c. Case Illustrations
Martin Griffiths (Deceased)
3.46. Mr Martin Griffiths and his wife bought Hope Farm Road post office in Ellesmere Port in 1995. The branch was situated in a shop from which Mrs Griffiths sold gift cards and stationery with the help of her mother-in-law. Mr Griffiths was the postmaster, and he was responsible for the running of the post office.
3.47. For years, Mr Griffiths had no problem with using Horizon or with balancing the branch accounts. However, problems with balancing began in, or about 2009 when more and more shortfalls became apparent. This may have coincided with the advent of Horizon Online. During the course of the following four years or thereabouts Mr Griffiths sought assistance from the Helpdesk without success. His family maintain that he was made to feel that he was the only person who was having balancing problems, a complaint made repeatedly by a large number of postmasters who contacted the Helpdesk. On at least two occasions Mr Griffiths was interviewed about the losses which were said to have occurred and on one occasion in 2011, he was suspended without pay. In July 2013, he was given notice of termination of his contract as a postmaster.
3.48. From about 2009 onwards Mr Griffiths’ mental health deteriorated. He became very depressed – so much so that he would not respond when his sister tried to convince him that there were others who were complaining of unexplained shortfalls and told him about JFSA and Sir Alan Bates. By 2012/2013 the shortfalls alleged to have occurred may have totalled as much as £102,000.
3.49. On 2 May 2013 a robbery occurred at the Post Office which resulted in a net loss to the Post Office of £38,504.96, which was reduced to £15,845 after some of the money was recovered. Mr Griffiths was injured during the robbery; he was present in the branch when it occurred. The Post Office Investigator advised the Post Office that Mr Griffiths was partly to blame for the loss sustained by the Post Office and that he should be held responsible for part of the loss.
3.50. On 23 September 2013, approximately one month before Mr Griffiths’ notice of termination was due to expire, he deliberately walked in front of a moving bus. He was taken to hospital suffering from multiple injuries and attempts were made to save his life including providing him with life support. However, on 11 October 2013, Mr Griffiths died in hospital aged 59.
3.51. By the date of his death Mr Griffiths had made very substantial repayments to the Post Office for alleged shortfalls. His parents contributed all their savings of about £62,000 and the balance owing was paid from the savings and income of Mr and Mrs Griffiths.
3.52. Mr Griffiths’ death was and remains devastating for his wife, children and other close family.
Harjinder Butoy
3.53. In January 2004, Mr Harjinder Butoy bought the Forest Side Post Office branch in Sutton- in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire. He financed the purchase with a redundancy payment and a loan from his brother. Mr Butoy ran the branch from a building in which he also operated an off-licence and a newsagent, and he and his family lived on the first floor of the premises.
3.54. On 24 April 2007, Mr Butoy’s branch was audited. It had been the subject of an audit one week previously and Mr Butoy had been told that “everything was fine” or words to that effect. Following the audit on 24 April 2007 he was told that there was a shortfall. The Post Office was to allege, ultimately, that the shortfall was in excess of £200,000.
3.55. Shortly after the completion of the audit, Mr Butoy was suspended, arrested by a police officer and taken to a police station. He was interviewed under caution by Post Office investigators. At the interview, Mr Butoy was represented by a duty solicitor. In due course, Mr Butoy was charged with a number of counts of theft. He first appeared at court (the Magistrates’ Court) on 10 October 2007. At or around the same date, Mr Butoy’s contract with the Post Office was terminated.
3.56. On 25 April 2008, Mr Butoy attended the Crown Court, where he pleaded not guilty to all the charges laid against him. In September that year, Mr Butoy was tried on an indictment containing 11 counts which cumulatively alleged that he had stolen approximately £206,000 from the Post Office. On 25 September 2008 he was convicted of 10 of those counts and sentenced, in total, to 39 months’ imprisonment. Mr Butoy recollects that he was offered some kind of plea bargain (the details of which are unclear) but, since he believed that he had done nothing wrong, he refused the same. Mr Butoy served approximately 14 months of his sentence before being released subject to an electronic tag and curfew.[23] His recollection is that he wore his tag and was subject to a curfew for a period of about five months.
3.57. Following Mr Butoy’s convictions, the Post Office sought a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. He was made the subject of a confiscation order in the sum of £61,294.34. By the time the order was made, the Post Office had already seized £51,000 belonging to Mr Butoy, so that the balance payable was £10,000. The sum was paid by Mr Butoy’s father, since by this time, Mr Butoy did not have the means to pay himself. His generosity removed the possibility that Mr Butoy would have to serve a term of imprisonment in default of payment.
3.58. From the commencement of the investigation to the completion of the criminal process about 21 months elapsed.
3.59. While Mr Butoy was serving his sentence of imprisonment, he received demands for unpaid Income Tax and VAT. He was unable to pay the same and, in consequence, he was declared bankrupt. Ten years were to elapse before Mr Butoy was discharged from his bankruptcy.
3.60. In the immediate aftermath of his conviction, Mr Butoy was remanded into custody. His sentencing followed about six weeks later. On the same day that he was remanded into custody he closed his business, and his wife left their family home and moved to Derbyshire to live with his parents.[24] At the time, Mr and Mrs Butoy had three very young children. No doubt, the combination of her husband being imprisoned and her caring for three children imposed very considerable stresses and strains upon her.
3.61. Mr Butoy’s convictions resulted in widespread and damning publicity. The convictions were reported upon in the local newspaper. News reports also featured in at least one national newspaper, The Daily Telegraph, and there were also reports in the Punjab Times.
3.62. Following his sentencing, the premises which Mr Butoy had bought in which to live and run his business were sold at a substantial loss. Mr Butoy told me that the loan which he arranged with his brother to acquire the premises has never been repaid. He has never been able to find employment since his release from prison. But for the huge assistance from his family members, he, his wife and children would have suffered devastating financial hardship.
3.63. According to Mr Butoy, over many years, and especially when he was imprisoned, he has suffered from mental health problems. Whilst no independent evidence from a medical practitioner has been sought in respect of this or any other Case Illustration, it seems to me to be very likely that such consequences would follow a lengthy period of imprisonment, the loss of a business and a home, and in effect, financial ruin with many years of bankruptcy.
3.64. All of Mr Butoy’s convictions were quashed by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on 23 April 2021.
Jacqueline McDonald
3.65. Mrs Jacqueline McDonald was born and brought up in the north of England. However, as a young adult she emigrated to the United States of America, where she met her husband. For a period of about 21 years, Mr and Mrs McDonald lived and worked in the United States and raised three children.
3.66. In 2005, the family moved to England. On 7 December 2006, Mrs McDonald became the postmistress of a post office at Broughton, which is a village near Banbury in Oxfordshire. The family lived in a flat above the post office. In 2007, Mrs McDonald expanded and refurbished the premises and the business.
3.67. On 1 October 2008, Mrs McDonald’s Line Manager came to the post office, claiming that Horizon was showing that the branch was holding approximately £50,000 in excess cash. When Mrs McDonald denied all knowledge of the excess cash, auditors attended and Mrs McDonald was suspended. Following the audit, she was asked to pay to the Post Office a sum in excess of £93,000 but she did not have the means to pay.
