Witness Name: Mrs Suzanne Palmer
Statement No.: WITN0224_02
Exhibits: WITNO224_02/1
Dated: 9 February 2022
THE POST OFFICE HORIZON INQUIRY
SECOND WITNESS STATEMENT OF MS SUZANNE PALMER
I, MRS SUZANNE PALMER WILL SAY as follows:
INTRODUCTION
I make this witness statement to update the Chair and the Inquiry on my recent
experiences with the Department for Business, and regarding the inadequacy and
unfairness of government’s efforts to compensate subpostmasters. In particular, I
provide this statement to detail the continuing impact on me and my family of the
government’s continuing inadequate and changeable approach to compensation and
reparations.
2. This is my second witness statement in this Inquiry. The first witness statement I
provided addressed the ‘human impact’ of the issues with Horizon and of Post Office’s
conduct toward me. I refer to that statement in full in terms of my background and the
full details of my experiences.
3. For the purposes of this statement, it is necessary only to briefly set out that
background. After working as an assistant in a post office, I invested in a post office I
had previously worked in. I managed the post office from July 2003, and was
Page 1 of 9
subpostmaster between September 2004 and October 2005 of the branch in Rayleigh,
Essex.
After experiencing shortfalls of approximately £9,000, and a subsequent audit, I paid
Post Office the money that the Post Office alleged I owed them. I did so under threat of
criminal prosecution, and an assurance from Post Office that if I paid the amount of the
alleged shortfalls, I would not be prosecuted. Post Office went back on that assurance,
and I was prosecuted in spite of my paying the amount that the Post Office alleged I
owed them in shortfalls, and in spite of the Post Office’s assurance that I would not face
prosecution. I rely on my first witness statement in this respect, and in particular the
detail of the pain and torment of my prosecution, and my trial. In particular, I rely on
the following passages of my statement:
‘5. The Post Office pursued criminal proceedings against me for three counts of
false accounting. I pleaded not guilty and insisted on a trial. A trial was held in
January 2007. I have never felt so afraid in my life. The Post Office told me that
if I did not plea[d]se guilty and was found guilty I would definitely go to prison.
There was a real chance that I would go to prison. However, I had done nothing
wrong, and I was determined not to be branded as a criminal. Following a three
day trial, I was found not guilty by the jury on Friday 29 January 2007. The Post
Office was ordered to pay all legal costs (£78,000).
‘6. Prior to the trial, Post Office told me that if I pleaded guilty, I would only
receive a community sentence, but if I plead not guilty and was found guilty I
would go to prison. I was terrified that I would go to prison for something that
I had not done, and Post Office were pressuring me to admit to something that
I did not do,
‘7. My husband and my sons were very supportive and encouraged me to stand
my ground and plead not guilty. I did not give in to the pressure from Post
Page 2 of 9
Office, but it did affect me. I had so many sleepless nights as I waited and
fretted over the forthcoming trial.
“8. My local community signed a petition defending my good character. I believe
that this petition gained over 600 signatures. i (who took over as the
temporary subpostmaster) also came to Court to appear as witness supporting
me.
‘9. The lawyers representing Post Office spoke to my barrister and said that if
GRO _: gave evidence, they would prosecute her.;
children and we did not want her to take this risk so she did not give evidence.
’10. I vividly recall that after the verdict was confirmed, as I was leaving Court
one of the Court ushers came to me and hugged me. She said that she was "so
sorry" that I had to go through the trial. On conclusion of the trial 2 members
of the Jury also spoke with me and said that they knew within 10 minutes that
I was not guilty.
’11. I called Alan Lusher the day that the verdict was handed down and told him
that I was found not guilty. He was really pleased with this. However, I had been
though months of hell, and even though I was proved innocent the Post Office
took away my job, my income, my business and my future.’
My contract with Post Office was terminated, in spite of my acquittal. I was found not
guilty by a jury of the actions which the Post Office accused me of, yet the Post Office
treated me as though I was guilty. This increased the financial and personal suffering
I experienced. As I detailed in my first witness statement, the losses I have suffered
are considerable. In fact, I lost everything; my business, my position, my income, my
home, my car and my personal belongings. The Post Office did not even pay me in lieu
of notice.
