Sub-postmasters acquitted of false accounting

Kashflow logo
Share this content

A number of sub-postmasters and postmistresses have been acquitted of false accounting charges since the publication of an interim report into the Post Office’s accounting system, Horizon.

In Durham, sub-postmaster Tom Brown was cleared of stealing £85,000 after he spent five years fighting the charges, while in Cornwall sub-postmistress Susan Knight was recently cleared of £22,500 false accounting charges as part of the review.

The pair are just two of 100 sub-postmasters and mistresses who have been accused of false accounting and who have registered an interest in suing the Post Office regarding the Fujitsu-built computer system.

Last year, the Post Office appointed forensic accountants Second Sight to examine allegations of deficiencies in...

Please Login or Register to read the full article

The full article is available to registered members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register. Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

About Rachael Power

Your friendly, neighbourhood community editor. 

Twitter: @rachpower10 


Please login or register to join the discussion.

By Derekat
30th Aug 2013 10:57

Sub-postmasters acquitted of false accounting

I Hope they are very well compensated. It's an especially serious accusation against someone who will be particularly well known to the local community. It probably also results in the loss of any associated business in the same premises as it would lose the footfall.  Sub- Postmasters  have been subject to some very bad treatment from the Post Office who are currently only interested in polishing the ---- prior to mugging investors.

Thanks (1)
02nd Sep 2013 13:20

postmasters eyc
sorry derekat bit slow these days as having many senior moments esconced as i now am firmly in god s waiting room as an over 65.

would love to know the meaning of the missing four letter noun which you advise is being polished prior to investors being mugged .

ta very much ... an old codger .

Thanks (0)
30th Aug 2013 11:37

This is another case that should never have come to trial. CPS idea of the public interest is inheretly flawed they have a very high unjistified impression of themselves. They should be using the balance of probability not public interest as the test

Thanks (2)
30th Aug 2013 11:52

Sad Situation

I know of someone taken to court locally - it ruined her business and she became a 'leper' in her own community even though she was certain she had done nothing wrong.


If she is cleared I hope all those people who have judged her within her village have the guts to apologise to her face


Thanks (1)
30th Aug 2013 12:20

Sad situation

Bit unfair on the locals - this person was found guilty in court so had been judged by the "rules" of our society,   but must have been awful for her to be convicted and not be guilty.

Thanks (0)
30th Aug 2013 11:54

I have dealt with

mant Subs. in the past and it was always trouble. I did think that because of all the overs and unders something was amiss. In the end it took so much of my time finding the errors and putting them right it wasn't worth the effort. This does not surprise me in the least.

Most of the subs are elderly with little knowledge of how hi-tech computer systems work so if things are going wrong they wouldn't know how to put it right.

Thanks (1)
30th Aug 2013 13:28

some poor bugger[***] having the accusation he /she had filched 85k hanging over their heads for FIVE YEARS !!! some other poor dear PAYING BACK 20 k FROM HER OWN MONEY knowing sh e was innocent !!!

i 'd tell my legal team to sue them out of sight for the absolute most they could get plus legal costs in toto.

do not care if it was for 100 k or 100 million .

not because i'd b greedy but to teach these highly paid jobsworths in the higher echelons la lesson and hopefully having the requisite guilty heads roll WITH FOREFEITURE OF ALL PENSION

Thanks (2)
30th Aug 2013 16:06

Another IT B**ls Up

Yet another public sector IT programme is found to be flawed.

I do not know what the cause is and it is pointless speculating but, as ever, it is the end users that suffer the system whilst those who specified it, normally non-technicals who think a wish list is a specification, have moved on to new pastures, gongs, knighthoods and pensions intact.

As for itp3asso's comment, I sympathise but I do care how much it costs because we not the Post Office will pay for it one way or another through government support, lower flotation price or higher prices because we are the end users. 

Still, we can spend the savings on smart bombs (if they are so smart why do they explode and end their existence), cruise missiles and other ordnance delivery systems (good euphemism for weapons) that we are not going to use on down town Damascus to bail out the Post Office with the compensation money and the cost of a new accounting system that will probably not do much better than the old one.


Thanks (0)
30th Aug 2013 18:53

Posy Office

but to teach these highly paid jobsworths in the higher echelons la lesson and hopefully having the requisite guilty heads roll WITH FOREFEITURE OF ALL PENSION.

Totally agree. Let heads roll AND forfeit pensions. These inadequates, and many like them, could not give a tinker's cuss about their actions, because they are well aware that the worst (or should that be best?) that can happen to them is dismissal with a huge pay off and a massive pension pot.

Thanks (0)
By Brunch
30th Aug 2013 19:15

Subpostmasters acquitted of false accounting

Carnmore should note that The CPS do not bring Post Office prosecutions, they are private prosecutions brought by the  Post Office itself . Nor has he understood CPS charging standards- public interest is only one of the tests applied, and it is not applied until after the strength of the evidence and the likelyhood of conviction has been considered. I believe the Post Office, in deciding whether to charge, apply the same tests as the CPS. If they didn't, prosecuting Counsel would quickly put them right.

Thanks (0)
31st Aug 2013 09:17

well thats another disaster then if PO
Can prosecute, do tell us more you seem to have a vested interested or similar. I do however dispute your comments re standards of proof mr lawyer

Thanks (0)
31st Aug 2013 09:22

i know enough about so called standards
To know that are not applied proportionally or adequately , we are entitled to go on the cps public pronouncements public interest, reasonable prospect of conviction blah blah blah, are all the people who make these objective judgements lawyers if so that's wrong

Thanks (0)
31st Aug 2013 09:25

counsel for PO
Would hardly object nor defence i surmise its called a conflict of fees

Thanks (0)
31st Aug 2013 09:27

dont the CPS normally takeover
Private prosecutions if they think its in the public interest

how many private criminal prosecutions are there every year?

Thanks (0)
By CoxE
31st Aug 2013 11:50

I agree with just about every opinion expressed in this respect - the mental anguish suffered by these poor sods is unimaginable, and for periods of years!   This ruins lives, not just businesses and the sooner the public sector is made accountable, properly, for it actions. inactions and incompetence, both financially and in any and every other sense, the better (dream on grandpa)

Thanks (0)