3.68. In 2009, Mrs McDonald was charged with a number of offences of false accounting and theft. At a plea and case management hearing on 2 June 2009 she pleaded not guilty to all the counts on the indictment. Subsequently, she pleaded guilty to six counts of false accounting. At some stage (probably after her pleas to false accounting) Mrs McDonald was advised by the barrister who was appointed to represent her that she should plead guilty to the allegations of theft in order to minimise the sentence which would be imposed upon her. Mrs McDonald accepted that advice and she admitted the counts of theft on 8 November 2010. On 21 January 2011, she was sentenced to a total term of 18 months’ imprisonment.
3.69. A striking feature of Mrs McDonald’s case is the number of calls which she made to the Helpdesk about transaction and balancing problems. In the period immediately before the audit which resulted in her suspension there were 256 such calls. Mrs McDonald has always maintained that, despite the number of calls, she received no meaningful assistance from the Helpdesk in particular, and the Post Office in general.
3.70. As is obvious from the narrative which I have just laid out, the criminal process took approximately two years to unfold. There was a very long time between charge and sentence; after sentence, proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 ensued. A confiscation order in the sum of £99,759.60 was made against Mrs McDonald although, in the event, the confiscation proceedings had little financial impact since by then, she had declared herself bankrupt.
3.71. As I have explained at footnote 23 above, Mrs McDonald was liable to serve half her sentence i.e. nine months. As it happens, she was released after serving four-and-a-half months, although she was fitted with an electronic tag and was made subject to a curfew. She wore her tag and remained subject to the curfew until nine months had elapsed from the date of her sentence. Notwithstanding that Mrs McDonald served most of her sentence in an open prison, the experience of serving an initial period of her sentence in closed conditions was very stressful. Her son turned 21 and her daughter turned 18 while she was still a serving prisoner.
Mrs McDonald had anticipated seeing her daughter on her 18th birthday since at that time she was serving her sentence at an open prison. That prospect was dashed when she was transferred to a different (and closed) prison so as to make it easier to produce her at court for confiscation proceedings. She had no contact with her daughter on her 18th birthday.
3.72. Mrs McDonald signed her witness statement as a Core Participant on 14 January 2022. At that point in time, she had not been discharged from bankruptcy. That means that Mrs McDonald had been in bankruptcy for approximately 10 years.
3.73. Mr McDonald was also made bankrupt. In effect, he was the victim of the accumulated financial woes to which the family was subjected once the Post Office claimed that Mrs McDonald was in debt to them to the tune of £93,000. Mrs McDonald lost her business, her home and the prospect that she would remain as a postmistress until retirement.
3.74. Mrs McDonald maintains that she has suffered very significant psychiatric and psychological impacts as a result of her prosecution and conviction. She has also, no doubt suffered grievously from the death of her daughter which occurred in the year that followed her release from prison.
3.75. Mr and Mrs McDonald and their surviving children have returned to live in the United States of America. Travel to and from the United States was often extremely stressful for Mrs McDonald while she remained convicted by reason of the entry requirements into the United States. Apart from her daughter-in-law, her husband and her children, no one in the United States knows of her history with the Post Office.
3.76. Mrs McDonald’s relationship with her parents and sibling became very strained when she was first investigated and charged. They have never properly recovered.
3.77. Mrs McDonald’s conviction was quashed on 23 April 2021 by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).
Janine Powell
3.78. Ms Janine Powell became a counter assistant at the Cowley Moor Post Office, near Tiverton, Devon in 2005/2006. Shortly thereafter, Ms Powell became the postmistress at that branch. Although this was something she had not anticipated when becoming a counter assistant, she was confident that she could succeed as a postmistress.
3.79. In the months that followed, Ms Powell was faced with a number of shortfalls. In early 2007, she was suspended pending an investigation into an allegation that she had stolen £74,000 or thereabouts from the branch. Thereafter, her contract with the Post Office was terminated.
3.80. For reasons which are unclear on the evidence before me, criminal proceedings against Ms Powell were not instituted until 2008. Ms Powell was charged with theft, and her case was committed to the Crown Court. Following a trial, Ms Powell was convicted and, thereafter, she was sentenced to a term of 18 months’ imprisonment.
3.81. In fact, Ms Powell was released from prison after approximately five months after which she was subject to an electronic tag and curfew for a further period.
3.82. According to Ms Powell, prior to her trial, she was offered the opportunity of pleading guilty to charges of false accounting. She was advised by the barrister who represented her to take this opportunity, since that would diminish the chances of her being sentenced to an immediate term of imprisonment.
3.83. Ms Powell decided against pleading guilty to false accounting; she simply could not accept that she had done anything wrong. However, this decision was a very difficult one for her to take. She was and is the mother of three children and, at the material time, two of her children lived at home with her.
3.84. Upon her conviction, alternative living arrangements had to be made for the two children who lived with Ms Powell. Her eldest son took up residence with other young people in the locality. Her daughter, then aged 10, went to live with a friend of Ms Powell. This proved to be a traumatic episode for the daughter. It involved separation from her mother, a change of school and deep-seated unhappiness in her new home.
3.85. According to Ms Powell her daughter has suffered from depression and a condition known as Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. With the same caveat as I have noted in respect of all medical evidence, I have no reason to doubt what Ms Powell has set out in her witness statement. It is not difficult to believe that the separation of Ms Powell from her daughter in such traumatic circumstances together with the associated upheaval could have precipitated mental illness. Fortunately, Ms Powell’s daughter condition began to improve, at least to an extent, once she and her mother had moved from the southwest of England to Durham.
3.86. Following her conviction and sentence, Ms Powell found it extremely difficult to obtain worthwhile employment. In her witness statement, she frankly describes how for some job applications she disclosed the fact of her conviction, whereas for others she did not. The applications for worthwhile posts which disclosed her conviction were unsuccessful. There were a few occasions when Ms Powell obtained worthwhile employment, having not disclosed her conviction. Invariably however, within a comparatively short time her conviction was discovered and her employment terminated.
3.87. Ms Powell’s conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on 22 November 2021. Since that time her relationship with all three of her children has become much less strained.
Damian Owen
3.88. Mr Damian Owen was born and brought up in North Wales. When he was a teenager, his mother became a postmistress. Mr Owen was fully familiar with the running of a post office by the time that he became the Branch Manager at Glanadda Post Office near Bangor in North Wales.
3.89. As a Branch Manager, Mr Owen had no contractual relationship with the Post Office. He was employed to manage the branch by the postmaster who was contracted to the Post Office. For all practical purposes however, it was Mr Owen who ran the post office from day to day.
3.90. In August 2010, an audit was carried out at the branch. Mr Owen maintains that this audit occurred no more than a few weeks after Horizon Online had been installed. At installation, the system had been tested, and the account had balanced. Nonetheless, the audit revealed, apparently, that there was a shortfall of approximately £25,000.