Page 3 of 9
10.
11.
My life was dramatically changed for the worse by the actions of Post Office. I still live
in financial insecurity 15 years later, and continue to live in a small council flat in an
unsafe area. We had to sell all of our assets and valuables to try and prevent
bankruptcy, but it was futile.
Over the past year or so, a number of subpostmasters who were convicted at trial, or
who pleaded guilty, have had those convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal.
In July 2021, the Department for Business announced an ‘interim’ compensation
scheme for those subpostmasters, to help with their immediate financial pressures,
recognising the harm and stress which the criminal prosecutions had on those
individuals. The scheme provides for interim payments of up to £100,000 for those
subpostmasters, payable within 28 days of an application being made.
I believe that those subpostmasters wholeheartedly deserve that compensation and
more. However, eligibility for the scheme is narrow, as the interim compensation is
available only those who: (a) were criminally prosecuted; (b) found guilty; and (c) have
since had those convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal. As a result, a huge
majority of subpostmasters affected by this scandal are excluded from receiving
compensation which they need and, I believe, they are entitled.
lam excluded from this scheme because I stuck to my principles, as I knew I had done
nothing wrong, and therefore pleaded not guilty and fought the wrongful prosecution.
I am now being penalised for successfully defending myself against allegations which
I knew to be untrue, and for exercising my right to a trial.
Again and again I have thought that it was a mistake that I pleaded not guilty, and also
that it was unfortunate that I was acquitted. This is because if I had pleaded guilty,
been convicted and then had my conviction quashed, I would have been entitled to
some compensation. As I said in my first witness statement: it seems that I have lost
everything for defending my innocence.
Page 4 of 9
12.
13.
14,
15.
16.
I feel that my exclusion from compensation, and the exclusion of others like me, is
little more than a continuation of the victimisation and harms which occurred at the
time. It has brought the suffering into the present day, and I feel as though preventing
me and people in my situation from receiving compensation is a continuing injustice.
In August 2021, shortly after the announcement of the interim compensation scheme,
I wrote to Paul Scully, the Minister under whom the compensation scheme was
devised and announced. That email is exhibited to this witness statement. I asked the
Minister why I was excluded from receiving interim compensation, when I had the
same experience of prosecution and criminal trial as those who were convicted.
I received a response from the Minister on 1 December 2021, which is exhibited to
this witness statement. The letter was dismissive. It stated that as a litigant in the
group claim against Post Office Ltd, I had received compensation and that the
department could do nothing more. It repeated that government would not provide
any further compensation to subpostmasters who were claimants in the group
litigation, as a full and final settlement had been reached.
It is important to say that although I received a payment from the Group Civil
Litigation, of that sum, half was taken in lieu of my bankruptcy and by the
Administrators. I was made bankrupt by the Post Office as a result of their prosecution
of me and dismissal from my post as subpostmaster despite being found not guilty
after trial.
I responded to the Minister on 2 December 2021. I wanted to ask the Minister why
the government had decided that those who had been convicted were more entitled
to compensation than those who were prosecuted but not convicted. My email stated:
“Since I received your reply email which you dictated ,and dismissed mine 3
months after I sent it, perhaps we could have a face to face meeting so you
can explain how you came to the decision that some people who were
Page 5 of 9
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
prosecuted are more important than others compensation wise . Only the
outcome was the same for me guilty/ not guilty”
I eventually received a response on 13 January 2022. That response is exhibited to this
email. In his response, the Minister stated:
‘Members of the Group Litigation Order (GLO) who have had criminal
convictions overturned are eligible for compensation as part of the overturned
criminal conviction settlements. The Compensation is open to all those who
were prosecuted, including those not convicted and will be determined based
on individual circumstances.’
[emphasis added]
When I received this letter I was delighted. The Minister, and the government, had
confirmed in writing that I was eligible for compensation. It meant that my constant
financial worries and my stress might be over. I would finally be able to move on with
my life, and I could lift myself away from the consequences of the Post Office’s
conduct towards me and the impact it has had on my life.
