Hundreds of Post Office workers ‘vindicated’ by High Court ruling over faulty Post Office IT system

[baldrick]

At some point, presumably quite soon after the new system was installed, senior management were fully aware of the faults and wete faced with two options.
A. Go back to the old system and get fujitsu to rectify the bugs.
B. Plough ahead regardless and fuck the consequences even if it meant criminalising hundreds of their own staff.

Which then leads to three serious questions.
Who made that decision?
Why the fuck did they do it?
Why aren't they in prison?

I actually think in the early days they did assume the system was correct and that many, possibly hundreds, of ordinary people who run small businesses of the kind that are the backbone of the country were thieves or engaged in fraud. And they didn't think this was weird or unusual or worthy of investigation in any way, because this is what they think of normal everyday people.

 

[Silas Loom]

I actually think in the early days they did assume the system was correct and that many, possibly hundreds, of ordinary people who run small businesses of the kind that are the backbone of the country were thieves or engaged in fraud. And they didn't think this was weird or unusual or worthy of investigation in any way, because this is what they think of normal everyday people.

The investigation branch, and the private prosecution team, in particular. No good comes of allowing a business to have its own police and prosecutors.

And in this particular case, it looks as if their mistrust of sub-postmasters was at least partly racist, hence the extraordinary colour-coding of people under scrutiny,

 

[Gerry1time]

Deming was a hero and really useful to quote to managers to get what you want. I've often thought of starting a thread about him but have feared it would attract abuse because he was from the business world and talking to managers (although those are the people that really need talking to).

Deming is awesome, I'm a huge fan. He may have been from the business world, but I've always seen him as someone who was in there disrupting it, trying to make it more human and less damaging to the people in it. His bit in 'Out Of The Crisis' on annual performance reviews is especially fantastic. He basically proves that the whole thing is meaningless, and you may as well just pick names out of a hat to decide your top performers each year, something that's always seemed to be the case to me at least.

 

[brogdale]

"People with targets and jobs dependent upon meeting them will probably meet the targets - even if they have to destroy the enterprise to do it."

Also sums up the entire Blair 'reform' project pretty well.

 

[two sheds]

He sounds interesting two sheds , but are his apothegms mutually coherent?

I have seen countless examples of target-driven short-termist stupidity of the sort covered in the quote from Gerry1time.

Incentives and motivations aren’t the same thing as system and process, so the 85% (or 98%) ascribed to the latter seems toppy. And it’s very common for bad managers to tweak process while ignoring bigger issues, such as that goals, incentives and motivations within an enterprise or a team are ill-aligned or counterproductive.

He needs a lot of studying but his view seems coherent to me (my only real criticism is that he wrote approvingly of some companies who weren't hugely ethical but who'd improved their delivery 'quality', but he was (a) American and (b) from the business world).

The 98% I think comes from management setting up the systems that people work under - management sets up the system, and staff can't change the system. Even when you get obstreperous people in an organization they're there because management determine the procedures for taking staff on so that's really down to them, too.

I particularly liked him because when he went into an organization he started at the shop floor, talking to people who actually did the work and the problems they experienced. Managers know how things are supposed to work, staff know how they actually do work.

He hated targets because managers normally set them with no regard to staff having the resources to meet them. It's the system that overwhelmingly determine the results people get.

He stressed that you have to work on the system. Why I like him so much is that his views seem completely transferable to any organization not just the short-term profit dominated ones we have now (another of his hates).

But a bit of a digression. I will start a thread and bugger the consequences.

 

[Chz]

I'm sure there's a deal of truth to what you say there, (there's usually asymmetry of information/know-how between the purchaser & provider of IT systems), but what would have been simple enough for POL to do was to examine their rates of convictions pre and post implementation. They did not need to be IT experts to see they suddenly had a massive increase of convictions without explanation; not rocket (or computer) science.

They did that, and they noticed the difference. Their conclusion was that postmasters had been diddling them for decades and the new system had finally caught the bastards so they were going to nail them to the wall. And while it's true that at first the PO was unaware of how bad Horizon was, Fujitsu came clean to them about it quite early in the process and the reaction was to work together to cover everything up.