3.91. Immediately following the audit, Mr Owen ceased to work at the branch. Over a year later, police officers and Post Office investigators arrived at Mr Owen’s home. A search was carried out but nothing of significance was found. Mr Owen was arrested and taken to a local police station where he was interviewed under caution by Post Office investigators.
3.92. Mr Owen was charged with stealing £25,000, or thereabouts, from the Post Office. He pleaded not guilty, and a trial ensued. The jury returned a verdict of guilty. Mr Owen maintains that there was adverse media reporting during the trial in the Liverpool Daily Post – a newspaper which has significant circulation in North Wales. At a hearing on 23 December 2011, Mr Owen was sentenced to eight months imprisonment. He served approximately three months of that term and was then released, wearing an electronic tag which he wore for approximately one month. One of the most upsetting features of Mr Owen’s imprisonment was that he was absent for one of his children’s first birthday.
3.93. Much to his surprise, Mr Owen was not the subject of confiscation proceedings. As I understand it, the Post Office took no steps to recover from him the amount he had allegedly stolen. It may be, although this is an educated guess, that the Post Office pursued a contractual remedy against the postmaster.
3.94. Shortly after the audit had been carried out in August 2010, Mr Owen had married his long-term partner. At the time of the audit and his subsequent arrest, they had two young children. However, following his conviction, Mr Owen and his wife became estranged and they separated. Mrs Owen and the children moved away from North Wales to the Midlands with the consequence that Mr Owen’s contact with his children substantially diminished. It was only when Mr Owen, himself, decided to leave North Wales and move to live nearer his children that regular contact was restored.
3.95. In his evidence Mr Owen described how he suffered with significant psychiatric and psychological problems during the course of his imprisonment. He estimated that he lost approximately four stones in weight during his incarceration. He maintained that his prosecution and conviction resulted in long-term psychiatric and psychological effects which included a major depressive disorder, a lack of self-confidence and a lack self- esteem.
3.96. Mr Owen’s conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on 23 April 2021. Until that time, he had found it extremely difficult to obtain employment and he was forced to take menial low-paid jobs.
Tracy Felstead
3.97. Ms Tracy Felstead was employed by the Post Office as a counter clerk in a Crown Office in Camberwell Green, London. At the material time, she was 19 years old and her employment with the Post Office was her “first job”.
3.98. In 2001, Ms Felstead was investigated over an apparent loss at her place of work of £11,503.28. There followed criminal proceedings in which Ms Felstead was charged with stealing that sum and two offences of false accounting. In her oral evidence at the Inquiry, Ms Felstead told me that, in consequence, she attempted to take her own life on two separate occasions. Following one of those occasions, she was admitted to a secure psychiatric unit at hospital where she was given psychotherapy treatment and medication.
3.99. Ms Felstead contested the charges. Following a trial at the Crown Court at Kingston upon Thames, she was convicted of theft. Prior to sentence, Ms Felstead’s family raised the sum of £11,500 in order that she might repay to the Post Office a sum equivalent to that which she had allegedly stolen. The hope was that by paying to the Post Office that sum she would avoid an immediate custodial sentence. That was not to be. On 20 June 2002, Ms Felstead was sentenced to a period of six months at a young offender institution.
3.100. Notwithstanding that her sentence was to be served at a young offender institution, Ms Felstead was imprisoned at HMP Holloway – a prison for adult women. While she was waiting to be transferred to a suitable young offender institution, Ms Felstead was deployed to serve meals to prisoners. On an occasion which, no doubt, will be forever seared on her mind, she opened a cell door to find a that a prisoner had hanged herself and was dead. Ms Felstead maintains – and I have no difficulty in accepting – that her experiences at Holloway Prison will live with her forever.
3.101. My understanding is that Ms Felstead was never transferred to a young offender institution. Rather, prior to the halfway point of her sentence she was released on curfew and subject to an electronic tag.
3.102. Following her release from Holloway prison and after the birth of her son, Ms Felstead, her partner and their very young child, moved out of the area in which she had been living to avoid hostile behaviour towards them.
3.103. Over the years before her conviction was quashed, Ms Felstead obtained employment from time to time but many job opportunities were lost to her by reason of her conviction. When she did obtain employment, she would, habitually, ensure that there was another person present if she was required to “cash up” on a till.
3.104. In 2013, the Post Office opened a mediation scheme for persons who claimed that they had been wrongly held accountable for shortfalls due to Horizon with a view to them receiving some kind of redress. As will become apparent in a later volume of my Report there was a good deal of discussion as to whether postmasters or others who had been convicted should be eligible to participate. Ms Felstead’s recollection is that she was denied the chance to participate in the scheme. This was “a further set back” for her.
3.105. By the time that Ms Felstead gave evidence to the Inquiry, approximately 20 years had passed since her wrongful conviction. Ms Felstead maintains that during the whole of this period she has suffered very significant mental and physical illnesses. Given that which I have described above I do not find that assertion surprising.
3.106. Ms Felstead’s conviction was quashed on 23 April 2021 by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).
Siema Kamran and Kamran Ashraf
3.107. Mrs Siema Kamran was married to Mr Kamran Ashraf in 1998. They had met when Mr Ashraf was working for Mrs Kamran’s father.
3.108. They decided to operate a business; they found and purchased a Post Office branch and newsagent store situated in Hampstead Heath. The purchase price payable was £135,000. That was financed by Mrs Kamran selling her flat and her father providing additional funds. In November 2001, Mrs Kamran became the postmistress of the branch.
3.109. Shortly after acquiring the business, Mrs Kamran became pregnant. Her pregnancy had complications, and she was unable to work to any substantial degree. Accordingly, it was Mr Ashraf, assisted by staff, who ran the Post Office and the shop on a daily basis.
3.110. From the outset, he had to contend with a number of shortfalls. They occurred very frequently. Sometimes the shortfalls were comparatively small; on other occasions, they were many hundreds. On one occasion, there was a shortfall of £2,429.90 that increased without explanation to £3,482.13.
3.111. On 2 September 2003, an audit was undertaken at the branch. Mrs Kamran was told that there was a shortfall of approximately £25,000. Investigators arrived and the shop premises were searched, as was the matrimonial home. Mrs Kamran was suspended from her position as postmistress and in December 2003, her contract with the Post Office was terminated.
3.112. It seems that the Post Office must have instituted criminal proceedings against both Mrs Kamran and her husband. However, they were advised by a solicitor to whom they had been referred by the NFSP[25] that one of them should plead guilty to the charges which had been brought against them. According to Mrs Kamran, the solicitor also advised that the person pleading guilty should expect no more than “a slap on the wrist”.
3.113. Mr Ashraf insisted that it was he who should take the blame. No doubt part of the motivation was the fact that his wife was pregnant. In January 2004, Mr Ashraf pleaded guilty to (I presume) theft of approximately £25,000. The plea was tendered at the Magistrates’ Court; however, Mr Ashraf was committed for sentence to the Crown Court. In February 2004, he was sentenced to a term of nine months’ imprisonment and ordered to pay compensation in the sum of £25,000. Mr Ashraf was released from prison earlier than the mid-point of his sentence; he was released subject to an electronic tag and curfew.
