NPR

petej wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:32 am

Enzedder wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2024 12:49 am Man, the Post Office lied to the courts - they knew that their defence was false.

Secret papers reveal Post Office knew its court defence was false

Imagine the hurt and anger coming up now if you were one of the 1000 postmasters affected. Public flogging and jail is too good for those buggers, and their lawyers

You need to nail senior management and some lawyers in this to change behaviour. To often the scapegoats are lower down the food chain.

Yup, there has to be jail time for this shite.

Slick wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:54 am

petej wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:32 am

Enzedder wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2024 12:49 am Man, the Post Office lied to the courts - they knew that their defence was false.

Secret papers reveal Post Office knew its court defence was false

Imagine the hurt and anger coming up now if you were one of the 1000 postmasters affected. Public flogging and jail is too good for those buggers, and their lawyers

You need to nail senior management and some lawyers in this to change behaviour. To often the scapegoats are lower down the food chain.

Yup, there has to be jail time for this shite.

With Parker and Vennels first in line. The lying scumbags.

Vennels should be locked up as soonest

Former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells was briefed on allegations that a “covert operations team” at Fujitsu’s Bracknell headquarters could remotely alter sub-postmasters’ accounts — two *years* before she gave evidence to MPs, according to a Channel 4 exclusive. Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury (and former committee chair) Darren Jones called the revelations the “darkest misleading of Parliament I’ve ever seen.” The Post Office denied remote access was possible for years afterward.

https://www.channel4.com/news/exclus ... pearence

SaintK wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 10:01 am Vennels should be locked up as soonest

Former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells was briefed on allegations that a “covert operations team” at Fujitsu’s Bracknell headquarters could remotely alter sub-postmasters’ accounts — two *years* before she gave evidence to MPs, according to a Channel 4 exclusive. Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury (and former committee chair) Darren Jones called the revelations the “darkest misleading of Parliament I’ve ever seen.” The Post Office denied remote access was possible for years afterward.

https://www.channel4.com/news/exclus ... pearence

The thing I dont get is where has all the extra cash gone? It is clear the external audits didn't pick this up but that's no great surprise! There is a strong suggestion here that someone was able to syphon off money from PO accounts overnight using the external IT links and possibly deposit elsewhere. If not then surely there would have been surpluses shown in stock levels, cash in hand, etc in the post office branches themselves or in other PO accounts? If PO staff were having to inject their own cash into the accounts then I cant see how the books could possibly have balanced? Surely the PO Director of Finance and his team should/would be able to identify where the surplus cash was and where it went? At best it went to the PO bottom line and drove the bonuses that the Directors etc knowingly took fraudulently or worse still there was a coordinated crime to siphon off cash using the external IT link. Either way this is clear evidence of coordinated corruption across the PO and Fujitsu to me beyond what we already know. Whilst rightly the focus has been on the poor sods who had their lives ruined by the PO and Fujitsu there is surely a major fraud here that needs to be investigated properly?

dpedin wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 11:37 am

SaintK wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 10:01 am Vennels should be locked up as soonest

Former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells was briefed on allegations that a “covert operations team” at Fujitsu’s Bracknell headquarters could remotely alter sub-postmasters’ accounts — two *years* before she gave evidence to MPs, according to a Channel 4 exclusive. Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury (and former committee chair) Darren Jones called the revelations the “darkest misleading of Parliament I’ve ever seen.” The Post Office denied remote access was possible for years afterward.

https://www.channel4.com/news/exclus ... pearence

The thing I dont get is where has all the extra cash gone? It is clear the external audits didn't pick this up but that's no great surprise! There is a strong suggestion here that someone was able to syphon off money from PO accounts overnight using the external IT links and possibly deposit elsewhere. If not then surely there would have been surpluses shown in stock levels, cash in hand, etc in the post office branches themselves or in other PO accounts? If PO staff were having to inject their own cash into the accounts then I cant see how the books could possibly have balanced? Surely the PO Director of Finance and his team should/would be able to identify where the surplus cash was and where it went? At best it went to the PO bottom line and drove the bonuses that the Directors etc knowingly took fraudulently or worse still there was a coordinated crime to siphon off cash using the external IT link. Either way this is clear evidence of coordinated corruption across the PO and Fujitsu to me beyond what we already know. