Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That isn’t actually what the Theft Act 1968 S1 actually says, BTW. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1 (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;   The difference between what you’ve said and the Act? a) intent to permanently deprive rather than  just depriving (which is why the offence of “taking without consent” was brought in for motor vehicles, as otherwise "joyriders" could say "but I intended to give it back at the end") b) dishonesty : If I honestly believed A's pen belonged to B, and took it and gave it to B - B might be found guilty of theft but I shouldn't be. 
    • Received a call and follow on confirmation email from the police about my cabinets! They wanted to confirm that I was prepared to support police action for the matter and that I would be happy to provide a statement and attend court at a later date!!! I think that something might actually get done - it won't get my cabinets back I know that but hopefully it will put a stop to this so called courier doing this to people!
    • Around a month ago I had to send a sympathy card to a friend in GB. Logistically it made sense to buy a personalised one on eBay and get it sent straight to my mate, rather than faffing around getting it sent to me.  This mighty purchase set me back all of £3.05 (including postage costs). I was taken aback that, when it was sent, I got a tracking number.  For a flippin' three-quid card!  I had no idea that technology had moved on so much and that tracking was so easy.  The shop has feedback for 16,300 purchases so tracking must be easy & automatic. It's unlikely your case will get to court, but in cases that do this got me thinking that we need to aggressively challenge the PPCs where they have lied about the timescales of sending their rubbish and have no proof at all of posting - when it would be so easy to provide it.
    • Thanks for uploading the appeal.  It was a waste of time but well done in not outing the driver. Why have your friends paid £60 they don't owe to a cowboy private company that have no means of making them pay as they don't do court?  If they paid by card, as I presume they did, they should get on to their bank and do a chargeback immediately. We call the £70 the Unicorn Food Tax.  The law specifically states they are only allowed to charge the original £100 but the PPCs and their bezzies in their trade associations allow this made-up extra £70 so £100 becomes £170.  Unfortunately for them the law doesn't. Anyway, snotty letter time. There is an example in post 32 here you can tweak as it's the same company but a different car park   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/463964-alliance-anpr-pcn-lease-car-appeals-refused-daymer-bay-cornwall/page/2/#comments  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

The sub-postmasters scandal


Recommended Posts

The i paper has dug this up about ICL/Fujitsu's system for benefit payments and fraud detection.

INEWS.CO.UK

The regulator of Fujitsu's benefits system claims the £1.5bn IT project suffered data errors like those that later hit the Horizon software

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

POL has suspended its PR man Peter Taylor. He was recorded [twice] saying he thought the SPMs had indeed stolen the money.

WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK

The Post Office last night suspended its chief spin doctor after he was caught saying victims of the Horizon IT scandal 'downright stole' the money.

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Sight, the forensic accountants, strongly suspected [or had proof, I can't remember] that money ended up in a POL suspense account. After a couple of years they think it was transferred onto the balance sheet and was taken into account for management bonuses.

  • I agree 2

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article in The Times today about the Jo Hamilton case and others.

An investigator with access to prosecution files claims he told Angela Van den Bogerd, a senior manager overseeing matters relating to the Horizon accounting system, that Jo Hamilton had been charged with theft even though no evidence had been found.

https://archive.is/WExoC

  • Thanks 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Times has found a whistleblower who worked in a PO call centre for Horizon. They're saying that the PO could access accounts and change them.

I remember in the ITV series, the Michael Rudkin character [from the SPMs' 'union'] said that after he went to Fujitsu's offices, his wife's Horizon account suddenly showed a shortfall of tens of thousands of £. He said it was done to punish him.

https://archive.is/dPNeg

  • Sad 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That Nick Wallis article on Anne Chambers' evidence is pretty shocking.

'No evidence. Williams pointed out that it surely was unlikely to be a user error if both trainers and auditors had recorded the Subpostmaster as inputting information correctly. Chambers replied:

“Well, yeah, I… yes, I don’t know why… I’m not happy with this one. But I still stand by there being no indication of a system error and the numbers that they were recording just didn’t make a lot of sense.” '

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure which second Times article you mean, TJ.

In that Twitter thread you couldn't access, @FollowTheScience says that the lawyer he was writing about asked Gareth Jenkins of Fujitsu to rewrite part of a statement because it could help the defence.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from Liam Byrne, chair of the Business select committee on the evidence given by the heads of POL and Fujitsu.

“You’ve left us fairly shocked actually. You’ve not been able to supply the committee with key events in the timeline, such as when the Post Office first knew that remote access was possible.

“You’ve told us you haven’t kept evidence safe about what money was paid to you inappropriately and therefore is owed back, and you can’t estimate the scale of compensation. We are grateful to the moral commitment to pay compensation, but that leaves us many questions.”

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee Castleton had costs in the region of £300k didn't he, for POL recovering £25k? It's being said that they wanted to make an example of him to discourage other SPMs from fighting.

I just hope they at least start to be paid out on account soon. The compensation committees sound hugely bureaucratic.

I do wonder if they're also considering the impact on people's lives; the homes or relationships or businesses they lost, never mind the mental effects. Fairness IMO says that they should be returned to the position they would have been in if they hadn't been falsely sued.

  • I agree 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The i paper is saying there could be a second scandal with the Capture system in the 1990s. I think we may have mentioned this.

INEWS.CO.UK

Former sub-postmasters have claimed they were wrongly convicted due to alleged faults with Capture

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Paul Patterson has put the cat amongst the pigeons today with his evidence.

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

Europe chief of tech firm embroiled in Horizon IT scandal opens evidence with apology for ‘appalling miscarriage of justice’

 

  • I agree 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...