3.114. Mr Ashraf’s imprisonment came as a great shock to Mrs Kamran. Initially, he was held at HMP Wandsworth. On her one visit to her husband at that prison, Mrs Kamran was very concerned about his physical and mental state. In due course, he was moved to HMP Ford which was an open prison. Conditions within prison became easier, but visiting for Mrs Kamran was much more difficult, given the distance between her home and HMP Ford.
3.115. Mr Ashraf had no means with which to pay the sum of £25,000 which he had been ordered to pay by way of compensation. In consequence, the Post Office sought payment from Mrs Kamran, no doubt relying upon their contractual rights. Demands against her were first made while Mr Ashraf was still in prison. It continued after his release. In an attempt to save her home, (which ultimately proved fruitless) Mrs Kamran entered an IVA which, in effect, halted the Post Office’s attempts to recover any money from her.
3.116. Mrs Kamran claims to have incurred very substantial losses, including the loss of her business and her home.
3.117. According to Mrs Kamran, both Mr Ashraf and she have suffered from significant psychiatric and psychological problems. In her statement, she asserts that Mr Ashraf has suffered from the well-recognised psychiatric disorder known as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (“PTSD”). She maintains that she has suffered, substantially, from a depressive illness which, on occasions, has led her to endure suicidal thoughts. Her depression persists.
3.118. The marriage between Mrs Kamran and Mr Ashraf still subsists, but Mrs Kamran describes it as “broken”. Although she has contemplated divorce, she “would never leave [him]”.
3.119. In the immediate aftermath of Mr Ashraf’s conviction there was significant adverse publicity. In her community, Mrs Kamran was known as a daughter who had married for love, but, following her husband’s conviction, she had to face comments such as “this is what happens when you find your own”.
3.120. Mr Ashraf’s conviction for theft was quashed at the Southwark Crown Court on 11 December 2020.
Parmod Kalia and Mahesh Kumar Kalia
3.121. Mr Parmod Kalia was the postmaster of a Post Office branch between 1990 and 2001. On 17 December 2001, at Bromley Magistrates’ Court, Mr Kalia pleaded guilty to a charge of theft of £22,202.01 from the Post Office. He was committed for sentence to the Crown Court and, on 8 March 2002, Mr Kalia was sentenced to a term of six months’ imprisonment.
3.122. On 14 May 2021, Mr Kalia’s conviction was quashed at the Southwark Crown Court. At paragraph 4.165 - 4.168 below, I explain some of the difficulties which he has faced in his quest to obtain appropriate financial redress in relation to his wrongful conviction.
3.123. At the time that Mr Kalia was subject to investigation and prosecution by the Post Office, he was living with his wife and family. He had four children; two boys and two girls. Mr Kalia’s eldest son ran his own business; Mr Kalia supported the remainder of his family from the income he earned at the Post Office and the retail store within which it was situated.
3.124. At the time of his conviction, Mr Kalia’s second son, Mr Mahesh Kumar Kalia, was 17 years old. He was studying for his A-Level examinations. His two younger sisters were also at school.
3.125. The investigation and subsequent prosecution of Mr Kalia inevitably meant the loss of the Post Office. When Mr Kalia was imprisoned, Mrs Kalia and her two sons ran the shop in order to provide the family with an income. This impacted substantially on Mahesh’s academic studies. He had hoped to pursue a career as a pharmacist but found it impossible to combine his academic studies and provide appropriate assistance in the shop for his mother. The result was that Mr M Kalia gave up his ambition of qualifying as a pharmacist although, in due course, he attended university and obtained a degree in Business Studies. Mr Kalia also described in detail, within his written statement, the cultural impact that the events had on his family.
3.126. In the witness statement which Mr M Kalia has provided to the Inquiry, he says that his family was “dysfunctional” for at least 10 or 12 years following his father’s conviction. His brother chose to move away from the area. One of his sisters lived away from the family during her late teens and early 20s. The relationship between his father and mother became “toxic and turbulent” with the consequence that they separated.
3.127. According to Mr M Kalia, he and his father were essentially estranged for about 17 years. Since Mr M Kalia has appreciated that his father was wrongly convicted, their relationship has begun to mend, however, to use his words “Between the ages of 17 and 35, I did not have a relationship with my dad. We will never get back this time”.
Sami Sabet
3.128. Mr Sami Sabet was born in Cairo, Egypt. In 1970, he came to the United Kingdom with his family and shortly thereafter he began his pursuit of academic qualifications. He first obtained an Honours Degree in Electronics Engineering from the University of Sheffield. Thereafter, he obtained a Masters Degree in Business Administration from the University of Middlesex. Employment followed in the commercial sector, both in the United Kingdom and in many other countries.
3.129. In 2003, Mr Sabet settled in the United Kingdom. He decided to leave “the rat race” and purchase a Post Office and newsagent. He first purchased the West Beach Post Office in Shoreham-by-Sea; this was followed by the purchase of a branch at the East Beach and finally a third branch at Mill Lane. All three branches were either in or in close proximity to Shoreham-by-Sea. The three branches were purchased by Mr Sabet using his own funds and by borrowing the sum of £100,000. Mr Sabet was the postmaster for all three branches.
3.130. The first of the branches was purchased in 2004. East Beach and Mill Lane were purchased in 2005.
3.131. Mr Sabet first noticed shortfalls in 2006. He says that he contacted the Helpdesk and spoke to regional managers about his problems. On 17 March 2008, auditors visited two of his branches, namely East Beach and Mill Lane. Following the audit, his home was searched, and Mr Sabet was interrogated, accused of dishonesty and suspended. In due course his contract with the Post Office was terminated and criminal proceedings were brought against him.
3.132. On 26 June 2009, in the Crown Court at Lewes, Mr Sabet pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud. His pleas were tendered on the advice of his lawyers and with a view to reducing the prospects of an immediate sentence of imprisonment. Count 1 related to an alleged shortfall at Mill Lane in the sum of £26,797.78. Count 2 related to an alleged shortfall at East Beach in the sum of £23,821.39. On 7 August 2009, Mr Sabet was sentenced in respect of each count to 12 months’ imprisonment suspended for two years with a requirement that he carry out 180 hours of unpaid work.
3.133. It is not entirely clear how much money Mr Sabet has paid to the Post Office since the shortfalls began. In his oral evidence he estimated that he had paid a total of about £67,000 in respect of alleged shortfalls. However, Mr Sabet had borrowed significantly in order to purchase the three post offices so that overall he has faced very large debts. He told me that he was forced to sell his home and that he been the subject of a number of County Court judgments. In order to survive, both he and his wife have been forced to borrow money from their respective families. For some time, he was able to obtain only comparatively menial employment which he found humiliating given the career which he left behind in order to become a postmaster. However, I note that, to his credit, Mr Sabet trained as a teacher and was able to obtain and hold down a teaching post until ill-health intervened.
