Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Unless prison sentences are given to directors (and indeed the legal professionals) who are complicit in such abuse then it’s only a matter of time before it happens again.
Sir Wyn’s Inquiry is compelling viewing but sadly not mandatory.
The Post Office accountants, as demonstrated at the current Enquiry, don’t seem to have a grasp of basic double entry bookkeeping so understanding tax was always going to be a challenge.
The Post Office probably needs to be closed regardless and probably reformed/branded and run by its postmasters.
With today’s pathetic gibberish from its current CEO at the Parliament Committee - in which he adequately demonstrated his incompetence – the clock must be ticking…..
Agreed -- The on-going Post Office Enquiry never fails to surprise.
Now the Post Office lawyers are aggrieved that they are having to work long hours to provide disclosure documents. However going forward they will amend “search terms” so that it it returns fewer finds and then because the returned percentage is so small they will stop doing it entirely.
Most of the witness statements from the Post Office employees are under examination just comical.
One cannot help thinking that if a Post Office representative lips are moving then…. decide for yourself.
I am not sure it is correct to assert that EY the auditors had not flagged up serious misgivings with the Horizon software. I believe there is evidence they did.
On the other hand applying the criticism to that of the Post Office internal auditors seems valid as it is they who would have dealt with the individuals.
Interestingly one of the finance directors for the Post Office was an ex-auditor of EY who had the Post Office as a client before joining the Post Office. However on reading the amusingly named “statement of fact” from the individual any auditing skills along with many other recollections seemed to have gone by the wayside.
Hopefully some of the Post Office legal team amongst others will have a fair chance to defend themselves against charges leading to custodial sentences.
I remember back in the 1980’s reading a CIPFA Report where they had discovered something called “accruals accounting”. I think they are better off sticking with “Receipts and Payments” at least it allows them to avoid the “true and fair” view.
Not sure I saw those but maybe you were just being too blunt for someone’s liking. The truth often hurts. Maybe you suggested HMRC should have made a “test” payment to them. Much like my responses to proforma invoices - here is my proforma cheque - this is what it would look like when payment is made.
I was never taught to do balance sheet reconciliations but they just seemed obvious and never trust the balance sheet until done.
My answers
Surely like every client relationship.
Whoever wants the other the most gives way.
Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Unless prison sentences are given to directors (and indeed the legal professionals) who are complicit in such abuse then it’s only a matter of time before it happens again.
Sir Wyn’s Inquiry is compelling viewing but sadly not mandatory.
The Post Office accountants, as demonstrated at the current Enquiry, don’t seem to have a grasp of basic double entry bookkeeping so understanding tax was always going to be a challenge.
The Post Office probably needs to be closed regardless and probably reformed/branded and run by its postmasters.
With today’s pathetic gibberish from its current CEO at the Parliament Committee - in which he adequately demonstrated his incompetence – the clock must be ticking…..
Probably sarcasm being the "source".
Agreed -- The on-going Post Office Enquiry never fails to surprise.
Now the Post Office lawyers are aggrieved that they are having to work long hours to provide disclosure documents. However going forward they will amend “search terms” so that it it returns fewer finds and then because the returned percentage is so small they will stop doing it entirely.
Most of the witness statements from the Post Office employees are under examination just comical.
One cannot help thinking that if a Post Office representative lips are moving then…. decide for yourself.
I am not sure it is correct to assert that EY the auditors had not flagged up serious misgivings with the Horizon software. I believe there is evidence they did.
On the other hand applying the criticism to that of the Post Office internal auditors seems valid as it is they who would have dealt with the individuals.
Interestingly one of the finance directors for the Post Office was an ex-auditor of EY who had the Post Office as a client before joining the Post Office. However on reading the amusingly named “statement of fact” from the individual any auditing skills along with many other recollections seemed to have gone by the wayside.
Hopefully some of the Post Office legal team amongst others will have a fair chance to defend themselves against charges leading to custodial sentences.
Problems are probably twofold. Reappointment “may” cloud judgement. The tick box culture means they don’t see the wood for the trees.
Policies rules seem to be set by technical departments who do not have a clue and carried out by operatives too gormless to challenge.
I remember back in the 1980’s reading a CIPFA Report where they had discovered something called “accruals accounting”. I think they are better off sticking with “Receipts and Payments” at least it allows them to avoid the “true and fair” view.
The claim will then be “with fewer calls than before customer satisfaction must be improving.”
Oddly an element of truth.
Not sure I saw those but maybe you were just being too blunt for someone’s liking. The truth often hurts. Maybe you suggested HMRC should have made a “test” payment to them. Much like my responses to proforma invoices - here is my proforma cheque - this is what it would look like when payment is made.
I was never taught to do balance sheet reconciliations but they just seemed obvious and never trust the balance sheet until done.