Accused Post Office employees of obstructing justice in subpostmaster cases
By
Chief reporter and senior editor EMEA
Published: 01 Mar 2024 10:00
Employees at the Post Office reportedly concealed crucial evidence that could have helped exonerate a subpostmaster they sought to penalize in order to intimidate others.
During the conclusion of the fourth phase of the official inquiry into the Post Office Horizon scandal, Edward Henry KC, representing victims of the scandal on behalf of solicitors Hodge, Jones & Allen Henry, highlighted a significant civil case involving Lee Castleton in 2006.
When Castleton faced a £26,000 shortfall at his Bridlington branch without a clear explanation, the Post Office insisted that he cover the amount. Troubled by the debt, Castleton decided to challenge the Post Office’s demand in court rather than comply.
The Post Office pursued Castleton in the High Court to recover the alleged losses, spending approximately £300,000 in the process. Castleton defended himself, but the judge sided with the Post Office, dismissing Castleton’s argument that the debt was not legitimate. Witnesses from the Post Office denied any system issues contributing to Castleton’s losses.
As a result, Castleton faced bankruptcy and his family endured significant financial and mental strain. Castleton was among the initial seven former subpostmasters who reached out to Computer Weekly about the injustices they faced in 2008.
In his summary for phase four, Henry asserted that Castleton fell victim to the Post Office’s aggressive resolve to set a precedent.
The tactic was described as a move to discourage further questioning of the Horizon system, knowing that prosecuting subpostmasters for unexplained discrepancies would falter if system flaws were exposed widely.
The legal team and investigators at the Post Office were aware of system errors but chose to withhold critical evidence that had emerged during an earlier case in 2001 involving a branch in Cleveleys, Lancashire.
In the 2001 case, the Post Office sued subpostmaster Julie Wolstenholme for the return of branch equipment following her contract termination. Wolstenholme countered that her dismissal was unjust and raised concerns about the reliability of the Horizon system used in branches.
The counterclaim, prompted by a subpostmaster who had encountered significant issues with the Horizon system, sought damages for unfair termination. It alleged that the Post Office violated an implied contractual term guaranteeing a functional computer system, highlighting the inadequacy of the system provided.