3.134. Following his conviction Mr Sabet was the object of hostile publicity and adverse treatment from people in his locality. He has been shunned in the street; a friend’s partner told his wife to leave him. Even following the quashing of his convictions, some of his neighbours still regard him as a criminal.
3.135. According to Mr Sabet his personality changed following his conviction. His wife maintains that he is aggressive. His siblings describe him as having changed markedly. He has suffered from depression, anxiety and panic attacks. He suffered from a heart attack in 2017 which Mr Sabet attributes to the long-term stress from which he has suffered.
3.136. Mr Sabet’s convictions were quashed on 19 July 2021 by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).
Christopher Trousdale
3.137. Until ill health intervened in or about 2001, Mr Christopher Trousdale’s grandfather had been the postmaster of a Post Office branch in Lealholm, a small rural village in the north-east of England. By that time members of the family had provided over 150 years’ service to the Post Office in one form or another.
3.138. In July 2002 an opportunity arose for Mr Trousdale to become the postmaster at Lealholm. At this point in time, Mr Trousdale was 19 years old. Undeterred by his comparative youth, he applied for the post of postmaster and was successful in his application. He was assisted in running his business by his then girlfriend (now his wife) and his mother.
3.139. Over time during 2003, shortfalls became more and more prevalent at the branch. On 16 September 2003, an audit took place by which time Mr Trousdale knew and expected that the auditors would discover shortfalls. To use his words, he was “hopeful that they would be able to correct the system errors”.
3.140. The auditors discovered a shortfall of £7,846.34. Post Office investigators arrived at the branch and Mr Trousdale was interviewed at his home, which was across the road from the Post Office. On the same day, he was suspended, and the keys were taken off him. His mother covered the branch and later took over. In his witness statement and oral evidence, Mr Trousdale was fiercely critical of the conduct of the investigators, particularly during the course of the interview at his home.
3.141. A second interview took place on 16 October 2003 at the Police Station in Whitby. By this time, Mr Trousdale was taking medication for his mental state. He did not then and he does not now consider that he was mentally fit to be interviewed. Nonetheless, the interview took place.
3.142. In due course, Mr Trousdale was charged with three offences of false accounting. On advice, he pleaded guilty to those charges and was sentenced at the Magistrates’ Court to a Community Order and a Probation Order, and directed to pay either a fine and/or prosecution costs in the total sum of £800.
3.143. Mr Trousdale maintains that he paid £7,800 or thereabouts to the Post Office in respect of shortfalls. He did not pay that sum from his own resources. His parents loaned him the sum of £15,000 which they, themselves, raised by remortgaging their home. That loan was used to settle all Mr Trousdale’s debts.
3.144. At some stage (either during the investigation/prosecution process or following his conviction) Mr Trousdale consulted a psychiatrist. He was diagnosed with PTSD and anxiety. He says that a number of years went by before his mental health had improved sufficiently to enter a normal workplace. I understand that Mr Trousdale now works in a business with his father and he maintains that even now he would find it difficult to sustain working at a place which was not part of the family run business.
3.145. Mr Trousdale had intended to marry his partner shortly after taking on the Post Office branch. In fact, their marriage did not take place until many years thereafter due to the upheaval caused by his conviction and loss of the Post Office.
3.146. A particularly sad consequence of his conviction for Mr Trousdale, was that his relationship with his grandfather broke down. In his witness statement, Mr Trousdale described the breakdown thus:
“My Grandfather, who had always worked for the Post Office, could not accept my conviction. Our relationship broke down and we hardly spoke before he died. I would try to keep it civil for the sake of my mum. My grandfather never learnt that my conviction had been wrong. This was heart-breaking as we were always so close before all of this. This is one of the most damaging things from my point of view.”
3.147. When he was appointed the postmaster at Lealholm, Mr Trousdale was told that he was the second youngest postmaster in the United Kingdom. He felt a great deal of pride at his achievement. However, the events surrounding the accumulation of shortfalls and the subsequent conviction have been ruinous in his view.
3.148. Mr Trousdale’s conviction was quashed at the Southwark Crown Court on 11 December 2020.
Susan Sinclair
3.149. Ms Susan Sinclair became a Core Participant on 17 November 2023, after Phase 1 of the Inquiry had concluded, and she has not made a witness statement to the Inquiry about the impact on her of the events I described below. I would like to record, however, that her recognised legal representative has participated in a number of phases of the Inquiry and I have been able to piece together the following information about Ms Sinclair based upon documents disclosed to the Inquiry.
3.150. Ms Sinclair lived in the United States of America before moving to Scotland in May 1998.
3.151. In February 2001, Ms Sinclair began working as a counter clerk at a Post Office at Ellon, a town in Aberdeenshire. Within months, Ms Sinclair had become the postmistress of a Post Office branch at Stuartfield, a village nearby.
3.152. Over the following 18 months or so, shortfalls occurred in Ms Sinclair’s branch accounts. In February 2003, the branch was audited and an apparent shortfall of £10,700 was discovered. That same day Ms Sinclair was interviewed by Post Office investigators. She was suspended and “locked out” of the Post Office.
3.153. Later that same month, Ms Sinclair was interviewed for a second time. In due course, she was prosecuted under Scottish law for the offence of embezzlement.
3.154. By the time of the audit in 2003, Ms Sinclair was in a relationship with a local man, but that relationship ended following her suspension. Following her suspension, Ms Sinclair moved to the north of England, and, after a time, she moved to Wales, where she met her current partner.
3.155. Ms Sinclair’s trial for embezzlement began in the first week of April 2004. In that week, she also discovered that she was pregnant. She contested the charge(s) against her with vigour, but she was convicted by a Sheriff (a Scottish judge) and sentenced to a term of probation and directed to undertake unpaid work for the community. Ms Sinclair undertook her unpaid work during and after her pregnancy in a charity shop in the north of England.
3.156. Ms Sinclair paid approximately £10,700 to the Post Office. Part of that sum was paid by the man with whom she was living at the time of her suspension. The remainder was paid with funds provided by her father.
3.157. Following her suspension, Ms Sinclair had been the subject of much local hostility and significant adverse publicity. Upon her conviction, she was the subject of further adverse publicity.
3.158. In September 2023, the High Court of Justiciary quashed her conviction for embezzlement. Ms Sinclair was the first person in Scotland to have her conviction quashed following a trial in which data from Horizon formed part of the prosecution case.
Robert Thomson
3.159. Mr Robert Thomson was the postmaster at Cambus Post Office near Alloa in Scotland between 25 November 1999 and 25 March 2004. The branch was situated within a small convenience store which was also operated by Mr Thomson.
3.160. From the time that he began using Horizon, Mr Thomson had problems with balancing and apparent shortfalls.
3.161. In March 2004, auditors attended his branch. The audit demonstrated a shortfall of approximately £7,000 although the evidence as to the precise amount is unclear. On the same day, a Post Office employee describing himself as Mr Thomson’s Contracts Manager arrived at the branch and informed Mr Thomson that the branch would close pending further investigation.
