr Stewart have been instructed to
31:25produce two reports addressing issues
31:27Rel relating to leadership management
31:29and governance the first of those
31:32reports has been disclosed to core
31:33participants it stated the 27th of March
31:372024 and has the UR expg
31:42606 it sets out the expected and best
31:45practice in relation to the standards of
31:47governance management and leadership in
31:50companies such as the post office in the
31:52period 1999 to
31:552019 it's a substantial body of work
31:57work being 133 pages in length including
32:00its
32:01appendices a copy of that um report the
32:04first report is to be treated as being
32:07having read into the record today and
32:09therefore a copy will be uploaded to the
32:12inquiry's website
32:14today Dame Sandra and Dr Stewart will be
32:17considering the evidence given in phases
32:19five and six of the inquiry both the
32:22written evidence and the oral evidence
32:24and will produce a second report in the
32:26light of that evidence when phases five
32:28and six have
32:30concluded thank you Mr Beer I think we
32:33can all agree that is a brighter
32:36note uh can I call Alan Bates please yes
32:39of course ah he's
32:47appeared sorry repeat after me I swear
32:51by Mighty God I swear by Al Mighty God
32:54that the evidence I shall give that the
32:56evidence I shall give shall be the truth
32:57truth shall be the truth the whole truth
33:00the whole truth and nothing but the
33:01truth and nothing but the truth thank
33:03you very
33:08much good morning Mr Bat good morning my
33:11name is Jason beer as you know and I ask
33:13questions on behalf of the inquiry can
33:15you tell us your full name please uh
33:17Alan bat thank you very much for
33:20previously providing a comprehensive and
33:22detailed witness statement to the
33:24inquiry and for coming to London today
33:26to give evidence to assist the inquiry
33:29um in its work can we start by looking
33:31at your witness statement please um it's
33:33the only hard copy document I'm going to
33:35be asking you to refer to it's got for
33:38the purposes of the transcript the UR
33:40win
33:423051 100 and it's up on the screen it's
33:4659 pages long um excluding the exhibits
33:50page and is dated the 29th of February
33:53um I picked up a couple of typos I
33:56wonder whether we could just correct
33:57those first if we look at page
34:0223 and the foot of page 23 at uh
34:06paragraph
34:0975
34:11um uh it says the CW were not involved
34:14in this period as I recall the nfsp in
34:17the letter should that say from Colin
34:21Baker yes it's sure dated the 13th of
34:23January so cross out the words January
34:25200 and put in the words Baker the word
34:28Baker yes yes please and page
34:3632 uh paragraph
34:49102 it says in my letter to Mr O'Neal
34:52dated the 9th of September 2009 I think
34:55that should be
34:562004
34:59the original
35:00letter yes it would be yes yes so can
35:04that be corrected to 2004 thank you if
35:07you can turn to page 59 please in the
35:09hard copy um do we see your signature
35:15there yes you do and with those two
35:17typos corrected are the contents of the
35:19statement true to the best of your
35:21knowledge and belief they are thank you
35:23very much Mr Bates I'm not going to ask
35:25you questions about every aspect of your
35:27witness statement because it's long and
35:30detailed and a copy of it will be
35:32uploaded to the inquiry's website today
35:34so the public can um read it can I start
35:37the statement can come down please um
35:39can I start with um a little bit about
35:41your
35:42background uh you tell us in your
35:44witness statement it's paragraph five no
35:46need to turn it up that before you
35:49became a sub postmaster you worked for
35:5112 years in the Heritage and Leisure
35:54project management sector is that right
35:56that's correct
35:58and is it right that in the course of um
36:00that work you developed experience in
36:03electronic point of sale EOS systems yes
36:07I do you developed experience in the
36:10development of site specific business
36:13software and the provision of Staff IT
36:15training that's
36:17correct to what extent if any did that
36:20background assist you when you became a
36:23sub postmaster and were later required
36:27to work with the Horizon it system I
36:30think when Horizon came in I think I was
36:32quite positive about it um because I I
36:35knew what technology and these sorts of
36:37systems could do so um I I was quite
36:41positive but I I found it a bit
36:43frustrating once the system was
36:45installed and we were operating I found
36:47there were many shortcomings in the
36:50system and um knowing what these systems
36:54could do it just seemed a bit of a lost
36:57opport
36:58opportunity you were a sub postmaster I
37:01think between the 31st of March 1998 and
37:05the 5th of November
37:082003 yes uh by my Reckoning so a period
37:11of five and a half years or so it's
37:15correct and by comparison if you don't
37:17mind me saying to other sub postmasters
37:19that's a relatively short period isn't
37:21it it
37:25is sorry it is but it's due to post
37:28office not to myself
37:31quite and also I suppose ironically you
37:34spent more than four times that period
37:38campaigning oh
37:42yes and why has that been
37:45necessary um because uh well initially
37:50it was because post office terminated my
37:52contract giving me 3 months notice and
37:55not giving me a reason for doing so um
37:59purely because in my belief is that it
38:02is I kept raising problems and concerns
38:04over its Horizon system due to a number
38:08of faults I'd found over the years you
38:11tell us in your statement that you spent
38:13um that period of time Seeking Justice
38:17accountability and redress for not just
38:21yourself and your uh wife but also on
38:26behalf um of a much wider group of
38:28people is that right yes I did um we um
38:33once I'd started my individual little
38:36campaign in
38:38there we we found others along the way
38:41and eventually we all joined up and so
38:44the jfsa was born and onwards me the
38:50campaign you say in your witness
38:52statement that you have dedicated this
38:54part of my life to this cause
38:59is that how it has seemed or felt first
39:03firstly that it's required dedication
39:06but secondly it's a
39:08cause yeah I think it's also
39:10stubbornness as well but um
39:12it's I mean as you got to meet people
39:17and realized it wasn't just yourself and
39:20you saw the harm and Injustice that had
39:22been um descended upon them uh you it
39:27was something that you felt you had to
39:29deal with sorry um it's something you
39:33felt you had to deal with it's something
39:35you couldn't put down and um you had the
39:38supports of the rest of the group in
39:40there as well
39:42sorry that's I do take a moment to uh
39:45clear the frog in your throat yeah I
39:46have
39:48and hopefully not a Welsh one there
39:51sorry talking of which um you ran a post
39:54office in North Wales um I did what was
39:58the name of the post office and in which
40:00town was it it's craigon post office in
40:03sedo just say that
40:05again codon post office in Fido and what
40:10kind of post office like me teasing him
40:12about I see okay what kind of post
40:15office was it it was well it it was a
40:19three position counter in the it was uh
40:22when we first um bought the property it
40:24was very much at the back of the the
40:26property in there and was a bit rund
40:28down and it also had another side and um
40:32a retail side to the business which was
40:35a whole variety of things crafts
40:38knitting um habitatery a whole range of
40:42things so for the first year or two we
40:45just ran the business as it was and
40:48slowly developed it from there putting
40:50on a big extension up updating the um
40:55updating a lot of the stock but more
40:58importantly we actually saw it as a a
41:01big potential to to grow the Post Office
41:03business we brought it right to the
41:05front of the building and with a a large
41:09queuing area for for people
41:12unfortunately it seems what post offices
41:14need and um uh so we we invested quite
41:19heavily in developing the post office
41:21and that was at the time Horizon came in
41:24thank you and I think you and your wife
41:25suzan were 44 years old when you took it
41:28over is that right about that yes would
41:31have been you tell us in your witness
41:33statements that there's no need to turn
41:34it up it's paragraphs 9 to13 in summary
41:37terms um about your decision to become a
41:41sub postmaster your decision to pick
41:43this post office uh your hopes and
41:46aspirations and the process by which you
41:49applied and by which your application
41:52was approved I just want to look at an
41:55account you've given in the past in more
41:57detail about that if we may um can we
42:00look please on the screen at poll
42:02302
42:134194 this is a witness statement you
42:16made in the course of the um group
42:18litigation proceedings in the high court
42:21and we'll deal more about that later
42:23today is that right yes it is yes and we
42:27can see the date on it in the top right
42:30um 9th of August
42:322018 and so this witness statement was
42:35made for the purposes of what came to be
42:38known as the common issues trial is that
42:40right that's
42:42correct and so the process by which you
42:45applied to become a sub postmaster the
42:48documents that were or in fact were not
42:52given to you were important issues and
42:55addressed in this Witness statement in
42:57very de great detail is that right that
43:00is right yeah can we look please at uh
43:02page
43:07three and pick up at paragraph 11
43:12please you say a key attraction to
43:15working with post office was that it
43:17would provide secure employment based
43:20upon the fact it provides a community
43:22service and has an established brand in
43:25the community from among the various
43:27small business options available a post
43:29office branch would in my mind be a safe
43:32option I was also encouraged by the fact
43:34I could run a secondary business such as
43:37a retail shop alongside the post office
43:39branch that sets out in summary your
43:42reasons for picking post office as a um
43:46a future Enterprise with your wife is
43:48that right that's
43:51correct now um paragraph 12 on this page
43:56wres through to um paragraph 23 on page
44:01five addresses the initial inquiries you
44:05made with the existing or the outgoing
44:08sub postmaster Peter Savage I think his
44:10name was that's correct um and the
44:13Planned visits that you made and indeed
44:15some unannounced visits that you made to
44:19the post office in question as part of
44:21your due diligence is that right that's
44:23correct can we just look at paragraph 21
44:27on page five
44:35please you say that you do remember that
44:37during one of my visits um to the branch
44:41Mr Savage explained that he had a
44:43practice of keeping unders and overs in
44:46a tin in the safe as a system to deal
44:49with any odd shorts or overs I remember
44:53this CU I thought it to be rather casual
44:55and unusual for a business never ever
44:57this I was not particularly concerned
44:58and considered it to be a matter for Mr
45:00Savage and his staff and I didn't
45:02understand it to involve large figures
45:05or to be um uh problematic is that right
45:09that is right and it was very odd and
45:11very strange I thought for a for a
45:13cash-based um system uh where you didn't
45:16actually record anywhere the amounts um
45:20and you didn't you didn't provide post
45:23office with returns of the position each
45:25week in there as well but you know that
45:27seemed to be the way it operated but
45:29these were small sums of money is that
45:30they were small sums of money yeah uh on
45:34um from paragraph 24 if we scroll down
45:38please um right through to paragraph 33
45:41at the bottom of page 7even you deal
45:44with the agreement to purchase the post
45:46office yes yes and then if we go forward
45:49to page eight
45:55please um from paragraph 34 on this
46:00page right through to U paragraph 86 on
46:04page 19 you deal with the following
46:07issues I'm just going to summarize them
46:09without reading the text firstly the
46:12application to the post office to be a
46:14sub
46:15postmaster secondly the interview at the
46:18regional office in Banger that you and
46:20your um wife
46:23attended thirdly um the confirmation
46:27that your application had been
46:29successful and the material that you
46:32were then given yes if we just go
46:34forward to page 15
46:42please and look at paragraph 62 you say
46:46at no stage during the process of my
46:49application appointment and branch
46:51opening was I ever um sent a copy of the
46:54sub postmaster contract I first obtained
46:57a copy of the sub postm contract much
46:59later in circumstances I explain below
47:03at no point during my appointment
47:04process was it mentioned or explained to
47:06me that the sub postmaster contract
47:08which was a lengthy document of 114
47:11Pages governed the terms of my um
47:15appointment now we're hear later that is
47:18this right that the post office robustly
47:21challenged you on that issue alongside
47:23other issues at the trial and then the
47:26trial judge then Mr Justice Fraser held
47:29that you were an honest witness that you
47:31were telling the truth and that like
47:33many other sub poost Masters you did not
47:36receive a copy of this document it's
47:39correct you address later in this
47:42section of your witness statement your
47:43initial classroom uh training and then
47:47lastly the transfer of the branch to you
47:50and the opening of it correct correct
47:53yes can we turn to the um introduction
47:57of the Horizon system into your
48:00branch and can we go to your inquiry
48:02witness statement
48:04please at page
48:22five at paragraph
48:2514 you tell us that in in October 2000
48:29the post office introduced Horizon at my
48:31branch and imposed upon me a requirement
48:35that I use it to record transactions at
48:37the branch and to submit uh Branch
48:40accounts to the best of my recollection
48:42Horizon was installed from the 2nd of
48:44October 2000 I remember the branch was
48:47closed around this time to um allow for
48:51this so Horizon installed um under two
48:57years after you took up uh the position
49:00of sub postmaster of this office correct
49:03and then scroll down to 15
49:06please you say um I didn't have any
