Postmasters previously offered derisory compensation by the Post Office are being given a new opportunity to claim under an independent appeals process. The Post Office has written to them offering the choice of appealing, or accepting a £75k flat payment. It’s one or the other – a difficult decision for which postmasters should receive detailed legal advice. But they’re being offered no help with legal costs, and few postmasters will be in a position to afford a lawyer. Many will take the path of least resistance and simply accept the £75k – which in some cases will be much less than they should receive.
The Post Office scandal probably needs no introduction. But, in short, between 2000 and 20171, the Post Office falsely accused thousands of postmasters of theft. Some went to prison. Many had their assets seized and their reputations shredded. Marriages and livelihoods were destroyed, and at least 61 have now died, never receiving an apology or recompense. These prosecutions were on the basis of financial discrepancies reported by a computer accounting system called Horizon. The Post Office knew from the start that there were serious problems with the Horizon system, but covered it up, and proceeded with aggressive prosecutions based on unreliable data.
Our previous Post Office scandal coverage can be found here.
The HSS scheme
The Post Office created a scheme to pay compensation to about 2,750 of the postmasters who hadn’t been prosecuted for theft, but had been required to repay “shortfalls” and (in most cases) lost their livelihoods. It was first called the “Historical Shortfall Scheme” and then renamed to the “Horizon Shortfall Scheme” – the HSS. But, by accident or design, the process for claiming compensation was complex and highly legal, and the Post Office didn’t offer postmasters any legal assistance in putting their claim together.2
So many postmasters ended up receiving derisory amounts – in one case as low as £15.75. And many received nothing at all.
Campaigning postmasters like Christopher Head told the Post Office in 2023 that all the HSS settlements had to be reviewed. They were ignored, but kept pushing. Thanks to their efforts, and a subsequent recommendation from the independent Horizon Compensation Advisory Board, a new independent appeals process has been created by the Government for postmasters who feel their settlement was unfair.
The catch
Here’s the letter the Post Office is sending Postmasters who were eligible under the HSS scheme. There’s a catch:
![Letter from the Post Office Horizon Shortfall Scheme dated 9 August 2024 regarding a £75,000 top-up offer: POST OFFICE
Post Office Horizon Shortfall Scheme
PO Box 76882
London
E1W 9RR
Our reference: [redacted]
[redacted]
09 August 2024
Dear [redacted]
Horizon Shortfall Scheme Application – £75,000 Top-Up Offer
The Government announced on 13 March 2024 that it is extending the £75,000 Fixed Sum Award - originally for Group Litigation Order (GLO) claimants - to all eligible claimants in the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS). This applies to you as an eligible claimant who has already accepted an HSS Offer and received a full and final settlement of less than £75,000.
Consequently, we are pleased to offer you a Top-Up payment of [redacted] to bring your total redress Offer in the HSS to £75,000.
An explanation of how the Top-Up Offer has been calculated can be found in Appendix 1.
This Top-Up Offer is made to you on the terms set out in the 'Top-Up Offer Acceptance Form' below.
The Department for Business and Trade is currently considering a proposal from the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board to establish a government-led Appeals Process. However, if you accept this Top-Up payment to £75,000 at this time, you would not be eligible for any such Appeals Process that might be introduced in the future.
If you are unsure whether or not to accept the Top-Up Offer, you are entitled to wait until a decision has been made about a potential appeals process. However, if you choose to participate in any future appeals process, you will no longer be eligible for the £75,000 Top-Up, and your appeal may result in an offer less than £75,000.
We have enclosed with this letter our Frequently Asked Questions about the Top-Up which you may find helpful in reaching a decision.
This Top-Up offer has no confidentiality requirement on your part. You can, of course, choose to keep it confidential if you wish. For its part, Post Office will continue to keep this letter and your information confidential as far as possible. Further information as to the circumstances in which Post Office may be obliged to share such information can also be found on the Scheme's website.
https://www.onepostoffice.co.uk/scheme
1](https://taxpolicy.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-25.png)
Postmasters have the option of receiving a fixed sum payment of £75,000, or can go through a full appeal assessment if they believe their losses are more than £75,000.
Whether or not to accept the £75,000 is a difficult decision. A postmaster would need to carefully assess the losses they suffered, which requires detailed financial analysis, plus a legal assessment of appropriate level of damages for loss of reputation and stress. We believe that the legal costs for such an an exercise would be at least £10,000.
How much is the Post Office offering to cover?
Nothing:
The Post Office will contribute towards postmasters’ legal fees during any actual appeal, but will make no contribution for legal advice on the critical decision of whether to appeal.
Most postmasters are elderly and vulnerable; only a few will have the resources to properly investigate if they could recover more than £75,000.
They’re being denied the chance to make a proper decision. There are cases where postmasters should be claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds – but without legal advice, we fear many will simply take the £75,000.
It looks like, once more, the Post Office is choosing the path that minimises compensation.
The Government should force the Post Office to do the right thing and cover postmasters’ legal costs, at this initial stage as well as during the actual appeal process.
Footnotes
I have previously written that this was between 2000 and 2013, but I have spoken to postmasters who faced false allegations of theft as late as 2017 ↩︎
They were offered legal expenses for considering any subsequent offer the Post Office made to them. But that was too late – the whole process was framed by the initial application, and for that, postmasters received no legal assistance ↩︎
The SRA was going to prosecute the Post Office’s lawyers. Then it stopped.
New evidence: the Post Office deliberately designed its compensation scheme to deter postmasters from applying
The Post Office – reckless with postmasters’ personal data; abusing data privacy to protect itself
The Post Office’s top priority is covering-up its mistakes
![Letter to Mr Read from members of an advisory board regarding Post Office compensation settlements: Dear Mr Read
Thank you for your response.
I am afraid that (as qualified lawyers, some of us with extensive experience of practice) my colleagues on the Advisory Board and I remain deeply unconvinced by the substance of what you say on the legal issues.
However, since the matter is now in the hands of the SRA ,we will refrain from commenting for the moment, save to say one thing.
We continue to hear stories that your former sub-PostMasters and Mistresses are confused, intimidated and hurt by the behaviour of the Post Office and its lawyers in negotiating settlements generally and in continued use of legalistic terminology. This is especially true for the significant number who remain deeply traumatised, and who do not understand the practice of terminology of what they see as an aggressive approach to settling claims. This is irrespective of whether the language or behaviour may or may not be technically permissible, and irrespective of the fact that they may have legal representation. Your reliance on legal argument ... and legal terminology similarly does not impress us. We do not perceive demonstration of behaviour that is anything like a sympathetic understanding towards the people your organisation has harmed. We suggest that this should give you cause for deep concern.
It is our practice to publish our correspondence, so will ask DBT to arrange this forthwith, unless we hear from you on that point.
[illegible]](https://taxpolicy.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Screenshot-2024-02-01-at-10.04.56-640x341.png)
The Post Office has finally stopped intimidating postmasters into silence; but it’s too late
Leave a Reply