3.162. Approximately two weeks later, Mr Thomson was interviewed under caution at his home. He maintains that at the close of the interview (when no recording of what was being said was taking place), one of the Post Office interviewers advised him to resign as a postmaster. Although I have no means of checking what was said to Mr Thomson following the interview under caution, the plain fact is that shortly after the interview had taken place, Mr Thomson resigned as the postmaster at the branch.
3.163. For a period of approximately four months after the closure of the Post Office, Mr Thomson tried to operate the convenience store. In his words, however, “the retail business quickly failed without the Post Office being open” and so Mr Thomson felt that he had no option but to close the shop.
3.164. In due course, criminal proceedings were instituted against Mr Thomson. They were initiated by the Procurator Fiscal, although the investigative work and the gathering of evidence was undertaken by Post Office employees. Mr Thomson was charged under Scottish law with embezzlement.
3.165. Mr Thomson’s instinct had always been to contest the charges. On the day that his case was set down for trial, Mr Thomson was persuaded by his lawyer to plead guilty to the charges (although the sum appears to have been reduced to £5,000) brought against him. The hope was that pleas of guilty, even at this very late stage, would persuade the court that a custodial sentence was unnecessary.
3.166. Mr Thomson avoided a sentence of imprisonment. He was ordered to undertake 180 hours of unpaid work for the community. He was also ordered to pay compensation in the sum of £5,000. Assuming that figure to be correct Mr Thomson was directed by the court to pay the same at the rate of £100 per month. In fact, so he says, Mr Thomson paid off the sum owing within one year.
3.167. Following his conviction, there was significant adverse publicity in the local media. He was “branded a thief”. Mr Thomson lived in a small rural community and the whole community knew of his conviction. This impacted not just upon Mr Thomson and his wife. Mr Thomson’s children were teased and bullied at school (at the material time, they were 13 and 10 respectively). Mr Thomson’s mother could not understand what had happened. She became reclusive and depressed. She was “so embarrassed and ashamed”.
3.168. Mr Thomson’s mother died in 2014. Mr Thomson has always thought that her deterioration in health in the years leading up to her death had been brought about by the fact of and the events surrounding his conviction.
3.169. Mr Thomson had always provided the main financial support for the family. The loss of the Post Office and his subsequent conviction brought very significant financial pressure on the family. Mr Thomson suffered from depression and consulted his GP. At some point in time, which is not specified in his witness statement, Mr Thomson began to develop suicidal thoughts. On one occasion, he walked to a local bridge with the intention of jumping to his death.
3.170. When Mr Thomson made his witness statement to the Inquiry on 12 January 2022, he remained convicted of the offence of embezzlement. On 24 January 2024, Mr Thomson’s conviction was quashed unopposed, on appeal by the High Court of Justiciary.
Maureen McKelvey
3.171. Ms Maureen McKelvey was the postmistress of a branch in Clanabogan, Omagh in Northern Ireland. The branch was situated within a store selling general goods. Ms McKelvey was in post between 1990 and 21 August 2002.
3.172. When Ms McKelvey took over the branch, she borrowed £120,000 from her bank so that she could expand her business. She purchased an adjoining building, thereby enlarging the space available for the Post Office and her general store.
3.173. This was very much a project. Very sadly, Ms McKelvey’s daughter had died some time shortly before her acquisition of the Post Office. It was hoped that developing and running a successful business would play some part in assuaging Ms McKelvey’s grief.
3.174. From the time that Horizon was first installed at her branch, Ms McKelvey had balancing problems. She was one of the first users of Horizon in Northern Ireland and, from the outset, she was afflicted by shortfalls. She had shortfalls most weeks and each one was reported to the Post Office. Like many other persons who gave evidence before me, Ms McKelvey maintains that she was told by Post Office employees that she was the only person who was experiencing problems, although “[she] didn’t believe them for one minute”.
3.175. In August 2002, an audit of Ms McKelvey’s branch was undertaken which apparently demonstrated a significant shortfall. She was immediately suspended and accused of stealing thousands of pounds. Her contract with the Post Office was terminated on 21 August 2002.
3.176. There seems to have been very significant delays between Ms McKelvey’s contract being terminated and the conclusion of the criminal proceedings which followed. A file of evidence relating to her case was not produced to the prosecuting authority in Northern Ireland until January 2004. Ms McKelvey’s trial did not conclude until September 2006. That means that a period of four years went by between the audit and contract termination in August 2002, and the trial in September 2006. I cannot readily understand how such delays could have occurred on the evidence available to me although on any view they must have created great stress and worry for Ms McKelvey. It was also in the period between January 2004 and the commencement of her trial that Ms McKelvey underwent a major operation to repair what she describes as “a ruptured thyroid”. Not surprisingly Ms McKelvey attributes this episode to the very considerable stress and worry from which she was suffering at the time.
3.177. Ms McKelvey’s trial lasted for some days. Ms McKelvey was able to prove by incontrovertible evidence that she had not been at the branch when one of the alleged thefts had taken place. She believes that this fatally undermined the whole of the case brought against her. Whether or not that is the case, the jury empanelled to try Ms McKelvey acquitted her of all the charges which were brought against her.
3.178. Ms McKelvey had hoped to make a statement to the press on the day that she was acquitted. She maintains, however, that when she left court she was “intercepted” by Post Office employees who escorted her to her car and warned her against speaking to the press.
3.179. Approximately two years before the audit which triggered the chain of events which I have described, Ms McKelvey’s husband died. She was left caring for three young children. Following the audit and the termination of her contract, Ms McKelvey was faced with caring for her children on much reduced income. She tried to keep her retail business afloat, but that became more and more difficult as time went by. By the time she was acquitted of all the charges which she had faced, her financial position was such that her business was a lost cause. In the end, the business and premises were sold, but at a loss.
3.180. Ms McKelvey’s financial difficulties were emphasised to me in oral submissions made by Mr Sam Stein KC. It was suggested that she had been reliant upon family members to provide significant financial support and that she had either been made bankrupt or, alternatively, that she had entered into an IVA. He was at pains to point out that she was facing a real struggle to obtain the full and fair financial redress to which, in her view, she was entitled.
3.181. While Ms McKelvey did not refer to bankruptcy or an IVA in her witness statement, she did maintain that for many years she relied upon her brothers and sisters for financial and emotional support. She also described how, when her eldest son started to work, he contributed substantially to the family finances. In summary, according to Ms McKelvey, she survived financially over very many years only with the very considerable assistance of her immediate family.
Susan Hazzleton
3.182. Ms Susan Hazzleton became the postmistress of the Post Office at Little Waltham, near Chelmsford, on 1 March 1995. The branch was situated in a shop from which Ms Hazzleton sold a variety of convenience goods.
3.183. Following the introduction of Horizon to the branch, Ms Hazzleton began to suffer from shortfalls. In late 2000, Horizon apparently revealed a shortfall of £6,000 (subsequently reduced to £4,300). The Post Office made a demand of Ms Hazzleton that she should pay the same and, reluctantly, Ms Hazzleton agreed, although she maintains that her agreement to pay that sum was subject to the proviso that a full audit of her system was undertaken in order to investigate how the alleged shortfall had occurred.