49:09involvement in discussions about the
49:11introduction of horizon I had no choice
49:14but to accept and accommodate this
49:15variation obviously this was also a huge
49:18change in how I operated the branch as
49:20many of the previous processes that I've
49:22been trained on and had operated at the
49:24branch were made obsolete not only only
49:27for me but also for my um
49:32assistants um paragraph 16
49:37please you say um when Horizon was
49:40introduced given my background with
49:42electronic Point of Sales Systems uh I
49:45regarded the introduction of Horizon at
49:47first as a positive Innovation and
49:49you've told us that in summary this
49:51morning however I did not expect there
49:54to be any apparent discrepancies shown
49:55on the system that I was unable to
49:58identify the cause of and resolve either
50:02by myself or with support or information
50:05from post office limited certainly I did
50:07not expect discrepancies to occur for
50:10which the post office would try and hold
50:12me liable without the cause being
50:15investigated and established to that
50:18point I'd been preparing accounts
50:20manually using the capture system just
50:24going back to um at what you say on the
50:28previous
50:31page you say in the third line I didn't
50:34expect there to be any apparent
50:36discrepancies shown on the system that
50:38you were unable to identify the cause of
50:41and
50:42resolve what do you mean by
50:46that well
50:49um I expected to be able to track down
50:54any
50:55transaction uh
50:57um that had undertaken myself or my
51:00staff had undertaken at the
51:02branch um One Way or Another there are a
51:06variety of ways of interrogating systems
51:09and the data on the systems and I
51:11presumed that the system would enable
51:14you to do that at the outset but um I
51:18mean in in in previous roles you know
51:21before post office I'd use something
51:24like Crystal Reports on software pack
51:26PES to
51:28to um to extract information using
51:31certain parameters in there but there
51:34was very little flexibility in Horizon
51:37as I saw it at that time um for reports
51:40that you could control the the um
51:44parameters of your searches for there
51:47were a set of reports don't get me wrong
51:49there were a set there were already
51:50built into the system but they were
51:53quite restrictive in there and
51:57um it it did seem to cause problems and
52:01um we see this as a feature in the
52:03correspondence that you we're going to
52:05turn to a little later sure um today and
52:07a constant theme that you pursued I.E
52:11the visibility of transactions and the
52:15auditability of
52:17transactions um from a sub postmaster's
52:19perspective was lacking in the Horizon
52:21system is that correct very much so
52:25yeah uh can we um uh turn please back to
52:29your high court statement poll 302
52:384194 and um turn to page 32
52:55please and can we pick it up at
52:58paragraph um
53:03144 uh you say that you've been referred
53:06to a part of the post office's um um
53:09defense and to its defense and counter
53:12claim and you say that you understand
53:15from this that the post office's case
53:18for the purposes of the common issues
53:19trial is quote that losses do not arise
53:24in the ordinary course of things with
53:26without fault or error on the part of
53:28sub poost Masters and their assistants
53:31and um this is what the post office said
53:34it would not be right to infer or
53:36presume that a shortfall and loss was
53:38caused instead by a bug or error in
53:42Horizon and quote that the truth of
53:44whether a shortfall did or did not
53:47result from losses for which the sub
53:48postmaster was responsable quote lies
53:52peculiarly within the knowledge of sub
53:54postmasters as the person with the the
53:56responsibility for branch operation and
54:00the conduct of transactions in branches
54:04you say um these things were in my own
54:07experience very far from the case and
54:10then you set out from your own
54:11experience
54:14um by comparison um what you
54:20say by reference to what the post office
54:24suggest can we look at paragraph 145
54:29please you say I um didn't expect there
54:33to be any apparent short Falls that you
54:35were unable to identify that's
54:36essentially what you said in your um
54:38inquiry witness
54:40statement and then
54:4246 you say one of my fundamental
54:46concerns when Horizon was introduced
54:49which you clearly communicated through
54:51various letters was the lack of
54:53transparency and control available able
54:56to me in reviewing transactions when
54:59trying to
55:00balance you refer to a letter and you
55:03say I could not fully access data that I
55:06needed in order to properly track and if
55:09necessary to correct
55:11transactions um your concerns came to a
55:14head in December 2000 following a
55:17particularly difficult balance you were
55:19therefore dependent you say upon the
55:22post office for this sort of
55:23information and therefore in order to
55:26Asain Ain the cause of any apparent
55:27shortfall and whether it was in fact a
55:29real
55:31loss and then you say in 147 although
55:34Post Office later moved to monthly
55:36balancing during your tenure you were
55:38required to produce weekly accounts
55:41which meant you had to conduct a balance
55:42on a weekly basis on a Wednesday when
55:45carrying out this balance on Wednesday
55:47the 13th of December 2000 The Horizon
55:51system showed there was an unexplained
55:52variance of over 66,000 relating to um
55:57gyro
55:59deposits that can come down thank you so
56:02the first substantial unexplained
56:04variant was over over £6,000 is that
56:07right yes and it was only a number of
56:09weeks after the system had gone live I
56:12was going to ask you that um system live
56:16um about the 2nd of October we're now
56:18talking about the 13th of December so
56:21two months or so yeah after the system
56:23had been installed this variance arose
56:32yes um if we go back to um paragraph 148
56:36please of poll 302
56:484194 so over the page
56:55please
56:57thank you you say as you mentioned in a
56:59paragraph above I contacted the helpline
57:02seeking support and help as to why this
57:04apparent variance had occurred they were
57:07unable to assist in any meaningful way I
57:09tried to investigate the matter myself I
57:11printed various reports from two of my
57:14three counter terminals I left the third
57:16terminal for use to serve customers as
57:19we were very busy in the branch with
57:20customers queuing out of um the door um
57:24you cross refer back to paragraph 1431
57:28I'm not going to um go there but
57:30essentially you tell us in that
57:31paragraph that on that day the 13th of
57:34December 2000 you contacted the helpline
57:37seven times is that right that's correct
57:39and one of the calls was um about an
57:41hour an hour in length yeah and were
57:44they have any assistance at all in that
57:46um in those seven goals not really
57:50um that stating the bleeding obvious I
57:53think really is is is one description on
57:55my use but I
57:58it it was all things that I'd tried um
58:02did they suggest anything no and the the
58:05the other impression I got is they they
58:07they couldn't access the system any
58:09further than I could at that
58:12time and just by way of an aside um I
58:15think you tell us in your um uh
58:18statement that post office records
58:20subsequently disclosed to you show that
58:23in the 2year and 9 Monon period period
58:27um up until um February up until
58:31November 2003 I when your contract was
58:36terminated uh you and your assistants
58:38made 507 calls to the helpline
58:42correct of which 85 related to Horizon
58:46and balancing problems
58:49yes and that you found the helpl line to
58:52be ineffective indeed of no help um very
58:56very much so and often we never bothered
58:58ringing
58:59it can we go on to paragraph 149 of your
59:03high court witness statement
59:05here you say using the limited reports
59:08you were able to uh print you ascertain
59:10that around
59:11£5,000 of the alleged shortfall related
59:14to gyro items that had become wrongly
59:16duplicated on Horizon these were reports
59:19were in the form of lengthy multi-line
59:21narrow Tilles and were many meters long
59:25making them difficult to review in any
59:26event at the time I believe that a
59:29majority of the remaining alleged
59:30shortfall being
59:321,182 81 was also attributable to gyro
59:36errors however I was unable to track
59:38these potentially smaller sums in the
59:41absence of proper reporting functions on
59:44Horizon therefore far from being within
59:46my knowledge I was unable to ascertain
59:48the root cause of the apparent shortfall
59:50at all um you had your thoughts which
59:53you set out later I also called my
59:55retail line man sorry my retail network
59:58manager Jerry Hayes the following day to
1:00:00inform him in the absence of a proper
1:00:02response from the post office I carried
1:00:04out I carried over the apparent
1:00:07shortfall from that week's cash account
1:00:08to the following week's cash account by
1:00:10transferring it to a suspense account
1:00:12which was visible to um the post
1:00:16office so um £5,000 of the $6,000 was um
1:00:22attributable to wrongly
1:00:24duplicated uh G
1:00:27the loss which had been left about
1:00:29£1,100 um you couldn't account for on
1:00:32the information available to you and is
1:00:35it that some
1:00:36£1,100 that you ended up in dispute with
1:00:38the post office over at that time yes it
1:00:41was yeah and I think the first thing you
1:00:44did was to write a detailed letter to
1:00:46the post office about it I did can we
1:00:48look at that please poll 4
1:00:544598
1:01:05at page 134
1:01:15please we can see this is dated the 19th
1:01:18of December 2000 so about 6 days after
1:01:22the balancing issue emerged and again
1:01:26about two and a bit months after the
1:01:28installation of Horizon at your
1:01:30branch and um it must be noted I think
1:01:35very early in the life of the Horizon
1:01:37system taken as a whole would you agree
1:01:39yes
1:01:40I you'll see that the heading of it is
1:01:43um Horizon
1:01:45faults can we read the letter together
1:01:48because this sets out um what might be
1:01:50an important
1:01:52account early in the life of horizon
1:01:57uh you refer back in the first paragraph
1:01:59to a um a
1:02:02conversation and um
1:02:05as um is good practice you confirmed it
1:02:07in detail in
1:02:10writing you say the balance at this
1:02:12office on the 13th was not only very
1:02:15stressful but also very
1:02:17worrying the evidence that appeared
1:02:19during that day proved Beyond any doubt
1:02:22that the Horizon system cannot be relied
1:02:25upon to give 100% accurate
1:02:30figures the problem which was
1:02:32highlighted to this office that day was
1:02:34with regard to gyro deposits and at one
1:02:37point the weekly returns were showing a
1:02:38variance to the addition of the daily
1:02:40returns of over
1:02:42£6,000 the whole of that afternoon was
1:02:45spent making a number of phone calls to
1:02:46the different helpl lines one of almost
1:02:49one hour long and kept two of the three
1:02:51terminals producing nothing but reports
1:02:54at a peak trading time when we had cues
1:02:56out of the door although eventually I
1:02:59did manage to track down the majority of
1:03:00the money that said the cash account for
1:03:03that week is still showing a shortage of
1:03:0611
1:03:0718281 I can without any doubt attribute
1:03:1136850 of that to gyro items that have
1:03:15been double entered and that I'm unable
1:03:17to track because of the way Horizon is
1:03:20set up of the remaining 81431 shortage
1:03:25I'm presuming that 40915 of that
1:03:27shortage is from the previous week
1:03:29that's become added to the total this
1:03:32leaves a difference of
1:03:3440516 which I am I'm unsure of where it
1:03:37comes from it may well be a gyro system
1:03:40error as might be the previous week's
1:03:4340915 shortage or it may be something
1:03:45else unfortunately the current Horizon
1:03:48system does not let you access previous
1:03:50transactions adequately enough to track
1:03:53problems with shorts or Rovers at the
1:03:55end of the week
1:03:58continuing having spoken to the LA local
1:04:01Branch Secretary of the Federation of
1:04:03sub poost Masters on these problems and
1:04:05realizing the problems I'm experience
1:04:08experiencing are being found by others
1:04:10around the
1:04:11country I do not I really do not believe
1:04:14it would be unreasonable for post office
1:04:16Network to hold me liable for losses on
1:04:19the cash account until such time as 100%
1:04:22guarantee can be given about the
1:04:24accuracy of
1:04:27Horizon I've been hoping to leave any
1:04:30comments in writing about Horizon until
1:04:32the office is quieter in January and
1:04:34then write a detailed submission about
1:04:36the cost we've incurred with it around
1:04:38£1,000 the problems with the counter
1:04:41staff working with money and stamp books
1:04:43on chairs or on the shelf behind them
1:04:45the very poor layout of the screen and
1:04:48menus the slowness of the printers the
1:04:50lack of report writing facilities the
1:04:52chaotic end of day and end of week
1:04:54procedures and the problems of having to
1:04:56do quote office work at a terminal on
1:04:58the counter given time I shall produce
1:05:01the report for you please do not think
1:05:04that I'm being nothing but negative
1:05:05about the system I'm a firm believer in
1:05:08the way forward through such a system
1:05:11but bear in mind my comments are made by
1:05:12someone who's had considerable
1:05:14experience of electronic Point of Sales
1:05:16Systems before joining the post office
1:05:18in 1998 I first began working with them
1:05:21in 1986 and used a variety of systems
1:05:24reading on so I have some insight into
1:05:27those systems and I would gladly be
1:05:29willing to offer constructive feedback
1:05:31if asked with regard to the current
1:05:34deficit showing on our cash account for
1:05:35last week how do you want me to progress
1:05:37this week's balance should I just roll
1:05:39it through and see what happens or what
1:05:42and then you ask for
1:05:44assistance so in that letter you make it
1:05:47clear on a number of occasions that
1:05:49herizon is fault at fault and you
1:05:52explain in detail why so far as you