 

[two sheds]

Also sums up the entire Blair 'reform' project pretty well.

Yep, his statements to me transfer perfectly to governments.

 

[two sheds]

Their conclusion was that postmasters had been diddling them for decades and the new system had finally caught the bastards so they were going to nail them to the wall.

Fucking hell that explains a lot.

 

[brogdale]

They did that, and they noticed the difference. Their conclusion was that postmasters had been diddling them for decades and the new system had finally caught the bastards so they were going to nail them to the wall. And while it's true that at first the PO was unaware of how bad Horizon was, Fujitsu came clean to them about it quite early in the process and the reaction was to work together to cover everything up.

The core of the criminality, then?

 

[Spymaster]

They did that, and they noticed the difference. Their conclusion was that postmasters had been diddling them for decades and the new system had finally caught the bastards so they were going to nail them to the wall. And while it's true that at first the PO was unaware of how bad Horizon was, Fujitsu came clean to them about it quite early in the process and the reaction was to work together to cover everything up.

Some of these people were accused of stealing very large amounts though. In some cases £100k+ in an accounting period; not over many years. If you nick that kind of money you have to do something with it, and that would usually involve a paper/electronic trail. It's not easy to make 100 grand vanish into thin air. Organised criminals expend vast resources to hide and launder money. It's possible that a few postmasters were sophisticated enough to do it, but 800-odd? All since a new computer system was implemented? That's got to ring fucking massive alarm bells.

When someone's accused of stealing that kind of money there's an investigation into their finances and what they did with it. Clearly in these cases that didn't happen so there's the question of what evidence they were convicted on.

 

[brogdale]

Clearly in these cases that didn't happen so there's the question of what evidence people were convicted on.

Which goes to the crux of the failings of the criminal justice system with its default to believing the IT over the accused. That needs to be one aspect that's addressed after the immediate knee-jerk political actions to kill this story.

 

[RiderOnTheStorm]

Just finished the ITV show and cant say I 'enjoyed' it (as it made my blood boil!) but really glad I did. Those poor people ..... and those b'stards.

Some thoughts (may have been voiced before, apologies in advance if so):
=What happened the money? - PO made many people pay the 20k, 40k, etc because the system said it was due .... where is this money now? This was 'real' money, unlike the numbers on the Horizon screen at the end of the day. The show did mention that it was all swallowed up by PO eventually. Surely it should be returned to the folk now?

=I have worked in IT for 25 years and its MAD for any computer company to say the system doesnt have access to the 'live' environment . Of course it does. How do they de-bug or investigate errors? How do they deliver upgrades & patches?

=Management defending their position: I think that every job is more complicated than it seems from the outside. Just watch an episode of How Its Made when they make a safety pin or something! So when a system is criticised, I think there is a natural circling-of-the-wagons and declaring 'you dont know what you are talking about' . It takes a good manager / leader to be able to listen to complaints / criticism / suggestions and weigh them to determine if they are valid.

=Which leads me to: The Peter Principal. Which, if you dont know, says that if a person is good at their job, they get a promotion. If they are good at that new level, they get a new promotion , etc etc. Until they get to a point where they are no longer working in their area of training / expertise so they are no longer good at what they are paid to do (eg good footballers becoming a managers .... ;-) ... ) In a big company, this means that theres a lot of people in middle / higher management that are way out of their depth and just getting by on the day-to-day stuff. Then something out of the ordinary happens, and its victim blaming time. You can see this regularly when you ask someone a question that they dont know the answer to ..... "Why do you want to do that?" is the usual reply of those that are lost.

 

[Chz]

When someone's accused of stealing that kind of money there's an investigation into their finances and what they did with it. Clearly in these cases that didn't happen so there's the question of what evidence they were convicted on.

