New whistleblower comes forward
In what could be one of the most significant developments in the Horizon story since Fujitsu engineer Richard Roll spoke to Panorama in 2015, a former troubleshooter on the pre-rollout Horizon system has given an interview to Computer Weekly, calling Horizon:
“a prototype that had been bloated and hacked together afterwards for several years, and then pushed screaming and kicking out of the door. It should never have seen the light of day. Never.”
Our interviewee did not want us to publish his name, nor make it known to Fujitsu or the Post Office as part of this process, but he has asked me to pass on his details to the ongoing Williams Inquiry into Horizon, the JFSA and any solicitors currently acting for Subpostmasters. He has indicated he is willing to provide a sworn witness statement about his experience.
Game-changer
Getting this testimony into the public domain has been a drawn-out process, and I am grateful for the opportunity to work with Karl and Bryan on the Computer Weekly team. The article contains only one man’s claims, which we have not been able to directly verify, but we have taken reasonable steps to satisfy ourselves he is who he says he is, and that publishing what he has to say is in the public interest. I hope it is of value to the many investigative strands pursuing this story as well as the casual reader. It could potentially be a game-changer.
“You’re the only one”
The refrain which has echoed down the years from Subpostmasters trapped in IT hell is “You’re the only one”. So many Subpostmasters say they were told they were the only branch in the country experiencing problems with Horizon. It is a matter of regret that this line was not pursued during the High Court litigation, especially as there was a Post Office witness in the box who I am assured had previously told two Subpostmasters they were the only ones having problems. It would have been interesting to see if that witness had denied or admitted doing so.
The reason I bring it up now is because right at the end of the three hour evidence session I mentioned in my last newsletter, Sir Wyn Williams makes it clear that one of his priorities is to “get to the bottom” of this alleged strategy by Post Office managers and investigators. Williams said:
“I was obviously not very happy to hear your compelling accounts of being told repeatedly, ‘Well, you are the only one with this problem,’ and clearly, [if] it was being replicated around the country, then it’s not too strong for me to say that that would be reprehensible.”
Williams asked Mark Bater from the CWU to “sit down for half an hour to an hour one day, collect your thoughts and any records you’ve got as to the number of cases that you’ve dealt with over years and the number of occasions, if you can, when this has been reported to you – that these people have been told that it’s only happening to them, because I really would like to try and get to the bottom of that, if I possibly can.”
The whole tenor of Williams’ approach in this session seems to suggest he is sympathetic to the plight of Subpostmasters. Whilst the inquiry may have no powers and few teeth, it might provide an opportunity for some former Postmasters to share their pain, and put together a body of evidence, which, if nothing else, should shame the organisations and individuals responsible for causing it.
I am aware the Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance has no interest in co-operating with the inquiry, and I understand their argument. The government set up the Williams inquiry so it would avoid having to do anything in terms of redress for Subpostmasters or holding Post Office execs and civil servants to account. But I also don’t see the harm in an individual stepping forward to give evidence, especially as the Parliamentary Ombudsman process, which the JFSA is pursuing, seems to happen behind closed doors.
Good news?
Finally, a former Subpostmaster gets in touch with what seems like good news. The SPM ran a Post Office before falling foul of Horizon. She was prosecuted and nearly ruined by the Post Office’s demands for allegedly missing cash. As part of her business relationship with the Post Office, before her troubles started, she took out a Post Office loan. This was backed by the Bank of Ireland at preferential rates for SPMs. After she was sacked the Post Office aggressively pursued her for the outstanding loan amount. The Subpostmaster agreed a repayment plan via Citizens Advice, and over the last ten years has been paying off this loan. Earlier this year, rather than the usual demand for cash, she got a letter from the Post Office writing off her remaining debt. No reason is given. The charging order on her property (her former Post Office) is also lifted. Again, no reason is given.
Curious. I wonder whether:
a) this is an indication the Post Office recognises her prosecution may well have been abuse of process and is quietly aiming to avoid giving her an incentive to sue
b) anyone else has got a similar story to tell.
If so – do get in touch – nick@nickwallis.com
Right. I am going to forward our whistleblower’s name and details to the JFSA, the Williams inquiry and the various solicitors representing Subpostmasters. Let’s see what happens next.
Yours
Nick