1:05:54could tell that was so is that right
1:05:56that's correct you tell the post office
1:05:58that you're not alone and that this was
1:06:00happening around the country that's what
1:06:03I understood yeah did that information
1:06:05come from your local Branch Secretary at
1:06:07the nfsp it did was that Dave Foster it
1:06:09was Dave
1:06:13Foster and you ask a question what
1:06:15should I do at the end yes did you ever
1:06:17get a reply a written reply to the raft
1:06:20of the points sorry no I never did no
1:06:22reply to this letter at all never
1:06:28can we move on please um to page 140 in
1:06:32this
1:06:38bundle this is um a follow-up letter of
1:06:41the 7th of January
1:06:492002 so
1:06:51now over a year has
1:06:54passed
1:06:58and you're writing to the post office
1:07:00about this um longin the tooth alleged
1:07:03shortfall and you say as you're aware
1:07:06the cash account for this office is
1:07:07still showing an amount of 10 14186 in
1:07:11the suspense account this cumulative
1:07:14figure was placed in the suspense
1:07:15account towards the end of
1:07:172000 and I have no doubt at all that it
1:07:20was due to errors in the Horizon system
1:07:22over a number of weeks at that time in
1:07:24my letters to Jerry Hayes of the 19th of
1:07:27December which we've just looked at 16th
1:07:30of July 2001 I've skipped over that one
1:07:32because of time neither of which did I
1:07:34receive a written reply to I gave
1:07:37further details on this matter I really
1:07:40do think that enough time has now passed
1:07:42for post office to have resolved this
1:07:44issue and that unless I receive a
1:07:46written comment to the contary by the
1:07:47end of this month I'll take it the
1:07:49matters closed when I signed my contract
1:07:51with post office counters I did not sign
1:07:54to accept the liability is arising from
1:07:57the shortcomings of a less than adequate
1:07:59Horizon system all liabilities from such
1:08:01a system are clearly the responsibility
1:08:04of post office limited or ICL
1:08:08pathway allowing this issue to drag on
1:08:11not only continues the stress and strain
1:08:13of the original problems but I fear also
1:08:15continually cast out over my honesty and
1:08:18that of my staff therefore I greatly
1:08:20appreciated it it if you would bring
1:08:22this matter to a head in order that we
1:08:25can
1:08:26um move
1:08:32on can um we turn to your inquiry
1:08:35witness statement
1:08:37please at paragraphs 39 and
1:08:4140 which um are on page
1:08:5212 you
1:08:54say finally by letter of the 6th of
1:08:56March 2002 I was notified that quote
1:09:00post office has decided to take no
1:09:02further action in respect of the loss at
1:09:04my branch and that this will be written
1:09:08off uh no reason was given but I've
1:09:11since seen a copy of a quote write-off
1:09:14Authority voucher disclosed by the post
1:09:16office which gives the reason for the
1:09:18write off as quote disputed Horizon cash
1:09:21account shortage the letter of the 6th
1:09:24of March also said said that the post
1:09:26office had taken time to respond because
1:09:28quote it has been necessary to formulate
1:09:31a consistent response to all such cases
1:09:34I take it from this that the post office
1:09:36was aware at the time of many such
1:09:38complaints I also take uh from the fact
1:09:40that the post office was willing to
1:09:42write off the considerable and parent
1:09:43discrepancy I disputed that my
1:09:45complaints were valid and that the post
1:09:48office was
1:09:49aware that was the case and wish to
1:09:51avoid the controversy on this matter
1:09:53given that I was willing to assert my
1:09:55legal
1:09:59right uh can we turn up please and poll
1:10:034os
1:10:064598 at page 143
1:10:18please we should just um look back at um
1:10:21page 142
1:10:23please this is the letter of the the 6th
1:10:25of March 2002 that you were referring to
1:10:27in your witness statement
1:10:32yes and um if we look at the third
1:10:40paragraph there's the passage that you
1:10:42cited after due consideration of the
1:10:45facts surrounding your loss in your
1:10:46report post office has decided to take
1:10:48no further action in respect of the loss
1:10:51which will be written
1:10:54off
1:10:56and the right of authority if we just
1:10:58look at the second page that was
1:11:04included if we just scroll down a little
1:11:07bit thank
1:11:09you this is the the onsign version
1:11:12essentially um I've received a write-off
1:11:16Authority um
1:11:19voucher to the value of the amount which
1:11:23has been cleared from my suspense
1:11:25account and the voucher has been cleared
1:11:27in the appropriate manner in the cash
1:11:29account number week number I'm
1:11:34sorry uh was that amount 10
1:11:384186 actually cleared out of your
1:11:41suspense account so you went back to
1:11:42zero in balancing terms yes yes I did so
1:11:46it didn't remain there after a shortfall
1:11:48which you were required to roll over
1:11:51no and then can we look at the loss
1:11:54authorization document which you also
1:11:56referred to in your uh witness statement
1:11:59that's poll 0032
1:12:138099 uh page three
1:12:20please I think this is the loss
1:12:22authorization document if we just pan
1:12:24out so we can see all of it
1:12:27please I don't think this is something
1:12:29that you saw at the time is that right
1:12:31this is an internal Post Office document
1:12:33that's correct um but you got disclosure
1:12:36of it later is that right that's
1:12:39right and we'll see that it seems to be
1:12:41in standard
1:12:44form it's got your branch name and your
1:12:48fad code the amount of money and it says
1:12:51the following decision has been made
1:12:53with regard to the loss at the above
1:12:54office
1:12:55which relates to an aged shortage which
1:12:59the sub postmaster insists was
1:13:00attributable to a horizon system
1:13:02software equipment training failure and
1:13:05then three boxes are three options are
1:13:09given the second of which was sub poost
1:13:12Master makes it good the third of which
1:13:15um an amount of it must be made good an
1:13:18amount of it will be written off and the
1:13:19first of which was the full amount will
1:13:21be written off and the post uh sub postm
1:13:24has been sent the appropriate voucher
1:13:26with which to clear the loss of the
1:13:29amount yes yes um did you um see this
1:13:34document that
1:13:36um the writing off of a
1:13:41loss because you said the loss was
1:13:44attributable to the Horizon system at
1:13:47the time of the dispute with the post
1:13:48office in 2002 and 2003 IE before
1:13:52termination of your contract no I didn't
1:13:55see
1:13:57see and so were you aware at that time
1:14:00that the post office um seemingly used
1:14:02the standard
1:14:04form um with delete as appropriate boxes
1:14:09on it no no I didn't but now that you
1:14:13mention it I I do recall a conversation
1:14:18that the retail network manager had at
1:14:22the time with this department at my
1:14:25office so I only heard one side of the
1:14:27conversation and it was about arranging
1:14:30for this write off amount or write off
1:14:34voucher and I seem to recall and it's
1:14:37stuck in memory because of what it was
1:14:40he said oh it's another one the Horizon
1:14:43losses and it's just one of those little
1:14:45things that you know sticks in the back
1:14:47of your mind that hen that was said at
1:14:49the time when when the retail manager
1:14:52was speaking to this department on the
1:14:55phone arranging the voucher in any event
1:14:58there existed a form in which a
1:15:02loss um could be authorized to be
1:15:05written off on the grounds um that the
1:15:09sub Postmaster said the loss was
1:15:11attributable to Horizon yes it did and
1:15:13that's what happened in your case
1:15:18yes thank you that can come
1:15:22down now before you um uh had
1:15:26authorization to write this loss off you
1:15:28continued to roll it over from week to
1:15:30week yes I did and was that done with
1:15:33the knowledge and approval of your then
1:15:35retail line manager well they were aware
1:15:37of it they certainly informed that
1:15:39that's what I was doing
1:15:41so we've heard um from some post off
1:15:45office staff um the evidence of um Susan
1:15:49Harding Springs to mind particularly to
1:15:51me um the the post office believed that
1:15:55the suspense account was used by sub
1:15:59postmasters to cover up theft and
1:16:04fraud your evidence is that you were
1:16:07being transparent from an early stage in
1:16:09the life of
1:16:11horizon in your complaints about Horizon
1:16:15discrepancies about the use of the
1:16:17suspense account to hold over disputed
1:16:20sums whilst continued whilst continuing
1:16:23to assert that the money wasn't owed and
1:16:26ought not to be made good is that right
1:16:28that's
1:16:29correct did there come a time when that
1:16:32practice was
1:16:34challenged um not during my tenure I
1:16:38understand it was later
1:16:41on I think after this write off um there
1:16:45continued to be um some shortages
1:16:49shortfalls shown on Horizon is that
1:16:51right that is that's right yes well not
1:16:55just sorry um you say shortages it was
1:16:58also overs and unders it was so
1:17:00surpluses as well surpluses
1:17:05yeah and did you seek to discover the um
1:17:08cause of both the surpluses and the
1:17:11shortages yes um as much as we could and
1:17:15did you um encounter success on occasion
1:17:19yes did it remain the case however that
1:17:21a some just over um ,000 pounds
1:17:25um was carried as um a shortage in the
1:17:29suspense
1:17:30account uh no not not to my recollection
1:17:34there was a claim at the very end of my
1:17:38um contract that I think they said that
1:17:41the um office was owing something in the
1:17:43region of 12 or
1:17:451400 but is that I'm referring to sorry
1:17:48it's that I was referring to yeah no it
1:17:51but that wasn't carried such what
1:17:53happened was that that I refused to
1:17:57um
1:17:59um when we when we undertook our weekly
1:18:02balance you were then meant to put in
1:18:03money to make up to the figure or take
1:18:06money out if it it was over in there I
1:18:08refused to do that I roll through the
1:18:11shortages or the losses in there uh
1:18:14sorry shortages or the overs each time
1:18:16so it had a a running total it it was
1:18:19adjusted from week to week um because I
1:18:22really did not know where the office was
1:18:25up to you know I had no idea so and
1:18:29often some of these um where there had
1:18:33been an error might come back in a week
1:18:36or two weeks or something of that um
1:18:40that sort of time or it could be a lot
1:18:42longer um when the actual error was
1:18:45discovered elsewhere and it can be
1:18:47corrected um but no I never actually
1:18:52reset um or zeroed the system but I just
1:18:55kept rolling through the shortages and
1:18:57losses and post office were aware of
1:19:00what I was
1:19:02doing did um the um installation of a
1:19:06new retail line manager Mike wakeley um
1:19:10cause matters to uh be brought to a head
1:19:12in that respect eventually yes and can
1:19:15we look at that eventually um poll 4 Z
1:19:214598 uh page 144 please
1:19:32this is a letter to you dated um the
1:19:3514th of April
1:19:372003 um reference losses and
1:19:40gains um just want to read the first
1:19:44part of the first paragraph further to
1:19:46our conversation you confirmed that
1:19:48you've been rolling over losses and
1:19:49gains for the past two years or more um
1:19:52that's um what you've just described
1:19:54yeah
1:19:55he says I was unaware of this
1:19:58practice and then in the second
1:20:00paragraph he says I'm now instructing
1:20:03you that with immediate effect you're
1:20:05required to make good the outstanding
1:20:06loss and to cease with this current
1:20:08practice of rolling over any losses and
1:20:13gains can we see your reply please uh
1:20:16page
1:20:22145 you say I'm rece in receipt of your
1:20:25letter the 14th of April that's the one
1:20:27we've just read confirming our
1:20:29conversation regarding losses and gains
1:20:31at our office which have always been
1:20:32rolled over since the installation of
1:20:34horizon I appreciate you may well have
1:20:37been unaware of this practice at the
1:20:38office but can assure you that many
1:20:40others at post office many other post
1:20:42office staff knew of
1:20:44it uh my comments regarding this were
1:20:46all well documented a number of
1:20:48letters such as that dated the 19th of
1:20:52December which like all letters uh was
1:20:55sent recorded
1:20:56delivery uh the problem with rolling
1:20:58over the losses and gains is that I
1:20:59presume I'd be accepting um uh liability
1:21:04for them which is something that I've
1:21:05pointed out in writing to you since the
1:21:08introduction of horizon here I'm unable
1:21:10to do until such time as I'm able to
1:21:12access the data that I'm being asked to
1:21:15be responsible for as I've written
1:21:17previously the totally inadequate report
1:21:19system has been made so complex it lacks
1:21:21the ability to interrogate the system
1:21:24when you know the information is inside
1:21:26if I'm unable to access the data to
1:21:29check items it's totally unreasonable to
1:21:31expect me to accept liability from
1:21:34uncheckable um uh data I think that
1:21:37reply um speaks for itself but did this
1:21:41exchange of Correspondence the newi is I
1:21:44think retail line manager raising the
1:21:47issue requiring you to make good the
1:21:49shortfall to Cease the practice
1:21:52ultimately LED lead to your contract act
1:21:54being terminated I believe so
1:21:59yes uh can we look please at page 147 of
1:22:02this
1:22:06bundle um letter um from Mr wakeley um
1:22:112nd of May scroll
1:22:13down thank you for your letter of the
1:22:1616th of April that's the one we've just
1:22:17looked at the contents of which have
1:22:19been noted nevertheless I must point out
1:22:22uh that you are bound by the terms and
1:22:23conditions of your contract for services
1:22:26which was acknowledged by you on the
1:22:2731st of March 2003 and somebody's
1:22:30written in correctly I think 1998 that
1:22:33was you was it 1998 exclamation mark um
1:22:37accepting your appointment um to this
1:22:39effect your charge with ensuring that
1:22:41all accounts entrusted to you are kept
1:22:43in the form prescribed by post office
1:22:45using the approved accounting system and