3.184. In or around March 2001, an audit team from the Post Office arrived at the branch unannounced. Apparently, no shortfalls were discovered, but Ms Hazzleton was told that there had been a problem relating to Pension Vouchers “and Horizon”. Post Office investigators questioned Ms Hazzleton in her home. She estimates that the questioning lasted for approximately four hours, and she described it as intimidating. The investigators also conducted a search of her home and seized items, including financial records, bank statements and her computer.
3.185. Ms Hazzleton was suspended on 30 March 2001. She does not recall receiving a notice terminating her contract but, in effect, her contract was terminated on the day that she was suspended.
3.186. Sometime thereafter, Post Office investigators and police officers attended Ms Hazzleton’s home. It is not entirely clear whether she was formally arrested or simply agreed to attend the local police station. She does recall that it was necessary for her to make arrangements for her children to be picked up from school – she was not permitted to collect the children and then attend at the police station.
3.187. Ms Hazzleton was at the police station for many hours, during which period she was kept in a cell and, thereafter, interviewed under caution. She was repeatedly accused of fraudulently submitting pension and allowance vouchers to the value of £300.
3.188. In due course, however, Ms Hazzleton was charged with stealing a total of £6,012. At the Crown Court, Ms Hazzleton faced 17 counts of theft totalling that amount. She steadfastly maintained that she had done nothing wrong and pleaded not guilty to each count.
3.189. The prosecution of Ms Hazzleton never made it to a trial. According to Ms Hazzleton, the proceedings were subject to unnecessary and unexplained delays. By September 2002, i.e. 18 months after Ms Hazzleton’s suspension, the Post Office were still unprepared for a trial. Accordingly, and in the face of pressure from the Court, the criminal proceedings were terminated. In her witness statement, Ms Hazzleton suggests that the Post Office withdrew the proceedings. Newspaper reporting at the time suggested that the Post Office offered no evidence against Ms Hazzleton at a hearing before a judge sitting in Chelmsford Crown Court, and that he entered verdicts of not guilty in respect of each of the counts laid against her.
3.190. Sometime after the criminal proceedings had come to an end, Ms Hazzleton received a Letter of Demand from the Post Office claiming that she owed the Post Office £1,800. Upon the advice of her solicitor, Ms Hazzleton refuted the claim and in August 2004 she received a letter from the Post Office informing her that it no longer intended to pursue the claim.
3.191. At the time of the criminal proceedings, Ms Hazzleton was the subject of adverse publicity in the local newspaper. Her friends told her that she was “the talk of the village”. Her young children were taunted at school; for example, they were often told that “your mum’s been stealing” and “It’s your mum’s fault we don’t have a Post Office”.
3.192. Ms Hazzleton lost her business. She had to convert her repayment mortgage into an interest only mortgage so as to be able to afford repayments. When she made her witness statement on 12 January 2022, she was still making mortgage repayments and she estimated that the duration of her mortgage had been extended by approximately 10 years.
3.193. Even so, when she gave oral evidence to the Inquiry, she explained that it would be necessary for her to sell her home since she was in no position to repay the capital sum owing on the mortgage.
3.194. Ms Hazzleton was one of the claimants in the Group Litigation and as such, she did not satisfy the eligibility criteria so as to enable her to make a claim for compensation under the Horizon Shortfall Scheme. Further, she was not entitled to an interim payment under the Overturned Convictions Scheme. Put shortly, when Ms Hazzleton gave evidence in Phase 1 there was a real prospect that the only compensation which she would receive was the amount she recovered in the Group Litigation. This was no more than a modest sum – hence her need to sell her home. Very fortunately, the Minister’s announcement on 22 March 2022, to the effect that claimants in the Group Litigation would receive additional financial redress, was, apparently, made just in time so as to enable Ms Hazzleton to take appropriate steps to preserve her home. Her recognised legal representative has recently confirmed to the Inquiry that although the Group Litigation Order Scheme was not launched until about one year after the Minister’s announcement, interim payments made available under Group Litigation Order Scheme were used to pay off mortgage payments which had accrued due.
Geoffrey Pound
3.195. Mr Geoffrey Pound was the postmaster at Lynmouth Post Office in Devon from July 2005 to December 2007. He lived with his family above the Post Office and his wife worked in the retail shop on the premises.
3.196. Mr Pound contacted the Helpdesk, on average, two to three times a week because of issues with transactions. On more than one occasion he was told that the discrepancies would resolve themselves, and on other occasions he was told to “make them good”. He says the Helpdesk never mentioned that other postmasters were having similar problems with unexplained discrepancies.
3.197. Mr Pound’s Post Office was subject to an unannounced audit in December 2007. The auditor found a shortfall of approximately £3,000. Mr Pound was already aware of this shortfall and had reported this to the Helpdesk. He did not have the money to ‘make it good’. Mr Pound was subsequently suspended after a phone call with an investigator in which he explained he could not afford to balance the shortfall.
3.198. There was no investigation after Mr Pound’s suspension and no civil or criminal proceedings were brought against him. Mr Pound’s contract was later terminated by the Post Office without notice.
3.199. Mr Pound’s circumstances are an example of the disproportionately harsh consequences endured by some postmasters who were held responsible for relatively ‘small’ shortfalls. Mr Pound and his family suffered significant financial impacts. He felt compelled to enter an IVA. After he was suspended, he had no income to keep the shop open and could not pay his mortgage. The shop was repossessed, and he ultimately lost his business, his home, and his investment property. Mr Pound and his family were made homeless.
3.200. Mr Pound and his family were excluded from the community. He was ignored by many and on one occasion a local shop owner who was hosing down the entire street, cleaned everywhere except for outside Mr Pound’s shop. It was clear to him from this event that his family were no longer welcome.
3.201. Mr Pound became increasingly depressed, and he tried to take his life. He was subsequently admitted to a mental health hospital where he stayed for a month before being placed on antidepressant medication for the following three years. Mr Pound’s daughter was only six when the family became homeless, and he was admitted to hospital.
3.202. Mr Pound told the Inquiry in March 2022 that he continues to struggle financially. He is on a state pension, with a small pension from work he had done before he took on the Post Office. He lives in isolated social housing and can no longer afford to keep a car, having to instead rely on the limited public transport available in a rural town. His wife uses a wheelchair, and it is increasingly difficult for him to push the wheelchair two miles to get to the bus stop.
3.203. Talking about the impacts continuing for postmasters today, Mr Pound said “… the victims need help just to live a basic life.”
Deirdre Connolly
3.204. Ms Deirdre Connolly became the postmistress at the Killeter branch in Northern Ireland in March 2006 and remained there until June 2010 when her contract was terminated by the Post Office.
3.205. Ms Connolly would contact the Helpdesk about two or three times a week. She said that the Helpdesk did not help her. She found that some of the Helpdesk staff could not understand her accent. She had tried her best to work through the manuals, but Horizon was difficult to use.