That's the most unbelievable part of the story, really. The money never existed, and somehow they were found guilty of stealing it. These are generally people living quite modestly, I don't see how they could ever explain how they moved £50k (in 20 years ago money) around without getting spotted. Clearly they thought all postmasters were criminal fucking masterminds in addition to being crooked.

ETA: It really is a case of something that the more and deeper you look at it, the more disgusting and criminal it is. Great that Parliament is talking of quashing the convictions, but this does nothing for the hundreds of people who paid back this non-existent money to make the prosecution go away. Money that went into the PO's profits and the board's bonuses. Money that was paid "back" on the condition that the PO took away all the paperwork and records around it and destroyed it. Those people will never see anything. They can't prove it.

 

[Wilf]

Vennels has handed back her CBE. But not, at the time of writing, all the money she got paid for destroying hundreds of lives.

One little detail I got from the BBC Sounds documentary was that senior execs even paid themselves bonuses for cooperating with one of the inquiries.

 

[brogdale]

One little detail I got from the BBC Sounds documentary was that senior execs even paid themselves bonuses for cooperating with one of the inquiries.

FFS; shouldn't be surprised...but really

 

[Wilf]

I actually think in the early days they did assume the system was correct and that many, possibly hundreds, of ordinary people who run small businesses of the kind that are the backbone of the country were thieves or engaged in fraud. And they didn't think this was weird or unusual or worthy of investigation in any way, because this is what they think of normal everyday people.

Kind of. The information that the system had bugs affecting balances was known very early. What happened was a mixture of wilful ignorance, refusal to pass key data on and managerial expectations that they would only hear one version of events. At various points that reached the level of outright dishonesty. And this was across both the PO and Fujitsu.

 

[two sheds]

Just finished the ITV show and cant say I 'enjoyed' it (as it made my blood boil!) but really glad I did. Those poor people ..... and those b'stards.

Some thoughts (may have been voiced before, apologies in advance if so):
=What happened the money? - PO made many people pay the 20k, 40k, etc because the system said it was due .... where is this money now? This was 'real' money, unlike the numbers on the Horizon screen at the end of the day. The show did mention that it was all swallowed up by PO eventually. Surely it should be returned to the folk now?

=I have worked in IT for 25 years and its MAD for any computer company to say the system doesnt have access to the 'live' environment . Of course it does. How do they de-bug or investigate errors? How do they deliver upgrades & patches?

=Management defending their position: I think that every job is more complicated than it seems from the outside. Just watch an episode of How Its Made when they make a safety pin or something! So when a system is criticised, I think there is a natural circling-of-the-wagons and declaring 'you dont know what you are talking about' . It takes a good manager / leader to be able to listen to complaints / criticism / suggestions and weigh them to determine if they are valid.

=Which leads me to: The Peter Principal. Which, if you dont know, says that if a person is good at their job, they get a promotion. If they are good at that new level, they get a new promotion , etc etc. Until they get to a point where they are no longer working in their area of training / expertise so they are no longer good at what they are paid to do (eg good footballers becoming a managers .... ;-) ... ) In a big company, this means that theres a lot of people in middle / higher management that are way out of their depth and just getting by on the day-to-day stuff. Then something out of the ordinary happens, and its victim blaming time. You can see this regularly when you ask someone a question that they dont know the answer to ..... "Why do you want to do that?" is the usual reply of those that are lost.

One of the postmasters remarked that the money seemingly went into Post Office profits.

 

[Wilf]

FFS; shouldn't be surprised...but really

Nick Read got the money, as part of his £455,000 bonus for 2021-22.

Must figure out how to copy links on phone, but the story was 20 June this year in the Guardian.

 

[Wilf]

Kind of. The information that the system had bugs affecting balances was known very early. What happened was a mixture of wilful ignorance, refusal to pass key data on and managerial expectations that they would only hear one version of events. At various points that reached the level of outright dishonesty. And this was across both the PO and Fujitsu.

Just further on this, apparently significant bugs showed up in the dry runs of Horizon, before it went live. I'm certainly no expert and guess that's quite common in an IT system. However it was another thing not passed on to the people being prosecuted.