1:22:48therefore in the event of any losses
1:22:50occurring these should be made good
1:22:52without delay accordingly failure to
1:22:54comply with these obligations can be
1:22:56construed as a breach of contract which
1:22:59could ultimately put your contract for
1:23:01services at risk over the page I
1:23:04therefore request that you acknowledge
1:23:06the content of the letter within 10 days
1:23:08of its posting confirming that the
1:23:10accounts are being maintained in the
1:23:11correct
1:23:13fashion and make good the losses as per
1:23:16your contractual um obligations and then
1:23:20149
1:23:23please
1:23:25uh your reply to that
1:23:27letter with regard to your letter of the
1:23:302nd of May first paragraph I think you
1:23:31pick him up on the
1:23:33typo um you refer me to section 12 of
1:23:37the
1:23:38contract and rather than what he has
1:23:41suggested to you you're liable to repay
1:23:44all losses you point out that section 12
1:23:47in fact um States the sub postmaster is
1:23:51responsible for all losses caused
1:23:53through his own negligence
1:23:55carelessness or error and also for
1:23:57losses of all kinds caused by his
1:23:59assistance deficiencies due to such
1:24:01losses must be made good without delay
1:24:04you rightly point out that I've agreed
1:24:06these terms I can confirm I gladly make
1:24:08good any losses caused in these manner
1:24:11um but I can see nothing in this clause
1:24:13which states that I'm also liable for
1:24:16data I'm unable to check and that's a
1:24:19summary of the position that you had
1:24:20been maintaining I think consistently
1:24:22since installation
1:24:25yes to take an extreme if the Horizon
1:24:28system said I owed a million pounds
1:24:30would you say I'd have to make good the
1:24:32loss without delay and without
1:24:34question there's no way I will agree to
1:24:36be held responsible for data I have
1:24:38input until um such time as I'm able to
1:24:42access the data that I'm asked I'm being
1:24:45asked to be responsible for in trying to
1:24:47state that I've acknowledged such things
1:24:48as terms and conditions of my contract
1:24:50you're in effect purporting to vary this
1:24:53contract
1:24:55um we can skip over the next paragraphs
1:24:58which are about something
1:25:01else and then go to the uh next page 148
1:25:05sorry 1
1:25:0715 and then the letter
1:25:10ends so um you you correct the post
1:25:15office on the terms and conditions you
1:25:18make it clear the point that many have
1:25:21missed that the contract does not oblige
1:25:25you to repay all
1:25:27losses um and then um you make a point
1:25:30of emphasis the million pounds example
1:25:32in your third
1:25:34paragraph Was there any um effort by the
1:25:38post office to engage with the points
1:25:41that you were making in this letter none
1:25:43at all never addressed
1:25:45them can we turn please to poll 4 Z
1:25:494598 and Page 30 that's the same bundle
1:25:52page 30
1:26:04scroll down
1:26:06please Mr
1:26:08wakeley in accordance with your contract
1:26:11I'm writing to issue you with three
1:26:12months notice of termination of your
1:26:15contract the termination will take
1:26:17effect on the 5th of November
1:26:212003 so um this is the letter that um um
1:26:25brought your um contract to an end is
1:26:27that right that is correct yes the
1:26:29letter of course speaks for itself um it
1:26:32gave you no um explanation for the
1:26:35reason for termination of your contract
1:26:38that's correct yeah was any such
1:26:40explanation given to you by the post
1:26:41office at this time
1:26:45never um it may seem an insensitive
1:26:48question but how did receiving this
1:26:50notice make you
1:26:52feel well I I was annoyed with them but
1:26:57um to put it mildly um
1:27:02but I think it was partly expected in a
1:27:05way because it was pretty pretty obvious
1:27:07they were determined
1:27:09to they were after me one way or another
1:27:12and um the buildup of correspondence
1:27:16over the
1:27:17period was certainly pointing in that
1:27:21direction but I always find it quite
1:27:23interesting that I pulled them up on the
1:27:25point about um trying to terminate me
1:27:28terminate me my contract under Clause 12
1:27:31or uh of the contract but they didn't do
1:27:33it that way they decided to go for they
1:27:36decided to go just under this you know
1:27:38any reason they wanted three months
1:27:41notice without giving a reason so it's a
1:27:44without fault without reason that's
1:27:46right um termination just on three
1:27:48months written notice yeah that's it but
1:27:50you'd had the 1,100,000 one
1:27:55,100 written
1:27:57off um you'd had the post office
1:28:00acknowledging that it was because of a
1:28:04genuine dispute over whether Horizon was
1:28:07to blame for it over the operation of
1:28:09horizon you'd been rolling over other
1:28:13shortfalls and surpluses since then with
1:28:17post office knowledge and then this
1:28:20arrives well it it was it it was a bit
1:28:23strange in a way because we were um a
1:28:26very busy post office in fact it was a
1:28:29time when uh a lot of post offices were
1:28:31were losing trade but our sales figures
1:28:35were were extremely high in the region
1:28:38we developed a lot of new business in
1:28:40there but you know it it was their
1:28:42decision to do it and so be it uh I mean
1:28:45I did offer I did offer at one point um
1:28:49when there were discussions between the
1:28:51retail manager and myself when we were
1:28:53heading in this direction he was saying
1:28:55come on Alan you know change your mind
1:28:57do this do that and all the rest of it
1:28:59and I say look if you're unhappy with
1:29:00the way that I'm providing your service
1:29:03then pay us back our in initial
1:29:06investment and take the post office away
1:29:08I would have been quite happy for for
1:29:10them to do that and I probably wouldn't
1:29:12have been here today on that basis but I
1:29:15mean it's it's
1:29:18um they they just decided they were
1:29:22going to I I felt they were they were
1:29:25going to make um a lesson of my case
1:29:30because a number of other people knew
1:29:31what was going on that time and I I
1:29:34think it was something the post office
1:29:36liked to try and give lessons of how
1:29:38they were in charge can we just look
1:29:41before the morning Break um at some
1:29:43reasoning that the post office gave
1:29:45subsequently for terminating your
1:29:48contract um to start with can we look at
1:29:51poll um
1:29:5301075 5
1:30:0538 and Page 11
1:30:21please um this is um a letter
1:30:24uh written to an MP Betty
1:30:28Williams um in relation to a letter that
1:30:31she wrote as a constituency MP to Alan
1:30:34Leighton the then chairman of the post
1:30:37office um and it's the 29th of
1:30:41October um if we just go to the second
1:30:46page scroll down we can see it's written
1:30:48by Dave Barrett head of commercial urban
1:30:51area for Wales the Marchers and side
1:30:54back to page
1:30:56one and look at the second
1:31:00paragraph briefly we've given notice to
1:31:02Mr Bates the present sub postmaster that
1:31:04we're withdrawing from our contract with
1:31:06him and then this this is because we've
1:31:09lost confidence in his willingness to
1:31:12conduct the job in the manner
1:31:16expected was that ever explain to you
1:31:19that they had lost confidence in your
1:31:21willingness to conduct conduct the job
1:31:24in the
1:31:27expected can we look please at poll
1:31:32303
1:31:421815 this is a presentation on Horizon
1:31:47Integrity prepared by um Dave Smith it's
1:31:52undated and it seeks to tell a story
1:31:55about the
1:31:57um um Integrity of
1:32:01horizon um it's um we may find in due
1:32:04course an interesting account overall
1:32:06but I just want to look at um what it
1:32:09says about you on page
1:32:13six and scroll down
1:32:18please uh Mr Smith says of the cases I'm
1:32:22aware Bates had
1:32:24discrepancies was dismissed because he
1:32:27became
1:32:28unmanageable was that ever explained to
1:32:30you that you became unmanageable no not
1:32:33at
1:32:34all and then Mr Smith says of you that
1:32:38you quote clearly struggled with
1:32:42accounting and despite copious support
1:32:45did not follow
1:32:48instructions uh firstly did you struggle
1:32:50with accounting no not not at all were
1:32:53you given copious
1:32:55support
1:33:00no did you seek to
1:33:02follow um the instructions that you had
1:33:05been given by the post office basically
1:33:07try and Bank bankrupt myself no I didn't
1:33:10so not to that
1:33:14extent if these um that can come down
1:33:17thank you if these after the fact
1:33:20reasons or justifications for the
1:33:23termination of your contract are not on
1:33:26your understanding correct what do you
1:33:29understand to be the reason for the
1:33:30termination of your
1:33:32contract well well I basically I think
1:33:36it was because a they didn't like me
1:33:38standing up to them in the first
1:33:40instance B they were finding it awkward
1:33:44and c I don't think they could answer
1:33:46these
1:33:47questions and I think they had a feeling
1:33:50I was going to carry on in a similar
1:33:53vein going
1:33:56forward uh just lastly then can we look
1:33:58at um poll 302
1:34:114194 this is your witness St can we look
1:34:14at paragraph 170 I'm afraid I haven't
1:34:16written which page that is try about
1:34:2225
1:34:30uh hopeless um try about
1:34:4430 try about
1:34:5235
1:34:56and then if you can scroll forward to P
1:34:58paragraph 170
1:35:07please you say this is your high court
1:35:09statement for the Glo common issues
1:35:13trial um I've little doubt that the
1:35:15reason for my termination is that I had
1:35:18not only uncovered limitations and
1:35:20potential errors with the Horizon system
1:35:23but that I continue to question the post
1:35:26office on the contractual relationship
1:35:28between sub postmasters and the post
1:35:31office was that your belief at the time
1:35:34yeah it is it's a good summary of how I
1:35:37felt does it remain your belief now oh
1:35:40yes Mr B thank you can we take the
1:35:42morning break please there's a slight um
1:35:45glitch with the transcription service
1:35:46which I think means we need to take 20
1:35:48minutes rather than our usual 15 all
1:35:51right so what time should we resume I
1:35:53think I think that means um 52 5 to 12
1:35:57all right see you all
1:36:15then so good morning uh if we continue
1:36:18Please Mr Bates with um August
1:36:222003 you remember where we are in the um
1:36:26narrative you've been given um notice of
1:36:29um termination of your contract I think
1:36:32one of the first things you did was to
1:36:33write to the chairman of the royal male
1:36:36group PLC is that right that's correct
1:36:39uh can we look at that letter please um
1:36:42poll1
1:36:507538 we'll see that this is um dated the
1:36:547th of August
1:36:562003 to Mr Allan Leighton um chairman of
1:37:00Royal Mel group
1:37:03PLC we'll look at the detail in a moment
1:37:06but can I ask you in general terms what
1:37:08the purpose was in writing to um the
1:37:11chairman of Royal M group PLC by this
1:37:14time you'd receive post office's
1:37:17decision to terminate your contract um
1:37:21what was the point well I I I was still
1:37:23in post if you like for the next few
1:37:25months so I thought it well worth trying
1:37:28to write to to the chairman to make him
1:37:31aware of what was going on um because he
1:37:34may well and have not known so uh I
1:37:38hoping that he might be able to
1:37:40undertake some sort of review into it
1:37:42look at the case for us or whatever take
1:37:45it on board a little bit more
1:37:47seriously uh this is of course still um
1:37:51taking a step back relatively early
1:37:54um in the entire Narrative of the
1:37:58Scandal August 2003 um Horizon had only
1:38:02been rolled out for three years or
1:38:05so yeah but it was wrong sorry I knew it
1:38:09was wrong then there were things wrong
1:38:11with it and I and having heard that
1:38:15others had had problems with it as well
1:38:18surely someone should have been looking
1:38:21at all of this and taking these things
1:38:23into
1:38:26consideration well in that sense you're
1:38:28obviously right because many people were
1:38:31yet to be terminated many people were
1:38:34yet to be prosecuted many people were
1:38:38yet to be convicted and many people were
1:38:40yet to go to
1:38:43prison can we look at what you said to
1:38:45the
1:38:47chairman first paragraph um I'm writing
1:38:50to you with regard to a letter I've just
1:38:53received from post office limited giving
1:38:55me formal notification of their decision
1:38:57to terminate my sub postmaster contract
1:39:00as chairman of the group responsible for
1:39:02post office limited I thought important
1:39:05that you should be aware of what is
1:39:06being undertaken in your
1:39:08name um you very much personalized
1:39:10things in that first paragraph
1:39:15Yes did you expect this letter to at
1:39:18least be seen by the person to whom you
1:39:20wrote it I C I certainly hoped it would
1:39:22be um
1:39:23um um I can't do more than draw their
1:39:28attention to it I can't force them to
1:39:30read it but
1:39:32um if you don't write to them then
1:39:34they'll never
1:39:38know paragraph two uh please find
1:39:41enclosed a copy of that letter as well
1:39:43as copies of previous correspondents and
1:39:45note regarding the problems in question
1:39:48I'm not going to go through the previous
1:39:49correspondents all your notes upon it
1:39:51which I've tried to keep in a chronolog
1:39:53iCal order uh in reality this matter
1:39:55should never have reached this
1:39:57stage uh but the extremely poor handling
1:40:00by post office Management in the past
1:40:02has led to the situation which could
1:40:05result um in us not only losing our
1:40:07business but something else um unlike
1:40:09the uh post office I do not have endless
1:40:13funds to fight this Injustice through
1:40:15the
1:40:17courts why was that in your mind at that
1:40:20stage the relative funds available
1:40:23to each side to fight a case through the
1:40:28courts well I suppose realistically I
1:40:32have been speaking with lawyers at that
1:40:35time and um I I was being advised that
1:40:40you probably wouldn't be able to afford
1:40:44um to take post office on um it just you
1:40:48know it was just an
1:40:50impractical uh situation from a finan
1:40:53point of view more than anything else
1:40:55regardless of the