Importantly, I felt as though the suffering I had experienced was being recognised, and
that I was finally being vindicated after being marginalised for so long.
That night, after receiving the Minister’s letter, I could not sleep. I was so excited and
hopeful about the changes I could make, and how my life could and would be
improved by receiving some interim compensation. I thought I could finally go back to
being myself again.
I was advised that my solicitors met with the Minister’s senior representatives at the
Department for Business on 19 January 2022. I was advised that my solicitors raised
the Minister’s letter of 13 January at that meeting.
Page 6 of 9
22.
23.
24.
25.
On 2 February 2022, I received another letter from the Minister, which is exhibited to
this statement. The letter was short. In it, the Minister went back on his previous
letter. His letter stated:
I stated that members of the GLO who have had criminal convictions
overturned by the courts are eligible for compensation as part of the
overturned criminal conviction settlement process, I then went on to explain
that in addition to those members of the GLO, compensation is also open to
individuals who were prosecuted but not convicted and that such claims would
be determined on individual circumstances. I wanted to clarify my explanation
that because of the terms of the settlement, this does not refer to members of
the GLO who were prosecuted but not convicted.
‘The position in relation to members of the GLO who were prosecuted but not
convicted is different to those who were convicted under the terms of the
settlement agreement. The position of people who form part of this group is
that they have already fully settled their claims against Post Office Ltd.’
When I read the Minister’s letter, I was devastated. It felt like a punch in the stomach.
I was being told that I was being punished all over again. My hopes had been raised
by the Minister’s letter of 13 January 2022. I believed that there was finally hope that
there would and could be change in my life after suffering for so long. However, my
hopes were dashed by the Minister’s letter of the 2 February 2022. Once again, I was
told that I was excluded.
I do not need to explain the suffering that I have experienced. I have done that already
in my first witness statement.
However, when I received the letter from the Minister on 13 January 2022, I thought
that I had turned a corner. I was up all night, as I could not sleep with excitement. The
opportunity to apply for compensation through the interim compensation scheme
Page 7 of 9
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
might completely change my life. To be told, less than three weeks later that I was to
be excluded from any route to compensation broke me. I did not know what to do
with myself. I was crying and weeping. My husband is a sick man, and I cannot lay my
worries on him. So, I am left once again to feel alone, excluded and rejected.
The impact of this scandal is not limited to the time in which it took place. I continue
to feel the effects now and every day. The government and Post Office continue to
reopen old wounds and refuse to make things right.
The Minister and Post Office make statements saying that they will fix things, and give
justice to people like me, but they only continue to hurt subpostmasters and even
make things worse.
As I believe I have shown in this statement, the Government and Post Office are
heartless in how they treat victims like me. They think nothing of raising my hopes
with a letter only to pull the rug from under my feet with another letter.
Before the Post Office took action against me over supposed shortfalls, I was a
different woman, living a different life. I had a good position as a subpostmistress,
with an income, profits from my shop, standing in my community and a future. I had
a fine home, a good car, decent holidays and my own jewellery and belongings.
After the Post Office threatened me into paying them for the supposed shortfalls on
the promise of not prosecuting me, and then prosecuted me, my life came apart at
the seams. I lost my position, I lost my income, I lost my home, our car; and even my
jewellery had to be sold to the bills and costs that mounted up as a result of the Post
Office actions against me.
After losing our home and great struggle, we finally managed to get a social housing
flat. My flat is so small that if I have family come to visit me, I must disassemble the
furniture so that there is space for them to sit down.
Page 8 of 9
32. Almost exactly fifteen years ago I was sitting in the dock of the Court with a police
woman standing behind as I fought to prove my innocence. Fifteen years on, I am told
by the Minister that I will have to continue to live with the consequences of
government’s and Post Office’s actions against me. I feel simply cut off from justice.
Statement of Truth
I believe the contents of this statement to be true.
Dated. 1.2. 2 PSP nen
Suzanne Palmer
Page 9 of 9