The husband of a former subpostmaster, who had her financial and mental health destroyed at the hands of the Post Office, is preparing a judicial review to challenge the government’s financial redress decisions.
In another twist in the Post Office Horizon scandal, Ken Tooby has warned the government that he will apply for judicial review of the decision to award him less than a third of a claim submitted on behalf of his late wife, June Tooby, who was blamed for losses recorded on the organisation’s faulty Capture software.
A judicial review would see a judge evaluate the lawfulness of decisions over the value of the offer and Tooby’s rejected appeal against it. This could impact a small cohort of former subpostmasters who suffered life-changing losses through Capture but have received derisory redress offers.
A government spokesperson said: “After more than two decades fighting for justice, subpostmasters and their families are finally receiving recognition and redress from the impacts of the Capture software.
“To date, over £8.7 million has been awarded to people affected by the [Capture] scandal, with offers set by an independent panel. We are working tirelessly to make sure every victim gets the justice and compensation they deserve as soon as possible. We do not comment on individual cases, and it would be inappropriate for the Department to comment on the potential legal action.”
June Tooby, who died in 2020, was a subpostmaster in County Durham. Her contract was terminated after nearly two decades when she had unexplained shortfalls. She had used Capture at the branch for almost a decade.
In 2024, an independent investigation was commissioned into Capture, which found there was a “reasonable likelihood” it had caused shortfalls in branch accounts, which ruined lives.
Tooby was the first former Capture user to receive an official apology from the Post Office for her treatment. In a letter, the Post Office wrote to Ken Tooby: “It is clear through the efforts of former postmasters and their families that there were significant failings at Post Office relating to Capture. We are truly sorry for these failings and their impact on all concerned, including your late wife, June.”
Capture was a PC-based software application that pre-dated the Horizon system, which has been at the heart of the Post Office scandal.
Triggered by Horizon drama
Former subpostmasters, who used the system in the 1990s, came forward with their stories following ITV’s 2024 drama about the Post Office Horizon scandal.
It was the same month that Kevan Jones, an MP at the time who now sits in the House of Lords, highlighted evidence of injustices triggered by Capture losses.
This ignited a campaign and, by December, the government promised financial redress and justice for subpostmasters affected by Capture problems. This followed an independent investigation by forensic experts at Kroll, which found there was a “reasonable likelihood” the Post Office Capture software had caused accounting losses.
Capture was a different software to Horizon, but the way the Post Office dealt with unexplained losses was the same, with subpostmasters covering the shortfalls, which often put them in life-changing difficulties. Many went bankrupt and some were prosecuted and convicted for financial crimes.
In a 2018 group litigation, High Court Judge Peter Fraser ruled that the Post Office showed “oppressive behaviour” towards the subpostmasters who had experienced shortfalls.
Regarding the Post Office’s policy to force subpostmasters to cover unexplained losses, he wrote in his judgment: “There can be no excuse, in my judgment, for an entity such as the Post Office to mis-state, in such clearly expressed terms, in letters that threaten legal action, the extent of the contractual obligation upon a [subpostmaster] for losses.
“The only reason for doing so, in my judgment, must have been to lead the recipients to believe that they had absolutely no option but to pay the sums demanded. It is oppressive behaviour.”
Diffrent treatment
After the huge court victory, the Post Office was forced to set up schemes to compensate effected subpostmasters. But former Capture users were not permitted to join Horizon shortfall redress schemes to make claims related to Capture, but were offered the chance to claim through a separate Capture redress scheme.
The Capture redress scheme is offering initial payments of £10,000 – with final award bands up to £300,000 – to subpostmasters who suffered because of the software’s flaws, with “exceptional cases” receiving payments above the upper limit.
At the time, a former subpostmaster who suffered at the hands of the Post Office’s faulty software said the announced compensation scheme “discriminates” against claimants.
Ken Tooby has been offered less than half of the amount claim. Offers to other Capture users, classed as exceptional cases, fall well below claims.
As reported previously by Computer Weekly, former subpostmaster Lee Bowerman, who is one of four “exceptional cases”, received a financial settlement offer through the Capture redress scheme which equated to just 7% of his professionally calculated claim.
The former subpostmaster in South Wales, who lost his business more than 30 years ago, was part of a group that helped the government department design the scheme.
Bowerman complained that consequential losses were not included in the offer and that there was limited opportunity to appeal decisions on redress awards. He called for parity with former Horizon users who were also affected in the Post Office scandal.
In the letter sent to former Department for Business and Trade (DBT) minister Blair McDougall MP, Bowerman wrote: “Throughout every meeting, without exception, we were explicitly assured that there would be full parity with the Horizon redress schemes. These assurances were clear and repeated.”
Bowerman said this has not happened in his case.
Solicitor Neil Hudgell of Hudgell Solicitors, which represents many former Capture users, said the Capture redress scheme “was designed to be light touch to avoid the long, torturous process of many of the other schemes”.
Hudgell added: “In the main part, it has been able to deliver speedier redress to the majority of Claimants, that’s some good news. However, for the most seriously affected, it falls badly short in our view in achieving fairness consistent with other victims of the scandal.
“Government are aware of our concerns and we continue in dialogue with them in the hope of avoiding costly and time-consuming legal proceedings. Victims that have endured the scandal for upwards of 30 years need closure but equally need that to be on terms that are fair and reflect the losses that they have endured during that time.”