1:40:59case uh moving on to paragraph the rest
1:41:02of the paragraph I do realize it's
1:41:04imperative for as many people as
1:41:06possible to have an opportunity to see
1:41:08the um uh in detail the management style
1:41:12applied by Royal M group um to the very
1:41:15public face of the local post office
1:41:17it's again trying to use what seems to
1:41:19be so often described in its outdated
1:41:22stalinistic management approach in order
1:41:25to bludgeon its will onto the poor sub
1:41:27postmaster with an issue that could
1:41:29bankrupt every sub post office in the
1:41:32country whilst I appreciate that
1:41:34principles can be expensive I cannot
1:41:36agree to any position which would leave
1:41:38me and every other sub postmaster liable
1:41:40for claims of millions of pounds from
1:41:43the post office without any redress or
1:41:46access to data to check such claims is
1:41:49that a reference to the um auditability
1:41:53or visibility the reporting function
1:41:55available to sub poost Masters on the
1:41:58system well certainly the lack of it
1:42:01yes uh my only um defense until I can
1:42:04find an organization willing to offer
1:42:06support is to ensure that the media and
1:42:09all those politicians who represent a
1:42:12ward with a Sub postm sub post office as
1:42:15well as everyone who runs a sub post
1:42:17office who or who uses ones has an
1:42:19opportunity to read all the facts that
1:42:22end these documents enclosed and others
1:42:24will shortly be available online once
1:42:26the um hoarding at the for the front of
1:42:28our building advertise advertising our
1:42:31website
1:42:34www.pof victims. org.uk is ready um in a
1:42:37week or so originally I'd registered um
1:42:41post office victim at me.uk to use but
1:42:44as the launch will undoubtedly bring up
1:42:46many other cases from across the country
1:42:48it was thought a larger and less
1:42:50personal site would be more um
1:42:52appropriate
1:42:54over the
1:42:56page it's important to make clear I've
1:42:58not breached my contract I will not be
1:43:00ceasing to trade on the 5th of November
1:43:032003 if I did I certainly would be in
1:43:05breach of my
1:43:07terms uh if you read the enclos
1:43:09documentation it's all self-evident I'm
1:43:11sure you can tell my back is up against
1:43:13the wall but until the book um the
1:43:16hoarding is ready and in place and all
1:43:19the web pages are downloaded to the
1:43:21server I welcome any option that will
1:43:23resolve this matter with a minimum of
1:43:25fuss without the national publicity this
1:43:27issue is bound to draw hence my letter
1:43:29to you as a last attempt to reach a
1:43:31sensible um uh
1:43:35conclusion now I don't think you got a
1:43:37reply from um Mr uh Leighton did you no
1:43:41um I got one from his office somebody
1:43:45did acknowledge it if I recall can we
1:43:49look at poll 304
1:43:520354
1:43:59um you can see this is the 27th of
1:44:02August thank you for your letter dated
1:44:04the 7th of August addressed to Alan
1:44:05Leighton which has been forwarded to me
1:44:07for
1:44:09reply uh can we look at the um second
1:44:12page
1:44:15please and scroll
1:44:18down you'll can see you can see that
1:44:20it's um from somebody in the operations
1:44:23Department uh Ria McQueen a case liaison
1:44:28manager go back to the first um page
1:44:32please and then if we look um in the
1:44:35second paragraph she says I've now
1:44:38completed my
1:44:40inquiries they've taken longer than
1:44:43expected and she says I've spoken with a
1:44:45number of the Personnel involved in the
1:44:47search for a solution to the situation
1:44:50um at the branch although I regret that
1:44:52the situation has re reached the point
1:44:54of termination of your contract quote I
1:44:57am confident that the various teams
1:44:59concerned in the events have worked hard
1:45:02to provide support and assistance to you
1:45:05in a consistent and sympathetic manner
1:45:08was that your experience no but this is
1:45:11post office's view it's not
1:45:13mine this support included a number of
1:45:15on-site attendances to assist with
1:45:17balancing did that occur uh that I had
1:45:21two people visit to try and assist with
1:45:25balancing but they could access the the
1:45:28system no further than I could so
1:45:30there's absolutely no help at all and
1:45:32also to provide extra training on the
1:45:34horizon system did you get additional
1:45:36training on the horizon system not that
1:45:38I can recall the aim was always that of
1:45:41achieving a solution to the difficulties
1:45:43you were experiencing in managing um
1:45:46transactions and processes um at the
1:45:49branch uh The Horizon system at the
1:45:51branch has been reviewed
1:45:53interrogated um in response to your
1:45:56complaints and the reports from the
1:45:57Horizon field support team and the NBC
1:46:01have confirmed that there's nothing
1:46:02inherently wrong with The Horizon system
1:46:05installed at the
1:46:07branch but was the system installed at
1:46:09your branch to your knowledge um
1:46:12reviewed and
1:46:13interrogated not that I'm aware of no
1:46:16one ever came to the place and I I've
1:46:18always been confused over nothing
1:46:20inherently
1:46:21wrong that turn a phrase it just seems a
1:46:26little unusual nothing wrong I can
1:46:30understand but inherently
1:46:31wrong it seems like a back covering sort
1:46:35of uh
1:46:37phrase and then read on please if we
1:46:40scroll down thank
1:46:44you um the sub postmaster contract is
1:46:47clear on the requirement that
1:46:48postmasters must make good loss or gains
1:46:51when misbalances occur in fact it isn't
1:46:53clear on that at all that's a complete
1:46:55misstatement of the contract um it's
1:46:58evident you've consistently refused to
1:46:59do this um even when specifically
1:47:02requested to do so by the area
1:47:03management
1:47:04team um the contract um also states that
1:47:08either party May terminate it with three
1:47:10months notice without a reason being
1:47:11given and that's what we've
1:47:14done and then I'm sure you've carefully
1:47:16consider the idea of your website I feel
1:47:19you should be aware that use of the post
1:47:22office Limited is imagery on your
1:47:24website May constitute trademark um
1:47:28infringement you say um in your witness
1:47:30statement that despite you having sent
1:47:33the chairman a full clip of the um
1:47:37relevant correspondence with notes about
1:47:40each item within
1:47:43it um to quote your witness statement
1:47:47predictably the response of the post
1:47:49office was to ignore the content and
1:47:53predictably to fail to investigate the
1:47:56real
1:47:57issues why in your view was it that the
1:48:01predictable response of the post
1:48:04office
1:48:08it's it was the way they tried to deal
1:48:12with things um which you experienced
1:48:15through
1:48:16their area manager I mean it was
1:48:20constantly a post office was in the
1:48:22right right and you were always in the
1:48:24wrong and um uh it
1:48:29was it just seemed to be their
1:48:33nature um you tell us in your um witness
1:48:36statement that this reply was the quote
1:48:40usual box ticking exercise written
1:48:43entirely from the post office's
1:48:44perspective of course yeah that's what
1:48:46it
1:48:48was the last paragraph concludes the
1:48:51management team has been wholly
1:48:53professional in the management
1:48:54deliberation and investigation of your
1:48:57issues had in fact the issues that you
1:48:59raised been investigated at all not that
1:49:01I'm aware
1:49:04of can we turn to paragraph 52 of your
1:49:07witness statement please your inquiry
1:49:09witness statement which is page
1:49:2116
1:49:26we asked you a question what data you
1:49:28believe you needed to access in order to
1:49:30determine the cause of
1:49:32discrepancies in the Horizon generated
1:49:34Branch accounts and you say um I
1:49:38required access to all data even in a
1:49:42readon format held on the system in
1:49:45relation to all input by me and my staff
1:49:49which happened at the branch in respect
1:49:51of verifying information regarding those
1:49:54transactions or the accounts that they
1:49:55ultimately formed a part of I could only
1:49:58check transaction logs that were
1:49:59available on Horizon for limited periods
1:50:01of time or used The Limited range of
1:50:04information and reports I had access to
1:50:06and which could be printed from Horizon
1:50:08terminals comparing them to stock in the
1:50:10branch I had no real way of checking
1:50:12information held in uh Horizon that came
1:50:15from post office itself or from its
1:50:17clients such as Camelot or indeed the
1:50:19way in which those have been reconciled
1:50:22with transactions in the
1:50:27branch and then if we go um further on
1:50:34please uh scroll down please to
1:50:4054 um whilst the position as stated in
1:50:42the letter that's the letter we've just
1:50:43read um is that they' reviewed and
1:50:46interrogated and concluded there was
1:50:47nothing inherently wrong with The
1:50:49Horizon system i' seen no evidence of
1:50:51the apparent review and interrogation
1:50:54they' claimed to carry out I was still
1:50:56without the data which I've been
1:50:57requesting for a number of years nor had
1:51:00they discussed their findings with me I
1:51:02do not believe there was any
1:51:03investigation or evidence that the port
1:51:05purported investigation had taken um
1:51:08Place have you seen any evidence to date
1:51:11that the purported investigation that's
1:51:14referred to in the letter sent on behalf
1:51:15of the chairman no taken place no I
1:51:18haven't have any ever seen claims that
1:51:20it Tak place so far as um you know was
1:51:25the data that you are speaking about in
1:51:26these paragraphs that you needed access
1:51:29to in order to understand the cause of
1:51:33an apparent uh shortfall or an over
1:51:36common to all cases uh in sub post
1:51:40offices that um you later came across
1:51:43I.E that no one could actually in the
1:51:45post office branch get access to the
1:51:48data they needed to see what had
1:51:50happened not not a not a I'm aware of
1:51:58anyway you I think um wrote to your MP
1:52:01is that right correct can we look please
1:52:05um at poll
1:52:07304
1:52:210368 uh you tell us in um uh your
1:52:24witness statement that
1:52:27[Music]
1:52:29um uh you wrote to your um MP um about
1:52:35your case that's um Miss Williams is
1:52:36that right that's right um on the 27th
1:52:39of October 2003 and she in turn raised
1:52:42it with post office and with the
1:52:45minister um she received um a reply um
1:52:50saying that they had taken a decision to
1:52:52review the case in its um
1:52:55entirety uh you say that that was
1:52:57carried out behind closed doors and
1:52:59didn't involve any contact with you is
1:53:00that right that's correct and then um
1:53:03she um wrote again um to uh post office
1:53:09and um your MP as a result of which post
1:53:12office wrote this letter on the 19th of
1:53:14January um
1:53:192004 um and if we look at the um second
1:53:26page I'm sorry just scroll up to the
1:53:28bottom of the first
1:53:30page we can see that it's written by
1:53:32Richard Barker the then general manager
1:53:35of the commercial Network I go to the
1:53:37top
1:53:40please um he says to Betty Williams MP I
1:53:43promise to write to you once a
1:53:45comprehensive review had been undertaken
1:53:47of the issues raised by
1:53:49you that review has been completed by a
1:53:52senior manager within post office with
1:53:54considerable experience in the handling
1:53:55of disputes and subsequent appeals the
1:53:58conclusions of that review which I fully
1:54:00endorses that the termination of your
1:54:02contract was done following proper
1:54:05investigation coupled with proper
1:54:07warnings and with appropriate offers of
1:54:09additional training and support no
1:54:11evidence was found which in any way
1:54:13substantiates the various claims being
1:54:15made by Mr
1:54:17baates and Mr um
1:54:20Barker uh goes as far as was saying that
1:54:23the decision to terminate your contract
1:54:25was not only correct it was the only
1:54:28sensible
1:54:29option the best way is to consider the
1:54:32matter closed again were you um involved
1:54:35in any such comprehensive review no and
1:54:39that was one of my big objections no one
1:54:41ever came and spoke to me about it or
1:54:43tried to understand what the problem had
1:54:45been it was as I said before or I it's
1:54:48been recorded um it was carried on
1:54:50behind closed doors
1:54:57so we've seen you write to your MP we've
1:55:00seen you write directly to um Alan Leon
1:55:04and the reply we've seen your MP write
1:55:07to post office and we've seen this um
1:55:12reply trying to ask
1:55:14questions
1:55:16um it suggested in some parts of your
1:55:19witness statement that um they were
1:55:21being um shut down or fobbed off by the
1:55:24post office is that your view that's the
1:55:27it seems to be the way the business
1:55:28works
1:55:30yeah can we turn please to poll 032
1:55:408099 and if we just pan out a little
1:55:44bit it may
1:55:46be that um these five
1:55:50paragraphs on this undated piece of
1:55:53paper are the comprehensive
1:55:56review um that has been referred to in
1:56:00the
1:56:00correspondence it may be but I I hadn't
1:56:03seen them until recent no I just want to
1:56:06look at what um the author Sandy Steven
1:56:10um
1:56:12says
1:56:14um they say I've reviewed if we scroll
1:56:17to the top paragraph please all the
1:56:19files from the data for Horizon
1:56:21installation and until the termination
1:56:23of bat's contract and read all the
1:56:25subsequent
1:56:27correspondents um I've summarized the
1:56:28salium points following um bates's
1:56:32assertions against the Horizon system
1:56:35there were clear attempts made by
1:56:36several people to ask the say ascertain
1:56:38whether sorry if there were systems
1:56:41problems eventually it was decided to
1:56:43write off the debt and a clear signal
1:56:45was given um to bait that all future
1:56:48losses would be recovered significantly
1:56:50further training and support was given
1:56:52to baates at that time is that
1:56:55true well it's true that's what it says
1:56:59yes um I meant in reality yeah no I'm
1:57:02afraid it wasn't that way no um later it
1:57:04transpired and bat admitted um that he
1:57:08continued to roll over losses um did you
1:57:12have to admit to this or were you in
1:57:14fact telling line managers sorry I
1:57:17already informed them I was right and
1:57:20you know I wasn't hiding the fact at all
1:57:22they were well aware of what okay so
1:57:24later it transpired and you admitted
1:57:27that you contined to roll over losses
1:57:29and had done um so since the
1:57:31introduction of horizon he received a
1:57:34formal letter instructing him to stop
1:57:35the practice that's true we've seen that
1:57:37from Mr wle um and make good any losses
1:57:40that's also true he did not that's also
1:57:42true losses continued to be made and
1:57:45rolled over and the retail line manager
1:57:47sought advice and contracts and legal
1:57:49services before terminating the contract
1:57:52um from the evidence contained in the
1:57:54files it's clear that retail line
1:57:55conducted themselves correctly and acted
1:57:57in accordance with the rules and then
1:58:00this leaving aside the anecdotal
1:58:01evidence on file which demonstrates
1:58:04Bates unsuitability as a
1:58:06postmaster was that ever put to you that
1:58:08you were unsuitable to be a
1:58:10postmaster no but they'd appointed me in
1:58:13the first
1:58:16instance are you aware of what anecdotal
1:58:19evidence there might be which
1:58:21demonstrates it's your unsuitability to
1:58:23be a
1:58:24postmaster if I mean I have records of
1:58:28that time which were statements from the
1:58:31retail network manager or my current
1:58:33retail network manager at that time
1:58:35which was Mike Wakley to say how well
1:58:38the office was doing and and well done
1:58:41for all the hard work I mean it's it's a
1:58:43nonsense I this was just them flexing
1:58:47their muscle and just deciding they're
1:58:49right and I was
1:58:51wrong
1:58:53uh they point out po post office has an
1:58:55absolute right to terminate um a
1:58:58contract with three months notice that's
1:58:59also one of the true statements in um in
1:59:01this document it was done in this
1:59:03instance following proper investigation
1:59:06U formal warning coupled with support
1:59:08and additional training yet you quote
1:59:12continue to flaunt and ignore the
1:59:15legitimate instructions from your retail
1:59:18line manager and then we see a sentence
1:59:21that um gets cut into the letter that
1:59:24we've just read the decision to
1:59:26terminate was not only right it was the
1:59:28only sensible option which is what led
1:59:30me to think that this was the
1:59:33comprehensive
1:59:34review and investigation that um had
1:59:39been referred to um it says that you
1:59:42continue to
1:59:43flaunt the legitimate instructions of
1:59:47the retail line manager did you flaunt
1:59:50his instructions
1:59:52no I just pointed out what I was doing
1:59:54and the reasons why I was doing it but
1:59:57they'd never respond to me they'd never
1:59:58discuss the issue about data and data
2:00:01access and liability and holding uh and
2:00:04how long that liability lasted for and
2:00:06all the rest of it
2:00:08I when I went into post office it was
2:00:11sold to me at the time as you were in
2:00:13partnership with the business but you
2:00:16very soon learned that this was a very
2:00:19one-sided partnership I mean basically
2:00:23you do whatever you're told is was your
2:00:26side of the partnership and they just
2:00:28didn't seem to like it if you raised any
2:00:31queries even no matter how Justified
2:00:34they
2:00:46were in um relation to this part of um
2:00:50The Narrative can we lastly please look
2:00:52at poll 4 Z's
2:00:594598 at page um three
2:01:08please and scroll down
2:01:11please this is um part of a um a slew of
2:01:14Correspondence that I'm not going to
2:01:16investigate in detail um over whether
2:01:20you would continue to provide a service
2:01:23within the post office as an interim
2:01:25measure and the um Arrangements that
2:01:28were being made for the post office to
2:01:29come into the branch and take away what
2:01:32they say belong to
2:01:34them um you say
2:01:38um at no time did post office ever ask
2:01:40me if I would continue providing a
2:01:42service as an interim measure I would
2:01:44not deny you did make a sort of request
2:01:46to use our premises and our facilities
2:01:48to have someone else come in to provide
2:01:50a service at a time when you've taken
2:01:52away our livelihood investment and
2:01:54savings but as you don't seem to live in
2:01:56the real world I can tell you that this
2:01:58was just receives us an insult it seems
2:02:01your organization will do every anything
2:02:03and everything to try and keep the
2:02:05failures of horizon hidden regardless of
2:02:09who they have to trample down on the way
2:02:12such as us or our community I can assure
2:02:15you if my continued and now increased
2:02:17resolve to bring the real facts of what
2:02:19is going on to those who will have no no
2:02:22choice but to act regardless of whether
2:02:25it takes
2:02:28years in relation to the P penultimate
2:02:30paragraph
2:02:34there that the post office would do
2:02:37anything and everything to try and keep
2:02:38the failures of horizon hidden why do
2:02:41you think that they were why did you
2:02:44think that they were trying to keep the
2:02:46failures of horizon
2:02:49hidden I think a number of reasons first
2:02:52off I think their their field um
2:02:56Personnel didn't understand it to any
2:03:00great um depth and they just seem to
2:03:04follow the corporate Mantra that Horizon
2:03:07is robust and that's it and everyone
2:03:10else is
2:03:11wrong
2:03:13um they didn't seem to want to
2:03:16engage uh in useful discussions about
2:03:20how to try and
2:03:22uh improve things they it any that they
2:03:28did make any approaches they made were
2:03:32very much surface it was just for show
2:03:35rather than to change things in any
2:03:38meaningful
2:03:39way it was a variety it was a variety of
2:03:42things at that
2:03:44time is what you write in that paragraph
2:03:47um was what you wrote in that paragraph
2:03:50based on your own experience or were you
2:03:52drawing from wider experiences of others
2:03:54then
2:03:56well first off it um I had some
2:04:00experience of those types of systems and
2:04:03it it was obvious it was extremely
2:04:05poorly designed and it didn't really do
2:04:08the job it was meant to and there were a
2:04:09huge amount of problems and I kept on
2:04:11hearing problems little problems from
2:04:14all sorts of people um other sub
2:04:18postmasters because I used to go to
2:04:20Regional uh Federation meetings as well
2:04:23and you did sit and chat and everyone
2:04:26had a moan and a winge about it uh and
2:04:29you heard of stories of where people
2:04:31were literally taking their computers
2:04:34and the whole systems and leaving them
2:04:36on the pavement outside and telling post
2:04:39office to come and collect it those were
2:04:40the sort of stories that were running
2:04:42around at the time in there uh
2:04:46but it was I think it was the lack of
2:04:49real engagement in all of this to try
2:04:52and resolve the problems address the
2:04:54problems and resolve them which made me
2:04:57think they just you know they just put
2:04:59up a stone wall on the whole thing your
2:05:01last paragraph might be considered to be
2:05:07prophetic yeah I don't suppose I don't
2:05:10suppose when um you wrote it you would
2:05:14end up 20 years later sitting here
2:05:16answering my questions
2:05:20no and in the clip of um
2:05:23materials
2:05:26that identified or or led to the Sandy
2:05:30Steven comprehensive review that we saw
2:05:34the five paragraphs on the one page in
2:05:36that clip of material is a note from um
2:05:40Mike wakeley your retail line
2:05:43manager um contributing to that document
2:05:47and he said that at this time Allan
2:05:50believes his actions are now a matter of
2:05:54principle is that how you felt it was
2:05:57because it goes back to an earlier
2:05:59letter that they could hold me liable
2:06:02for any amount in there that's what I
2:06:04that's what they wanted me to agree to
2:06:07and that was
2:06:08wrong that can come down thank you I
2:06:11think one of the first things that you
2:06:12did after termination of your contract
2:06:15was to um set up the website um www.post
2:06:21office victims. org.uk I did yeah yes I
2:06:25did um and I also wrote to the local
2:06:28newspaper who to explain to the local
2:06:31community uh what had gone on un
2:06:34fortunately the local paper printed my
2:06:37letter in full to explain what had
2:06:40happened with post office and I also had
2:06:43um large scale posters blown up of that
2:06:45letter which were attached to the front
2:06:47of the door of our premises and remained
2:06:50there for quite a Time and postoffice
2:06:52victims. org UK was the nent group that
2:06:56subsequently became the jfsa is that
2:06:59right it it I suppose it was like a seed
2:07:03I wouldn't say organization
2:07:06it it was what I set up initially there
2:07:09to try and attract and draw uh other
2:07:11cases and also as a warning to others
2:07:15about getting involved with post office
2:07:17this is this is the type of organization
2:07:19you are um
2:07:22planning to get involved and there were
2:07:25other things I did as well around that
2:07:26time to uh try and raise uh the profile
2:07:30of the issue can we turn to um page 28
2:07:33of your witness statement
2:07:41please Federation and uh paragraph
2:07:5092
2:07:58and if I zoom in on that please you say
2:08:00my main objective for creating the jfsa
2:08:03was to expose the truth I wanted to
2:08:06create a body of former and current sub
2:08:08postmasters and Branch assistants which
2:08:10could provide a community for all those
2:08:11going through the same experiences with
2:08:13the post office I knew that I was not
2:08:15alone in my dealings with the post
2:08:17office and the jfsa was set up in order
2:08:19to ensure that other people in the same
2:08:21situation as myself knew that they too
2:08:24were not on their own as mentioned above
2:08:26there was a complete lack of support
2:08:27from post office and I believe those in
2:08:29s similar circumstances required um
2:08:35support um I've read elsewhere that one
2:08:38of the reasons that um you set up the
2:08:41group was that you and others had felt
2:08:45that you had been abandoned by every
2:08:48other organization so that you had to
2:08:50group together is that right yeah and
2:08:52and I think that's true um what you're
2:08:55saying there it was myself and others as
2:08:58well it wasn't I know I seem to take the
2:09:01lead in it but um there were a lot of
2:09:03others certainly in the early days there
2:09:05was a great deal of support from which
2:09:07other organizations had abandoned you
2:09:09and others well certainly the Federation
2:09:11the Federation was absolutely useless I
2:09:13mean they were just another department
2:09:15to post office as I believe it still is
2:09:17these days as well but um uh they why do
2:09:21you think they're just another
2:09:22department of the post office well at
2:09:24one time I believe they had an office in
2:09:26in post office headquarters but ignoring
2:09:29that um
2:09:31the it depends which bit we're going if
2:09:34you go right back to the early days the
2:09:372002 2003s and when I was going to these
2:09:39Federation meetings I know I attended
2:09:42one uh meeting uh where a sub postmaster
2:09:46at the back of the uh meeting group he
2:09:50started saying I've just had my post
2:09:52office taken off me and I'd have
2:09:53problems with Horizon and all the rest
2:09:55and the Federation exact the Federation
2:09:58exact people who were there escorted him
2:10:00out the back of the place uh they took
2:10:04him away out of that meeting I know
2:10:07perfectly well when my contract was
2:10:09terminated I went to a federation
2:10:12meeting to try and well a local branch
2:10:15one I went to a federation meeting where
2:10:18I tried to um speak on behalf off of
2:10:21that and um there was one of the
2:10:24national executive uh Federation members
2:10:28at that meeting and he stop tried to
2:10:31stop me speaking he refused to say this
2:10:34that I should be allowed to talk about
2:10:36such things at the meeting and if it
2:10:38hadn't been for the local chairman who
2:10:41was nol Thomas at that time um if it
2:10:45hadn't been for him talking and moving
2:10:47this chap out the way I'd never been
2:10:49able to get over what had happened to me
2:10:51and explain to the other IND so there
2:10:53was awful lot of pressure from the
2:10:55Federation to support post office in it
2:10:58in fact there is I don't know if you're
2:11:01going to show it there is
2:11:03correspondence um from the
2:11:06Federation where they actually support
2:11:08post office's position in terminating my
2:11:11contract um I don't know whether you're
2:11:14going to cover
2:11:16that um slightly out of order but I
2:11:19think I know what your um about can we
2:11:22yeah sorry you're asking about the
2:11:25Federation I'm the one that's supposed
2:11:26to bowl the fast
2:11:29balls um I think um if I can cover drive
2:11:33it back it's poll
2:11:35021
2:11:415384 if you're right that's a good slip
2:11:48[Music]
2:11:50catch
2:11:55is that the document you're talking
2:11:57about a letter to you from Colin Baker
2:12:01the General Secretary of the nfsp yeah I
2:12:04think that's the one
2:12:09yeah uh you you had written a couple of
2:12:12letters to him I'm not going to show now
2:12:15um of December 2003 and January
2:12:192004 and he notes that Betty Williams
2:12:22has written to Alan Leon we've seen that
2:12:24um he says I can go no higher within the
2:12:27Royal M group than Alan Leighton I'm
2:12:29sure that your Member of Parliament will
2:12:31have had as much if not more success
2:12:33than I would hopefully you'll have more
2:12:36information from that um
2:12:40route and then the last paragraph I
2:12:43think is the one you're referring to
2:12:44we're not in a position to provide
2:12:45information regarding other sub
2:12:47postmaster's dealings with post office
2:12:50we're aware there are some disputes
2:12:51around the time that um offices migrated
2:12:55from the manual system to the Horizon
2:12:57system but we are now of the view that
2:13:00Horizon works well and there are no real
2:13:02problems with post offices at which are
2:13:05operating the or operated by The Horizon
2:13:09system was that essentially the nfsp
2:13:12position as communicated to you Horizon