3.206. In 2009 Ms Connolly took on two rural outreach sites, one in Aughabrack and one in Ardstraw. She was aware that those previously running these sites had been made aware by Police of the risk of ‘tiger kidnappings’ given the cash that was held on premises. Nonetheless, despite the logistical difficulties of having to take her computer and a case full of money to both rural areas every time, coupled with the security risk of having a personal alarm device given by the Post Office which was not always functioning well given the poor network signal, she took on this role alongside running her own Post Office full time. She said Horizon did not work well at either of the sites and wondered if the significant shortfall that resulted in the suspension of her contract could have been caused by the transactions handled at Ardstraw. She recalled there being difficulties with the system due to the poor line.
3.207. In June 2010, an unannounced audit of Ms Connolly’s post office took place. She recalls in her written statement that when she arrived that morning, she saw a strange car parked on the road, but did not want to get out until someone else came in, because of fear of being robbed given the risk. The auditor from the Post Office told her that he had found a discrepancy. From then she was suspended and not allowed back into the Post Office. She recalls that the screen showed a shortfall of £16,592, but she had no opportunity to see his calculations or go into the Post Office to check. £1,000 was taken off the money owed because the auditor found that amount in cash in a safe in the Post Office.
3.208. Ms Connolly later received a letter from the Post Office asking her to pay £15,592, followed by a letter from a fraud investigator at the Post Office inviting her to a meeting at Royal Mail Belfast. Ms Connolly attended the meeting and was accused of stealing the money and giving it to the paramilitaries. This allegation terrified Ms Connolly.
3.209. She and her husband asked their families for money to pay the Post Office. They received a total of about £14,000 from their family. She said, “The shame of [this] still burns.”
3.210. Ms Connolly said she paid the money to the Post Office under threat to their lives. She said, “it was like having money extorted from you with menace”.
3.211. The local community stopped coming to her shop as the story about the audit had spread. She was branded a thief in her own town and felt she could not lift her head in public from the shame.
3.212. Ms Connolly said that her darkest day was the day that she received a letter from the Post Office stating that it would not bring criminal proceedings against her. She had not considered that this would be a possibility. She said she was on the brink of taking her life that day.
3.213. Ms Connolly developed epilepsy in 2013 which she attributes to the stresses of the situation she found herself in. She began having panic attacks and was treated for anxiety and depression. She said her children have also been affected. She and her husband were made bankrupt in February 2013. They were forced to sell the shop and the premises at a loss.
3.214. She said:
“As a result of the Post Office action against me, I went from being a hardworking, respected, confident person, to being a recluse not wanting to see anyone or talk to anyone.”
Millie Castleton
3.215. The civil proceedings brought by the Post Office against Mr Lee Castleton have been the subject of much justified publicity. In summary, in 2007 the Post Office obtained a judgment against Mr Castleton following a contested hearing in the High Court in London. Mr Castleton was ordered to pay to the Post Office the sum of £25,858.95 plus interest. He was also directed to pay their legal costs which were subsequently agreed by Mr Castleton in the sum of £270,995.78 plus interest. By the time an application for a charging order was made against Mr Castleton, the judgement debt, in total, stood at £309,807.94.
3.216. Mr Castleton has recently let it be known that he intends to take legal proceedings against the Post Office and Fujitsu in which he will allege, so I believe, that the judgment against him, made at the request of the Post Office, was obtained by fraud. The proceedings against Mr Castleton were the subject of a civil case study as part of Phase 4 and will be subject to further examination in a later volume of my Report. For present purposes, I would like to make it crystal clear that nothing which I say in the paragraphs below about the trauma suffered by Ms Millie Castleton, should be taken as being any kind of indication by me about the merits of Mr Castleton’s proposed proceedings against the Post Office and Fujitsu. I wish to use Ms Castleton’s evidence purely as a prime example of the sort of impact that a close family member of a postmaster may have experienced as a result of the events relating to Horizon.
3.217. Ms Castleton is Mr Castleton’s daughter. She has personally written a witness statement for the Inquiry to describe the impact upon her (and to a degree her mother) of the events which unfolded between the Post Office and her father. It is a very moving account of Ms Castleton’s childhood and teenage years and her struggles as a young adult. The statement should be read in full for a complete understanding of the trauma which Ms Castleton has endured.
3.218. Ms Castleton was aged eight when she became aware that the Post Office was alleging that her father was liable for shortfalls at his branch. In her words, she became aware of the “confusion, frustration and anxiety that was leeching into my home”. Mr Castleton’s contract as a postmaster was terminated and the civil proceedings followed. Her family were branded as “thieves and liars”. Mr Castleton worked away from home while Mrs Castleton tried to run the newsagent business which, initially, had been run in conjunction with the Post Office branch. Mr Castleton’s absences from home to facilitate his work soon began to impinge upon the relationship between father and daughter.
3.219. When Ms Castleton moved school (I assume to go to a secondary school) she became the target of bullying. In her first week she was asked “Didn’t your Dad steal loads of money or something?”. It was not long before Ms Castleton was the victim of assaults and hurtful verbal taunts. School became a place of loneliness and misery. Meanwhile, Mrs Castleton developed epilepsy. Ms Castleton provided her with as much assistance as possible especially when her father was away at work. She often slept with her so that she would always be on hand if Mrs Castleton suffered a seizure.
3.220. At or about the age of 17, Ms Castleton’s mental health began to suffer significantly. She began to experience feelings such as “self-loathing, depression and feeling like a burden to [her] family”. Despite these setbacks, she did sufficiently well academically to obtain a place at university.
3.221. At, or about that time, however, Ms Castleton developed an eating disorder and was diagnosed with anorexia. Although she was able to take up her place at university and complete her first year, by the beginning of her second year Ms Castleton was too unwell to resume her studies. She was forced by illness to “take a year out”. Her eating disorder, inevitably impacted upon other aspects of her health and at one point during her “year out” Ms Castleton was admitted to hospital with heart related illness.
3.222. I can think of no better way to end this section of this volume of my Report than to quote from the penultimate paragraph of Ms Castleton’s witness statement. It is a vivid and compelling summary of the trauma from which she has suffered and from which she continues to suffer.
“I fought. I tried. I am better for it. Not perfect but better, part of me will always feel a little broken-up. I still feel a burning fear of spending larger sums of money or doing something purely for myself. That nagging voice in my head still says ugly things sometimes. It still tells me that my past and my family’s struggle will define me, that it will be a branding on my skin forever. Broken, thief or liar. Even now as I go into my career I still find it so incredibly hard to trust anyone, even subconsciously. I sabotage myself by not asking for help with anything. Asking for equipment, advice or resources feels terrifying. Like I’m unworthy or be thought poorly of. I’m trying hard to break this cycle but I’m 26 and am very conscious that I may never be able to fully commit to natural trust. But my family is still fighting. I’m still fighting, as are many hundreds involved in the Post Office trial.”
Footnotes