 

[Wilf]

Some of these people were accused of stealing very large amounts though. In some cases £100k+ in an accounting period; not over many years. If you nick that kind of money you have to do something with it, and that would usually involve a paper/electronic trail. It's not easy to make 100 grand vanish into thin air. Organised criminals expend vast resources to hide and launder money. It's possible that a few postmasters were sophisticated enough to do it, but 800-odd? All since a new computer system was implemented? That's got to ring fucking massive alarm bells.

When someone's accused of stealing that kind of money there's an investigation into their finances and what they did with it. Clearly in these cases that didn't happen so there's the question of what evidence they were convicted on.

From what I've read/heard, the PO prosecution branch were told to do exactly none of that investigating. It was a closed system of 'Horizon shows a deficit... Fujitsu says (lies) that Horizon works.. you stole the money'. None of the counter evidence was made available and the courts were stuck in the same loop.

 

[Petcha]

K, job done. I've just tuned into the beeb and it's still leading the news. They're exonerated. Can we move on?

 

[RiderOnTheStorm]

Just further on this, apparently significant bugs showed up in the dry runs of Horizon, before it went live. I'm certainly no expert and guess that's quite common in an IT system. However it was another thing not passed on to the people being prosecuted.

No IT system (or machine or device) is 100% error free. There are always bugs. But these were covered up and the users carried the can. What galls me in these sort of cases is that the business drags the sufferer to the court steps and then (sometimes) pays them off without admitting liability.

I don think anyone expects perfection. But its the deny-deny-deny attitude that hurts.

 

[Silas Loom]

K, job done. I've just tuned into the beeb and it's still leading the news. They're exonerated. Can we move on?

There’s still loads of legislative and structural change to consider.

Private prosecutions should not be a thing.

The default legal assumption that computer systems work needs to be modified sensibly to take account of where human error is quite likely (spreadsheet or bespoke software design) and where it is not (Excel itself and other mature COTS).

How is Fujitsu to be punished? The Cabinet Office had a fight with them in the 2010s and tried to get them precluded from bids; they managed perfectly well through existing frameworks and contract variations.

All of this will continue to be discussed in the context of Horizon, as it should be.

 

[scifisam]

K, job done. I've just tuned into the beeb and it's still leading the news. They're exonerated. Can we move on?

I assume you're taking the piss.

The money paid "back"needs to be returned with interest plus extra compensation (for the ones that never went to court, too) and certain people need to be prosecuted. The latter is unlikely to ever happen, but the former certainly can.

 

[izz]

K, job done. I've just tuned into the beeb and it's still leading the news. They're exonerated. Can we move on?

Why ? Should there be a limit on outrage ? Should there be a limit on public attention ? If you don't want to think about this issue now then don't, if you want to put your attention to the awful situation in the middle east then do so. There are threads elsewhere for that.

 

[Wilf]

K, job done. I've just tuned into the beeb and it's still leading the news. They're exonerated. Can we move on?

Have the suicides been brought back to life? Are Vennels et al serving sentences? Have all the victims even come forward yet?

 

[two sheds]

Have all the victims even come forward yet?

Another 100 on top of the ones that came forward immediately after the tv programme, I read

 

[Wilf]

Another 100 on top of the ones that came forward immediately after the tv programme, I read

Yes, I imagine there will be a fair number who 'just' had to cough up a few grand and then quietly sold the business. Along with dozens too traumatised to do anything at all till the ITV prog went out. Poor sods.

 

[Wilf]

Government about to pass blanket exonerated bill.

Horizon scandal: hundreds of post office operators to have convictions quashed

Move is designed to draw line under scandal but legal experts say it ‘must never be seen as a precedent’

www.theguardian.com

Amazing what Quality Docudrama + 'Ideal Victims' + Election Year can do.

 

[Buddy Bradley]

Have the suicides been brought back to life?

It's been a bit weird how the BBC coverage (at least) never mentions the suicides - it's always just about the hundreds wrongfully accused/convicted/appealed.