2:13:15works well there are no problems with
2:13:17post off in post offices with it yeah
2:13:20and I
2:13:22um it was very much I I mean the
2:13:25Federation always seemed to try and
2:13:27manage any of the problems around
2:13:29Horizon um I can recall a conference
2:13:33Federation conference main conference I
2:13:36think it was in 2002 around there
2:13:39in it was in candido which is why I went
2:13:43to it and there were a whole host of
2:13:46people raising queries delegates raising
2:13:49queries about Horizon in conference and
2:13:52it got to such a state that they
2:13:54couldn't move on with conference and
2:13:56Conference decided to set up a separate
2:13:59committee to look into Horizon issues
2:14:02and um and for members to report them to
2:14:04them and they would then discuss them a
2:14:06post
2:14:09office uh to what extent has the nfsp
2:14:12assisted you in establishing the facts
2:14:14in your case none to what extent has the
2:14:18nfsp assisted you in seeking red in your
2:14:21case
2:14:24none to your knowledge what role did the
2:14:27nfsp play in assisting other sub
2:14:29postmasters when it was alleged against
2:14:32the sub postmaster that they had a
2:14:35shortfall I have not heard of one
2:14:37instance where they've successfully done
2:14:39anything of that nature I think you tell
2:14:42us that you've been informed that the
2:14:44post office would often only allow a
2:14:47representative of the nfsp or a friend
2:14:50to sit in on interviews where suspension
2:14:53or termination was contemplated that's
2:14:56correct and you tell us in your
2:14:58statement that the nfsp nearly always
2:15:00agreed with the post office and said
2:15:02sometimes to the post postmaster come on
2:15:05ownup tell them what you did with the
2:15:07money
2:15:09yeah are these accounts that other sub
2:15:11poost Masters have given to you yes
2:15:14sir to your knowledge has the nfsp ever
2:15:17once helped a sub postmaster in any
2:15:19court case in which the operation of the
2:15:22Horizon system or the Integrity of the
2:15:25data which it produces has been
2:15:27questioned no to what extent did the
2:15:30nfsp assist in the group litigation none
2:15:33at
2:15:35all to what extent has the nfsp assisted
2:15:38others following the group litigation in
2:15:40obtaining redress I don't
2:15:43know thank you we can go back to um
2:15:46where we were in the um the account but
2:15:50that can come down from the screen thank
2:15:55you you'd set up the um
2:15:58jfsa and you tell us that from um the
2:16:01late 2000s onwards um say from about
2:16:042009 onwards you have spent an estimated
2:16:0830 to 40 hours um a week campaigning in
2:16:12relation to post office and Horizon is
2:16:15that right easily
2:16:17yes can we look please at page 27 of
2:16:20your witness
2:16:22[Music]
2:16:39statement and paragraph 87 at the
2:16:44top you say the challenges were faced at
2:16:47every step of the way since the post
2:16:49office would obstruct me
2:16:51the gravity and enormity of the problem
2:16:53was not recognized by others in power
2:16:55including government and it became clear
2:16:57that the only way to achieve progress
2:16:59was through a formal legal route which
2:17:01has its own challenges including
2:17:03obtaining the necessary funding for this
2:17:07route you say there that challenges were
2:17:09faced at every step of the way since the
2:17:12post office would obstruct me what had
2:17:14you got in mind when you were saying
2:17:15that
2:17:16well disclosure is a good one um they
2:17:21um I mean we went through before we got
2:17:23to to the court case we went through a
2:17:25whole host of schemes and they always
2:17:27used to say yes we be supportive yes
2:17:30we'll try you know with MPS and all the
2:17:32rest yes we'll we'll get on board with
2:17:34it yes we're looking for the truth and
2:17:36all the rest of it but all they did is
2:17:39is cause problems they they were not
2:17:41forthcoming with the details in there
2:17:44certainly disclosure is a very good
2:17:46example of that I mean cases used to
2:17:49take months and months to progress um
2:17:52I'm thinking of the initial mediation
2:17:56scheme uh for example um and it you just
2:18:01felt you though they were there you were
2:18:04still banging your head against a brick
2:18:06wall to try and get anything out of them
2:18:09because they were determined to Pro to
2:18:12protect the brand at any cost and they
2:18:16didn't want anything coming out or being
2:18:19disclosed that might cause damage to
2:18:21post
2:18:22office now you ceased work as a sub
2:18:24postmaster in November 20 2003 yeah yes
2:18:29yes and I think you've um uh not
2:18:32returned to other work since then
2:18:34because instead you've dedicated to
2:18:37campaigning for accountability justice
2:18:40and redress is that right yeah I
2:18:42mean I think the key the key issue has
2:18:45always been to expose the truth um uh uh
2:18:48right from the outset um because the
2:18:51other things sort of always felt they
2:18:53followed on if you once you know the
2:18:55truth about issues the rest will
2:18:57hopefully follow on
2:18:59afterwards
2:19:01um I mean I didn't set out to spend 20
2:19:05years doing this um uh I hadn't expected
2:19:09to be uh doing this so much by myself
2:19:13but
2:19:14it it got more and more complex and it
2:19:18was very it was harder and harder to
2:19:19share out out and work as a a bigger
2:19:23group um uh to take things forward so uh
2:19:29yeah I did finish up sort of leading in
2:19:32a way in there but obviously going back
2:19:34to to The Others When when when there
2:19:36was an opportunity for for their
2:19:40endorsement I it was it was encouraging
2:19:43along the way one one of the things we
2:19:45did do is bring people together and a
2:19:48lot of people it was a bit like um
2:19:51I don't mean this in a derogative way
2:19:53but it's a bit like stray lands they
2:19:54were lost people were lost out there
2:19:56they're the only ones they're wandering
2:19:58around wondering you know what have I
2:20:00done wrong they're suffering so badly
2:20:02but once you managed to bring them
2:20:03together to meet others in a similar
2:20:06situation it had enormous effect on
2:20:09their
2:20:10lives you spent um two decades
2:20:13undertaking this work um presumably
2:20:17thousands of hours yes
2:20:21why in your view has that been
2:20:24necessary because the further down the
2:20:27road you you went with it um the more
2:20:30you realized you couldn't let it
2:20:35go I think you um at one stage um
2:20:39attempted the um strategy of speaking to
2:20:42government about this yeah can we turn
2:20:46please to correspondence with Ed Davy MP
2:20:49in May 2010
2:20:51that can come down from the screen thank
2:20:53you and so to put this into context to
2:20:56orientate ourselves May 2010 jfsa was
2:21:01well established now yeah yes um the
2:21:04computer weekly article had been written
2:21:07by Rebecca Thompson on the 11th of May
2:21:102009 MH and I think you were indeed
2:21:13interviewed by her as part of um her
2:21:16work yes that's correct and her work
2:21:20Drew to together the facts about a
2:21:22number of cases
2:21:24yes can we look then at the letter that
2:21:26you wrote to Ed Davy mp on the 20th of
2:21:29May 2010 um ukg
2:21:33301
2:21:43619 so um as we can see from the way
2:21:47you've addressed the letter um at the
2:21:50top
2:21:51um Minister for postal Affairs within
2:21:54the Department of Business Innovation
2:21:57and skills sometimes called um Biz so I
2:22:00think um to put his um position in
2:22:02context there he was the then Minister
2:22:05for postal of Affairs the new government
2:22:08having been
2:22:09formed 14 days earlier on the 6th of May
2:22:162010 general election that year was 6th
2:22:19of May so he's 14 days here in can we
2:22:21read the letter together um you say I'm
2:22:25writing to you with regard to your
2:22:27position as Minister on behalf of
2:22:30jfsa we're an independent group of EX
2:22:33and serving sub poost Masters who've
2:22:34suffered at the hands of the post office
2:22:36and their Horizon system ever since it
2:22:38was first installed our website outlines
2:22:42how we came about and our aims as well
2:22:45as offering sample cases that were
2:22:47provided by some of the group currently
2:22:49the group numbers CL to 100 though we
2:22:51continue to be joined by others who have
2:22:53learned of jfsa and have found that
2:22:56there is nowhere else to turn for help
2:22:58in every instance the post office acts
2:23:00as judge jury and executioner and the
2:23:03individual is deserted by their reputed
2:23:06reputed representative organization the
2:23:09national Federation of sub poost Masters
2:23:11invariably these cases all stem from the
2:23:13flows sorry the flaws of the Horizon
2:23:16system that the post office introduced
2:23:18and which they refus to admit has ever
2:23:20suffered from a single problem the
2:23:23evidence is there to be found by anyone
2:23:24in a position of being able to unlock
2:23:26doors instead of placing barriers in the
2:23:28way of those pursuing the information
2:23:31our organization has access to a number
2:23:33of Specialists who could provide the
2:23:35questions and analyze the resulting data
2:23:38if required uh though an
2:23:41independent um external investigation
2:23:43instigated at ministerial level would be
2:23:46most appropriate and will without doubt
2:23:49easily find evidence of the error ridden
2:23:52system I'm sure we'll appreciate that
2:23:54there is not a single computer system
2:23:55that does not from time to time suffer
2:23:57from errors especially when the size and
2:24:00level of complexity of the programs
2:24:02associated with the Horizon system the
2:24:05post office blindly state that there are
2:24:06not nor have there ever been any system
2:24:09errors so subsequently anything wrong is
2:24:11entirely the responsibility of the sub
2:24:13postmaster as that is what they've
2:24:15agreed to when signing their contract
2:24:18this is a contract that was produced in
2:24:201994 and does not address nor identify
2:24:23new technology but they're still using
2:24:25it to intimidate and prosecute sub
2:24:27postmasters over the page the weight of
2:24:30evidence we've been collecting over the
2:24:32years continues to grow and gain in
2:24:34standing it's only the flat refusal of
2:24:37the post office to allow experts to
2:24:39examine the system which is holding back
2:24:41this major scandal from breaking with
2:24:43the continuing sorry the growing numbers
2:24:45in jfsa and the support we're now
2:24:48finding from the it community and the
2:24:49media it's just a matter of time until
2:24:51the real truth about the post office and
2:24:53Horizon is exposed over the years I've
2:24:56personally submitted written details of
2:24:58all of this to the Select Committee of
2:25:00the DTI and then on two other occasions
2:25:02to that of Burr and put simply the
2:25:05information has either been buried or
2:25:06disappeared others of JF jfsa have
2:25:09followed the route of contacting their
2:25:11MPS who've taken the matter up with the
2:25:13post office on their behalf subsequently
2:25:15they're stonewalled or handled by the
2:25:17post office often with off-the-shelf
2:25:19answers where where they only change the
2:25:21name and address I'm writing to you on
2:25:23behalf of the group I'm asking for a
2:25:25meeting where we can present our case to
2:25:28you much has appeared in the Press over
2:25:29the last few days that government is
2:25:31going to change and I only hope that's
2:25:33true if it is the abuse of sub poost
2:25:36Masters that has been going on under the
2:25:38protection of the previous government
2:25:39May well come to an
2:25:44end so your letter to um Mr dve MP um
2:25:50provides um some detail either in the
2:25:52body of the letter or through cross
2:25:54referencing to your um website as to the
2:25:58issues that sub postmasters were facing
2:26:01and informs Mr Davy that um the post
2:26:04office's conduct amounted to a
2:26:07scandal yes very much can we look at the
2:26:10reply please
2:26:12abat
2:26:18701 um
2:26:20dear Alan Bates um thank you for your
2:26:23letter of the 20th of May requesting a
2:26:26meeting since 2001 when the Royal Male
2:26:29which includes post office limited was
2:26:30set up as a public limited company with
2:26:32the government as its only shareholder
2:26:34government has adopted an arms length
2:26:35relationship with the company uh so that
2:26:38it has commercial Freedom to run its
2:26:40business operations without interference
2:26:42from the shareholder the Integrity of
2:26:44the post office system is an operational
2:26:46and contractual matter for the Post
2:26:48Office and not government and whilst I
2:26:50do appreciate your concerns and those of
2:26:52alliance members I do not believe that a
2:26:54meeting would serve any useful
2:26:59purpose you tell us in your um witness
2:27:01statement that you took um offense at
2:27:04the term arms length to um describe the
2:27:09role that the government played in
2:27:11relation to overseeing and monitoring
2:27:14the post office why well it's because of
2:27:17the structure wasn't it government the
2:27:19soul share holder they were the owners
2:27:22as such of all of this and how can how
2:27:25can you run or take control or sort take
2:27:28responsibility for for a an organization
2:27:32without having some interest in there or
2:27:35trying to be in control in fact
2:27:36government were pumping huge amounts of
2:27:39money into post office year after year
2:27:42so you know they need to be
2:27:44held responsible
2:27:47or they need to be addressed really the
2:27:50way that they've been going on and it's
2:27:53very hard to engage them in it um not
2:27:56nowadays they're a bit more interested
2:27:58these days but I mean at that time to
2:28:00try and get government to to take it on
2:28:02board seriously it was but before a four
2:28:05part drama on well I me no I In fairness
2:28:08yes the drama is great did a lot for for
2:28:10us but I mean we've had enormous cross
2:28:14party support from many MPS over the
2:28:17years and some of whom I think you'll
2:28:19see you know shortly but I mean um
2:28:23the you the time this this letter was
2:28:26written was in
2:28:292010 and I think at that time we were
2:28:32involved with a firm called uh shith a
2:28:35law firm called shith and there have
