Mr Bates vs The Post Office
Discussion
VanDriver99 said:
The 555 postmasters who exposed the scandal by suing the Post Office received more than £42m plus costs when their claims were settled in 2019. But around £31m of this sum went to litigation funders, leaving the surviving claimants with little compensation for their shattered lives.
Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
The Post Office used a tactic of trying to bankrupt the legal team that brought the case, and they very nearly succeeded.Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
One particularly s
tty action was trying to recuse the judge mid trial, which stopped the trial process and cost millions in extra fees to deal with this cynical ploy to waste time and money.It was a high risk action they took against the PO and it took years for a group of financiers to be found to take on this risk, they were effectively fighting the British Government and it's exchequer in a case where it was known the PO, Government ministers and the civil service were colluding against the truth coming out.
If you don't understand how that can cost huge sums of money, then you need to consider educating yourself on the realities of someone without money trying to take on in the courts people or establishments with unlimited funds. Those with the funds will act like complete b
ds on principle, because they have no moral compass.Fastpedeller said:
I'm surely not the only person to notice the following:-
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
Makes sense, that would make individuals at Fuj. involved not just crap software !
Maxdecel said:
Fastpedeller said:
I'm surely not the only person to notice the following:-
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
Makes sense, that would make individuals at Fuj. involved not just crap software !
Fastpedeller said:
Maxdecel said:
Fastpedeller said:
I'm surely not the only person to notice the following:-
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
He was accused of theft of 94k. PO said the figure was 282k
282 is 3x 94, so was this simply an 'error' of 94k which Fuj tried to correct twice? we know how the figures increased when Fuj tried to input a negative amount ref Jo hamilton case. So maybe trying to correct it twice Fuj then 'gave up' and the figure, rather than reverting to zero became 282 ?
Makes sense, that would make individuals at Fuj. involved not just crap software !
540TORQUES said:
VanDriver99 said:
The 555 postmasters who exposed the scandal by suing the Post Office received more than £42m plus costs when their claims were settled in 2019. But around £31m of this sum went to litigation funders, leaving the surviving claimants with little compensation for their shattered lives.
Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
The Post Office used a tactic of trying to bankrupt the legal team that brought the case, and they very nearly succeeded.Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
One particularly s
tty action was trying to recuse the judge mid trial, which stopped the trial process and cost millions in extra fees to deal with this cynical ploy to waste time and money.It was a high risk action they took against the PO and it took years for a group of financiers to be found to take on this risk, they were effectively fighting the British Government and it's exchequer in a case where it was known the PO, Government ministers and the civil service were colluding against the truth coming out.
If you don't understand how that can cost huge sums of money, then you need to consider educating yourself on the realities of someone without money trying to take on in the courts people or establishments with unlimited funds. Those with the funds will act like complete b
ds on principle, because they have no moral compass.
Lee Castleton defended himself at the High Court but because he lost(due to PO lies) he ended up liable for a third of a million from the PO's costs and being bankrupted. Yes, PO's lawyers were probably expensive but High Court just costs a st load.Just been watching Dave Smiths evidence. Rather looks to me that he didn’t instigate the right report as to whether Horizon was robust or not. Just wanted a summary of why the business believed it was robust.
Strange that the report mentioned the possibility of having a full IT audit although that would mean that all criminal cases would be stayed and may cast doubt on previous convictions. No further investigations were agreed although DS claims that the legal case had nothing to do with that……..
And they expect us to believe that they didn’t know that there was at least some potential issues!
Strange that the report mentioned the possibility of having a full IT audit although that would mean that all criminal cases would be stayed and may cast doubt on previous convictions. No further investigations were agreed although DS claims that the legal case had nothing to do with that……..
And they expect us to believe that they didn’t know that there was at least some potential issues!
hidetheelephants said:
yes: Lee Castleton defended himself at the High Court but because he lost(due to PO lies) he ended up liable for a third of a million from the PO's costs and being bankrupted. Yes, PO's lawyers were probably expensive but High Court just costs a st load.
That was another detail I found hard to stomach. PO spent a st load.tload of money pursuing someone they knew would never be able to pay. The whole thing is so scummy and Vennells the vicar is proving to be a disgusting human being.hidetheelephants said:
540TORQUES said:
VanDriver99 said:
The 555 postmasters who exposed the scandal by suing the Post Office received more than £42m plus costs when their claims were settled in 2019. But around £31m of this sum went to litigation funders, leaving the surviving claimants with little compensation for their shattered lives.
Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
The Post Office used a tactic of trying to bankrupt the legal team that brought the case, and they very nearly succeeded.Now come on please......31 Million Pounds.Wasnt that taking advantage??
I worked on the Horizon Hotline.....If they had asked me I would have told them the system was faulty for nothing.
Solicitors will fleece you at the drop of a hat ...they are almost as guilty as the Post Office IMHO
One particularly s
tty action was trying to recuse the judge mid trial, which stopped the trial process and cost millions in extra fees to deal with this cynical ploy to waste time and money.It was a high risk action they took against the PO and it took years for a group of financiers to be found to take on this risk, they were effectively fighting the British Government and it's exchequer in a case where it was known the PO, Government ministers and the civil service were colluding against the truth coming out.
If you don't understand how that can cost huge sums of money, then you need to consider educating yourself on the realities of someone without money trying to take on in the courts people or establishments with unlimited funds. Those with the funds will act like complete b
ds on principle, because they have no moral compass. Lee Castleton defended himself at the High Court but because he lost(due to PO lies) he ended up liable for a third of a million from the PO's costs and being bankrupted. Yes, PO's lawyers were probably expensive but High Court just costs a st load.Up there along with Baroness Mone and the 50m Universal credit scam gang, POL mgt no better.
LimmerickLad said:
Boringvolvodriver said:
SydneyBridge said:
The chap this morning, former MD, does not seem to have a clue about anything
rather conveniently I would say. 
"I should've been aware ....I should've been, I wasn't".Obviously appointed for his managerial abilities.
Sway said:
Couldn't find the thread in NPE - but the Eye not letting go (quite bloody rightly!).
This should be front page news. As an aside, I've a relative working at Fujitsu (been there a very long time), in a non operational role.
They're treating staff appallingly at the moment too.
Any examples to share?This should be front page news. As an aside, I've a relative working at Fujitsu (been there a very long time), in a non operational role.
They're treating staff appallingly at the moment too.
Digger said:
Any examples to share?
Difficult without making it reasonably clear who they are chap unfortunately. However, suffice to say the UK offices are very low in the favour of the wider business, and they're acting on that basis in ways that I wouldn't usually expect a corporate to do... Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff