The Post Office’s decision to contest appeals against past convictions by users of the organisation’s Capture software is “inexplicable”, “unconscionable” and causes “fresh harm and insult” to victims, according to the group overseeing the compensation process of the ongoing scandal.
As part of a continuing exchange of letters, Christopher Hodges, chair of the influential Horizon Compensation Advisory Board (HCAB), has replied to Post Office chairman Nigel Railton’s justification of his organisation’s decision (see full letter, below).
In an excoriating letter, Hodges said that contesting the Capture appeals “completely undermines any trust in statements that the Post Office is sorry, has changed, and can now be trusted” in the ongoing scandal of subpostmasters wrongfully convicted as a result of flawed accounting software.
Capture was a PC-based software application that pre-dated the Horizon system, which has been at the heart of the scandal.
Three appeals against pre-Horizon convictions have been sent to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) so far. Two of these are convictions based on the Capture system, and one is regarding a conviction based on a system known as the Automatic Payment Terminal (APT).
The CCRC is also reviewing around 30 more cases of prosecutions based on software that pre-dates Horizon.
Post Office needs to apply common sense
HCAB had previously written to Railton questioning the decision to contest Capture appeals. Railton replied that he understood the advisory board’s concerns, but that the “Post Office must nevertheless act in accordance with the rules and requirements of the independent judicial system and our legal duties as the original prosecutor – which, given past mistakes, Post Office takes very seriously”.
In the latest letter, dated 15 May, Hodges dismissed that justification out of hand.
“There appears to us to be no reason why the PO could not make a statement to the Court of Appeal that in the current situation, where the PO has caused such harm to the victims, it does not feel right or conscionable that it should object to any appeals brought by victims or having been independently reviewed by the CCRC, and it trusts that the PO will understand the reasons for this,” he wrote.
“The decision on this should be taken by the PO Board. The advice of lawyers to the PO Board should be treated as advice rather than a binding decision, and that advice should be subjected to a degree of common sense – which has not, in our view, yet happened.”
Hodges referred to Railton’s appearance at the Business and Trade Select Committee in January, when he was asked whether, as with Horizon-related convictions, legislation should be used to overturn Capture convictions en masse – and he agreed.
“The Post Office’s public stance, as expressed to the Select Committee, is that these convictions should be overturned. Yet they are arguing to the Court of Appeal that they should not be. That seems to us and to public commentators to be inexplicable and unconscionable,” wrote Hodges.
“You and the Post Office have been on record as apologising for horrendous harm to subpostmasters. Yet this stance actually causes fresh harm and insult to them. It completely undermines any trust in statements that the PO is sorry, has changed, and can now be trusted.”
Post Office actions court controversy
In March 2024, the government introduced legislation to overturn around 900 convictions based on evidence from the Horizon system. This came in May 2024, at a time when the UK government faced public outrage after the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office.
The HCAB has already called for further legislation to overturn Capture convictions, and in March, MPs demanded “urgent legislation” for this and warned that “unsafe” convictions based on other pre-Horizon systems were yet to be unearthed.
Hodges also questioned the role of the lawyers advising the Post Office, given their involvement in many of the past controversies around the way subpostmaster victims were treated.
“Your letter seems to shift responsibility for the decision towards your legal advisers. The advisors on which PO rely have been involved for some time and were involved in the post-Hamilton defence of convictions, in ways which properly provoked some controversy during [former Post Office CEO] Nick Read’s tenure,” said Hodges.
“Some come from the same chambers as counsel now under the spotlight through the PO Inquiry for matters of significant concern. Without in any way questioning the propriety of their decision-making, we do wonder if they come to these matters with the appearance of sufficient independence when advising on matters with a considerable history where they have played an active role.”
Computer Weekly has asked the Post Office for a response to Hodges’ latest letter, but had not received a reply by the time of publication. The organisation has previously said: “We want all unsafe convictions to be overturned and are doing all we can to ensure appeals are heard as expeditiously as possible and in line with our legal duties as the original prosecutor.
“Our response to these appeals is subject to extensive legal advice, and our role is to assist the Court of Appeal’s deliberation of the unique legal and factual issues that prosecutions that may have involved the Capture software require.”
Computer Weekly first exposed the scandal in 2009, with the stories of seven subpostmasters who suffered due to faulty accounting software – our full coverage of the scandal since that time is shown in the timeline below.