2:28:37been a number of meetings bringing
2:28:38people together and in fact shmith had
2:28:41been working with the MP so we were we
2:28:43were growing a body we were growing an
2:28:45interest and a number of the other MPS
2:28:49were find finding their own um
2:28:53constituents who'd had problems some
2:28:55postmaster problems so it was starting
2:28:59to become a little more gelled as as an
2:29:03organization and the number and with a a
2:29:07substantial a growing and growing number
2:29:10in there and it was very much why we
2:29:15felt government should have been
2:29:17involved at that
2:29:18time I mean
2:29:20you show me this letter from Ed Davy and
2:29:25I I I don't know what your script is but
2:29:28I I'm I'm more concerned about another
2:29:32letter that came in response from uh a
2:29:36letter I wrote to Ed Davey and um I'm
2:29:40not sure whether you're going to go to
2:29:42that let's see let's
2:29:45see you tell us in your witness
2:29:47statement I'm not going to turn it up um
2:29:49it's paragraph 100 4 um that this
2:29:52response from um Mr Davy was
2:29:55disappointing because he had not taken
2:29:57account of anything which you had said
2:30:00in your letter and indeed appeared to be
2:30:02a standard template form of response is
2:30:05that correct
2:30:06yes and I think you didn't keep those
2:30:08feelings to yourself at the time you in
2:30:12fact sent a reply to Mr
2:30:14dve um on the 8th of July 2010 can we
2:30:17please look at ukg
2:30:20301
2:30:326099 you say um I have to say that your
2:30:35response to me dated the 31st of May
2:30:37that's one we've just looked at
2:30:39regarding the very serious very serious
2:30:41issues I had uh raised was not only
2:30:45disappointing but I actually found your
2:30:47comments
2:30:48offensive it seems though that um there
2:30:51are new politicians in post the
2:30:53government hasn't changed the letter you
2:30:55sent is little different to the one I
2:30:56received seven years ago from the
2:30:58minister responsible for post offices at
2:31:00that time and so many more lives have
2:31:03been ruined in the interim um because of
2:31:06that same
2:31:08attitude it's not that you can't get
2:31:10involved or cannot investigate the
2:31:12matter after all you do Own 100% of the
2:31:15shares and normally shareholders are
2:31:17concerned about the morality of the
2:31:19business they own it's because you've
2:31:21adopted an armed length relationship
2:31:23that you have allowed a once great
2:31:25institution to be asset Stripped by
2:31:27little more than thugs in suits and
2:31:30you've enabled them to carry on with
2:31:32impunity regardless of the human misery
2:31:35and suffering they inflict you can
2:31:37listen to your civil servants telling
2:31:39you that these are really an operational
2:31:41matter for the post office to deal with
2:31:44you can even listen to the post office
2:31:45telling you Horizon is wonderful that
2:31:47there's never um ever been a problem it
2:31:50is inherently robust and these are just
2:31:53a few malcontents trying to cause
2:31:54trouble or you can meet and hear us
2:31:58sorry you can meet with us and hear the
2:32:00real truth behind Horizon and what the
2:32:02post office is actually up to your civil
2:32:06servants in the post office will not
2:32:07tell you about post office staff
2:32:09harassing sick ex sub postmasters
2:32:11demanding written Promises of money or
2:32:13they'll send the police around they
2:32:15won't tell you that the post office
2:32:16watched post offices heading into
2:32:18trouble fails to provide any help and
2:32:20then Waits until the problem shows a
2:32:22loss of 20,000 plus so that the sub
2:32:25postm then Falls foul with the proceed
2:32:27to Crime act they won't tell you that
2:32:29when someone wants to sell their post
2:32:31office and has a suitable buyer post
2:32:33office will turn down the applicant to
2:32:35drive that business into the ground you
2:32:37won't hear about sub postmasters ending
2:32:39requesting audits of their offices and
2:32:42having to wait for up to um five years
2:32:44for someone to turn up in offices
2:32:46turning over5 million a year neither
2:32:49will they tell you of the cases where
2:32:51the post office have run an audit closed
2:32:53the post office bankrupting the owner
2:32:56who loses his business house and family
2:32:58holds a pending court case over him for
2:33:0018 months then drops the charges and
2:33:02walks away nor will they tell you um
2:33:05tell all about how they are stopping sub
2:33:07post Masters selling on the post office
2:33:10side of their business in order to
2:33:12recover the original investment they
2:33:14won't even tell you the post office
2:33:16sorry that the Horizon system is
2:33:17designed to entrap sub post Masters so
2:33:19that they can easily finish up in prison
2:33:21just by trying to open up the day after
2:33:23a trading uh period balance this is just
2:33:27a taste of some of the practices your
2:33:28company is carrying out in your name day
2:33:30after day they brandish a big legal
2:33:32stick fail to provide evidence in court
2:33:35and rely on the clause in the 1994
2:33:37contract about a sub postmaster being
2:33:39liable for any loss from their office
2:33:42however it occurs yet their shy Horizon
2:33:44system is the root cause of all of this
2:33:47post office themselves lose thousands of
2:33:49pounds from each of the crown offices
2:33:51that they run using Horizon though their
2:33:53staff are not treated as guilty and to
2:33:55proven innocent but a sub postm is the
2:33:58hold of this Scandal is teetering on the
2:34:00edge of a precipice at this point but
2:34:02it's still not too late for you to
2:34:04reconsider convening a meeting to
2:34:06discuss this issue involved if you're
2:34:08prepared to keep an open
2:34:14mind it seems that um following your
2:34:18letter
2:34:20um Mr Davy agreed to a
2:34:24meeting yes I think so um at um
2:34:28paragraph 105 of your witness statement
2:34:30there's no need to turn it up you
2:34:32confirm that you attended a meeting with
2:34:35um Mr Davy on or about the 7th of
2:34:38October um and you tell us that you
2:34:40don't in fact have a note of the meeting
2:34:43and can't recall details of the um
2:34:47meeting the inquiry is in possession of
2:34:49a briefing document for Mr Davy for the
2:34:51purposes of um his attendance at that
2:34:54meeting um with you um can we see
2:34:58whether we can look at that please
2:35:00ukg
2:35:076062 it's dated as you'll see the 5th of
2:35:10October
2:35:122010 and the um purpose of the document
2:35:17is a rescheduled meeting with you on the
2:35:197th of October to discuss the jfsa
2:35:22claims that endemic flaws in the Horizon
2:35:25system have resulted in a number of sub
2:35:27poost Masters having their contracts
2:35:29wrongly
2:35:30terminated um and in many cases
2:35:32prosecuted for uh false
2:35:35accounting and if we scroll down
2:35:39please it sets out the U
2:35:42background to the
2:35:46meeting recalling the history of your
2:35:48two letters
2:35:50describing the second as being more
2:35:57confrontational and then it says that
2:35:59this is the fourth line of that
2:36:02paragraph uh that letter was followed by
2:36:04reports that channel 4 were planning to
2:36:07run a news item on the jfsa
2:36:10campaign we then recommended offering a
2:36:13meeting in response to this second
2:36:16request that's the letter we've just
2:36:17read quote for presentational reasons
2:36:21against the background of potential
2:36:23publicity playing heavily on government
2:36:26Minister quote refusing to meet victims
2:36:30of government-owned post office Horizon
2:36:32system which has systemic faults
2:36:34resulting in wrongful accusations of
2:36:37theft and false accounting end um
2:36:42quote so this records that the
2:36:45recommendation to Mr Davy was that he
2:36:46should offer to attend a meeting for
2:36:49presentational reasons against the
2:36:51background of potential publicity I the
2:36:54channel
2:36:554 uh news item when you um attended the
2:37:00meeting can you recall whether Mr Davy
2:37:02appeared to engage with the substance of
2:37:04the issues that you were raising I don't
2:37:08recall you don't recall whether he did
2:37:11or not or you I don't I don't recall the
2:37:15the the detail of of the meeting and I'm
2:37:19quite certain that if there had been
2:37:21something positive that was coming out
2:37:22of it I'd have remembered
2:37:25that if we scrolled on on the briefing
2:37:28note for Mr
2:37:30Davis sorry Mr
2:37:33Davy um it sets out the
2:37:37objectives he's to seek to establish at
2:37:39a very early stage whether legal action
2:37:42against post office is imminent or
2:37:45planned and it will be prent to adopt a
2:37:47subdudes approach in the comments you
2:37:50make he should emphasize the issues
2:37:52raised by the jfsa or operational and
2:37:54contractual
2:37:55matters should make the point about
2:37:58government having an arms length
2:38:01relationship establish whether the jfsa
2:38:03is committed or planning to initiate
2:38:06action against the post
2:38:08office uh note that it will be for the
2:38:10relevant legal process to decide on the
2:38:12jfa
2:38:14case demonstrate you're prepared to hear
2:38:17the jsa's side of the story
2:38:20but make it clear you're not in a
2:38:21position to offer substantive comment
2:38:24and avoid committing to setting up an
2:38:26independent or external um review of
2:38:31horizon do you recall whether Mr Davy
2:38:34responded to the points that you had
2:38:36made in detail in your letter of the 8th
2:38:38of July no I don't recall
2:38:41sorry to your
2:38:43mind was Mr Davy aware at the conclusion
2:38:46of your meeting that a scandal in your
2:38:49view had taken place and was in the
2:38:51process of still taking place I'm I I
2:38:54don't
2:38:55recall did Mr Davie um altered the
2:38:59position that he had set out in the
2:39:00letter that the government enjoyed an
2:39:03arms length um relationship with the
2:39:06post office in the light of the concerns
2:39:08that you had raised I don't know I don't
2:39:11what was the outcome of the
2:39:15meeting um I can't think of anything
2:39:19star that came out of it otherwise i'
2:39:21probably recall it but um I I suppose I
2:39:24mean this has been like a long journey
2:39:27you sort
2:39:28of you finish one thing you move on to
2:39:31the next been there done that tried that
2:39:33so let's just keep going um so I think
2:39:36it was just another step along the way
2:39:39did you walk away from the meeting with
2:39:41Mr Davey having said that he was going
2:39:43to do anything at all not that I can
2:39:47recall which I can recall from other
2:39:50ministers I've met are you able to
2:39:53remember any positive development
2:39:55arising from the
2:39:57meeting
2:39:59no thank you that can come
2:40:02down looking at the way that the um
2:40:07Horizon Scandal
2:40:09developed what view do you take of the
2:40:11arms length approach that the government
2:40:13took in relation to its oversight of the
2:40:15post
2:40:16office I think it should have been
2:40:18involved or got involv involved far
2:40:20earlier on and in fact
2:40:26um don't know preempt where you're going
2:40:28but there was a uh I think one of the
2:40:32responses I think I got from Ed dav's
2:40:36office at a later time which oh no it
2:40:40might have been a different Minister
2:40:41sorry I maybe jumping the gun it was it
2:40:45was a a response that I'd written to one
2:40:47of the ministers for a meeting
2:40:50but the the and to inform them that four
2:40:54letters of intent had been issued by the
2:40:58lawyers Shu Smiths at that time but the
2:41:01response didn't come from the minister
2:41:04it came from the shareholder executive
2:41:08I.E
2:41:09government um so they were fully aware
2:41:13that legal proceedings were potentially
2:41:17about to
2:41:18begin
2:41:22throughout your statement you refer to
2:41:24the responses of government ministers
2:41:26across the years um Pac mcfaden Ed Davey
2:41:30Norman lamb Joe Swinson and
2:41:34others on being repeatedly informed
2:41:36about the um concerns of sub postmasters
2:41:40and Crown office employees the formation
2:41:43of the
2:41:45jfsa and indeed the
2:41:47Glo in which they say that the the post
2:41:49office is an arms length body that the
2:41:52matters raised were matters for the post
2:41:53office to deal with and that the post
2:41:56office was independent of
2:41:58government the I I do think a lot of the
2:42:02ministers a lot of them come in for
2:42:04stick in the inquiry and all the rest of
2:42:06it and I'm sure some of it's deserved
2:42:09but I actually hold the
2:42:12department um and I I I hold the Civil
2:42:15Service more to blame in a lot of these
2:42:18instances why things never progressed at
2:42:21the time because I'm sure between them
2:42:23and post office briefing ministers they
2:42:25were briefing them in the direction they
2:42:27wanted to to brief them in not that was
2:42:30for the benefit of the group or the
2:42:32individuals in there because of the
2:42:34positions that they felt they were in
2:42:36and that should be taken at that time
2:42:38and also knowing that they probably have
2:42:41other
2:42:43organizations um hammering away or and
2:42:46nagging at them but they were going
2:42:49probably wait and see who got the
2:42:51furthest who got the
2:42:53furthest but I I mean I I do think it's
2:42:56I do c certainly hold the officials far
2:42:59more guilty in all of this than the
2:43:01politician you tell us um finally before
2:43:03lunch um in paragraph 298 of your
2:43:06witness statement that around this point
2:43:09the point being after the settlement of
2:43:10the group litigation the government
2:43:12abandoned the line that this was all a
2:43:14matter for the Post Office and moved on
2:43:16to the new line that it had been misled
2:43:19by the post office is that your view I
2:43:23don't think they could deny anything
2:43:24else could they
2:43:26really thank you very much Mr bit sir if
2:43:29that's an appropriate moment can I ask
2:43:31that I think it's five P now can we um
2:43:34reconvene at 52
2:43:37yeah so 5 to2 5 to two everyone
2:43:46yeah

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Alan Bates - Day 117 AM (09 April 2024) - Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry by Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 23,140 words across 3,533 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.