Justice delayed is justice denied
The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry published the first part of its final report today. Read the full report here.
This report, by the inquiry’s chair Sir Wyn Williams, delivers 19 recommendations, all of which focus on the human impact of the scandal and compensation for victims.
It makes for a very disturbing read.
The scale of the human impact of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal:
- There are approximately 10,000 eligible claimants in the schemes providing financial redress. That number is likely to rise by hundreds, if not more, over the coming months.
- The scale of the suffering endured by claimants is extremely wide-ranging – from those held liable for small amounts of money, to the 1,000 claimants wrongly convicted and imprisoned, and/or who became seriously ill, and/or were declared bankrupt.
- Many have died without having received the full and fair redress to which they are entitled – estimates put this number at around 350 people.
- 13 confirmed deaths by suicide have been linked to Horizon shortfalls.
- 59 people contemplated suicide at various points because of their experience with Horizon and/or the Post Office.
- 19 people have abused alcohol due to their experiences with Horizon and/or the Post Office.
- The devastating consequences of the scandal cannot be overstated – bankruptcy, home losses, depression, anxiety, PTSD, suicide, self-harm, divorce, public shame, hostility, imprisonment.
- Immediate family – wives, husbands, children and parents – have endured very significant suffering in the form of distress, worry and disruption, psychiatric illnesses, and very significant financial losses.
Highlights from Volume 1 of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry’s Report
Full and fair redress
Despite new evidence that the total costs paid for the “operational delivery of Horizon redress schemes” have risen to £100 million, we still don’t have a definition of what “full and fair financial redress” means.
The report is very critical about the complexity, delays, and bureaucracy of redress schemes that have left victims waiting years for full compensation. It recommends that the government, in conjunction with the Post Office, make a public announcement explaining what is meant by the phrase “full and fair financial redress”.
Further, such an explanation must indicate that claimants should be awarded sums equivalent to those they would receive in civil litigation brought before a judge in England and Wales, with damages awarded at the top end of the appropriate civil litigation range. This meaning must be applied when assessing amounts awarded to individual claimants in each of the four compensation schemes.
Free legal advice
The report concludes all claimants should be entitled to obtain free legal advice when choosing between accepting a Fixed Sum Offer or seeking assessed financial redress.
Further, a senior lawyer should be appointed to independently oversee assessments.
Family member compensation
The report recognises that close family members of those who have been most adversely affected by Horizon have themselves also endured, and may still endure, considerable suffering.
It concludes it is only fair and proper that such family members should be able to obtain financial redress which recognises their own suffering. The report recommends a process should be devised to deliver this redress for such family members.
Restorative justice
By 31 October 2025 the report says the government, Fujitsu and the Post Office should publish a report on a programme for restorative justice that brings together those that have caused harm with the people who have suffered, so they can “discuss the impact, take responsibility, and work collaboratively to make amends”.
It says work towards this restorative justice programme should be founded on moral responsibility and must not be hindered by other legal proceedings.
Compensation has been too slow and too adversarial
The report says that compensation schemes have been “bedevilled with unjustifiable delays” and redress has not been delivered promptly. Further it states that “on too many occasions” the Post Office and its legal advisers have been “unnecessarily adversarial” in making initial offers for compensation, driving down the level of eventual financial settlements.
It says the development, implementation, administration and delivery of compensation schemes have caused very substantial delays in providing redress to claimants. The chances of claims being resolved within current timescales are remote, and in fact many will likely be in existence for some years yet.
Who’s responsible?
Sir Wyn Williams gave us a very clear glimpse into what his report will cover next, in terms of what happened and who is responsible.
Shockingly, despite clear evidence that Post Office employees knew Horizon was capable of producing errors, “wholly unacceptable behaviour” was perpetrated by a number of individuals. As we’ve reported previously, throughout the lifetime of legacy Horizon, the Post Office, and indeed Fujitsu, maintained the fiction that Horizon’s data was always accurate.
To date those responsible have not been brought to justice, and no one has been held criminally liable. Indeed, the Post Office has not even undertaken any private prosecutions related to Horizon failings.
As we said at the start, justice delayed is justice denied!
So, what next?
The report’s recommendations essentially demand a complete overhaul of how compensation is delivered, with much stronger independent oversight and a genuine commitment to putting victims first, rather than protect institutional interests.
The government, and where appropriate the Post Office and Fujitsu, must now provide written responses to the report’s 19 recommendations by 10th October 2025.
