Post Office inquiry live at this time: Alan Bates says company spent 23 years lying ‘to silence me’ on Horizon scandal

An inner Post Office doc, titled “Horizon Integrity”, described Alan Bates as having “become unmanageable”.

The obvious overview of doable instances of Horizon faults claimed the previous subpostmaster “clearly struggled with the accounting and despite copious support did not follow instructions”.

Detailing a number of different doable recognized instances, it then states: “Details of the cases do bear looking at.”

Mr Bates denied that he struggled with accounting, laughed when requested if he acquired copious assist, and on the matter of directions, stated: “Basically try and bankrupt myself? No I didn’t, not to that extent.”

While Alan Bates stated he “never” acquired a cause for the Post Office terminating his contract, he has been proven a letter by the company to an MP in 2003 claiming that it had “lost confidence in his willingness to conduct the job in the manner expected”.

The declare got here in correspondence – seen by the inquiry – to MP Betty Williams, who had written to the Post Office to relay her constituent’s concern in regards to the short-term closure of the department run by Mr Bates.

Asked if that had ever been defined to him, Mr Bates instructed the inquiry: “No.”

Alan Bates has stated he believed the Post Office have been making an attempt to “make a lesson” of his case when terminating his contract in 2003.

“I felt they were going to make a lesson of my case – because a number of other people knew what was going on at that time, and I think it was something the Post Office liked to try and give lessons of how they were in charge,” he instructed the inquiry.

Alan Bates has said he was “never” given an explanation for his dismissal by the Post Office.

Asked by the inquiry’s lead counsel the way it felt to obtain a letter from the Post Office in August 2003 telling him they have been terminating his contract that November, he stated: “I was annoyed with them, to put it mildly, but I think it was partly expected in a way.

“Because it was pretty obvious they were after me, one way or another, and the build-up of correspondence over the period was certainly pointing in that direction.

“But I always found it quite interesting that I pulled them up on the point about trying to terminate me and my contract under Clause 12 of the contract … but they didn’t do it that way. They decided to go just under this ‘any reason they wanted in three months’ notice without giving a reason’”.

The inquiry’s lead counsel clarified: “So it’s a ‘without fault, without reason’ termination, just on three month’s written notice”, including: “You’d had the £1,100 written off, you’ve had the Post Office acknowledging it was because of a genuine dispute over whether Horizon was to blame for it, you’d been rolling over other surpluses since then with Post Office knowledge – and then this arrives.”

Mr Bates replied: “It was a bit strange in a way, because we were a very busy Post Office, in fact it was a time when a lot of Post Offices were losing trade but our sales figures were very high in the region, we developed a lot of new business in there. But it was their decision to do it [fire me] and so be it.”

He added: “I did offer at one point when … we were heading in this direction … if you’re unhappy with the way I’m providing your service then pay us back our initial investment and take the Post Office away, I would have been quite happy for them to do that, and I probably wouldn’t be here today on that basis.”

Alan Bates has been proven correspondence between himself and the Post Office during which he was immediately ordered to pay for unexplained shortfalls – and refused.

Citing his contract, Mr Bates instructed the Post Office he was beneath no obligation to pay for sums which he couldn’t make certain he in truth owed the company, the paperwork present.

Months later, he acquired a response informing him that his contract could be terminated.

Alan Bates has instructed the Post Office IT Inquiry he by no means obtained a response to a letter he despatched to the Post Office in December 2000 during which he raised issues in regards to the Horizon IT system.

In one other letter to the Post Office seen by the inquiry, dated January 7 2002, Mr Bates wrote: “When I signed my contract with Post Office Counters, I did not sign to accept the liabilities arising from the shortcomings of a less than adequate Horizon system.”

Alan Bates has been proven an inner Post Office doc – not disclosed to him on the time – which reveals a lot of choices obtainable in responding to his request for a shortfall to be written off.

The doc incorporates three choices – both to grant the subpostmaster’s receipt in full, to make them pay for the sum, or two grant a partial receipt.

“Were you aware at that time that the Post Office seemingly used a standard form with ‘delete as appropriate’ boxes on it?” Mr Bates was requested by the inquiry’s lead counsel.

“No I didn’t, but now you mention it I do recall a conversation that the retail network manager at the time had with this department at my office, so I only heard one side of the conversation, and it was about arranging for this write-off voucher,” Mr Bates stated.

“And I seem to recall, and it’s stuck in [my] memory, and he said, ‘oh, it’s another one of those Horizon losses’. It’s just one of those little things that sticks in the back of your mind that was said at the time.”

Alan Bates has been proven letters he despatched to the Post Office about accounting shortfalls and faults with the Horizon system throughout his time as a subpostmaster, interesting to his employer for assist and detailing the issues with the IT system.

The second letter, despatched in January 2002, says he “has no doubt at all” that one inaccurate sum of £1,041.86 was “due to errors in the Horizon system”.

Alan Bates stated the partnership between subpostmasters and the Post Office was “very one-sided”.

He instructed the inquiry: “I had been led to believe that subpostmasters were working in partnership with the Post Office, and if the Post Office wanted me to measure up to the standards they required, I expected them to do the same for me.

“However, over time, it soon became evident that the ‘partnership’ was very one-sided, and it really was a question of ‘you will do as you are told and if you don’t like it, you can’t complain and there is no redress on this, and you just get on and keep your mouth closed’ – that’s how it works.”

In his witness assertion to the inquiry, Alan Bates stated the Post Office had spent everything of the 23 years he has been campaigning “denying, lying, defending, and attempting to discredit and silence me”.

He stated: “Prior to and since my termination from the branch, I have spent the last 23 years campaigning to expose the truth, and justice, not just for myself, but for the entire group of wrongly treated/wrongly convicted subpostmasters.

“I have dedicated this period of my life to this cause which, sadly, has been necessary since Post Office Limited has spent this entire period denying, lying, defending, and attempting to discredit and silence me and the group of SPMs that the Justice For Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA) represents.”