Story of O wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 1:43 pm
I’m still amazed that anyone thought that 100’s of post masters were doing the same fraud at the same time.
That’s the point . One or two ,maybe but not 100’s . The alarm bells must have been ringing loud and clear. They probably were so why was it ignored. ?
This is the part that just doesn't make sense. I worked for Midland Bank then HSBC Bank in the branch network for over 20 years, eventually as. Branch Manager in the City and West End in the late 90's/early noughties. During that time there was comparatively a small number of staff related fraud. On each occasion the investigation had a focus on a reason and to "follow the money". The cases were varied, some very sad, almost desperate family situations. In other cases there were addiction issues but in every case I personally was involved in it was possible to find out where the money went.
As far as I know this just didn't happen at the PO. Hundreds of SPM's prosecuted without a shred of evidence of where the money went. On top of that prosecution numbers suddenly shooting through the roof with no explanation.
It's just unthinkable but succeeding in future prosecutions of senior PO executives will not be easy.
See Stoways input I Quote " fact that the Royal Mail is protected, they had their own internal police unit, the Investigation Bureau. They had proper legal powers, they were usually ex-Police and could be very intimidating " I also worked as PO Engineer/ BT Engineer. This 100% fact.
Story of O wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 1:43 pm
I’m still amazed that anyone thought that 100’s of post masters were doing the same fraud at the same time.
Yes, if this story was a Film or TV Series, most people would say, “ how unrealistic, it would never happen in real life “
It beggars belief that nobody thought, “ Hang on a minute, there surely can’t be hundreds of them from all over the UK who are on the take, and blaming the computer system “
Friend or faux wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 4:33 pm
See Stoways input I Quote " fact that the Royal Mail is protected, they had their own internal police unit, the Investigation Bureau. They had proper legal powers, they were usually ex-Police and could be very intimidating " I also worked as PO Engineer/ BT Engineer. This 100% fact.
I've worked for Royal Mail for over 40 years and I can confirm that's true . The internal investigation branch was called the i.B . In all my years I've personally seen them frog march two or three people out of the building in handcuffs . It was usually for stealing .
Friend or faux wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 4:33 pm
See Stoways input I Quote " fact that the Royal Mail is protected, they had their own internal police unit, the Investigation Bureau. They had proper legal powers, they were usually ex-Police and could be very intimidating " I also worked as PO Engineer/ BT Engineer. This 100% fact.
I've worked for Royal Mail for over 40 years and I can confirm that's true . The internal investigation branch was called the i.B . In all my years I've personally seen them frog march two or three people out of the building in handcuffs . It was usually for stealing .
Story of O wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 1:43 pm
I’m still amazed that anyone thought that 100’s of post masters were doing the same fraud at the same time.
Yes, if this story was a Film or TV Series, most people would say, “ how unrealistic, it would never happen in real life “
It beggars belief that nobody thought, “ Hang on a minute, there surely can’t be hundreds of them from all over the UK who are on the take, and blaming the computer system “
Unless the prevailing thought process in upper management - before introducing the system - was " I bet those SPMs are robbing us blind - we really need a system to catch them out. Our internal police force are pretty sure there's a lot of criminality going on, so let's get this system in to catch the buggers"
Then, when the system shows up "frauds"*, it's confirming their expectations so a) they think it must be a great system 'cos it agrees with them, and b) they're happy to be "proved" right all along. So they're less likely to look for flaws.
Having probably spent many millions of pounds for the software, with some execs putting their “reputation” on the line by backing it, no-one would want to be the one to rock the boat.
It’s all about self- preservation and doing everything they could to discredit any concerns. The execs didn’t/don’t give a toss about the poor old postmasters. Crocodile tears from Vennells - really sorry - that she’s been found out.
BoniO wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2024 4:23 pm
Having probably spent many millions of pounds for the software, with some execs putting their “reputation” on the line by backing it, no-one would want to be the one to rock the boat.
It’s all about self- preservation and doing everything they could to discredit any concerns. The execs didn’t/don’t give a toss about the poor old postmasters. Crocodile tears from Vennells - really sorry - that she’s been found out.
An all too common mindset. I think you’re spot on.
Once you’re invested in something, what needs to be right to justify the investment can become more important than what’s actually right
Yup. The only “right” most execs are interested in is what’s right for them. That and driving the best results possible for the company to keep the shareholders happy - which, in turn, keeps them in a job and feeds their huge bonuses.
The Postmasters never had a chance of being treated fairly.
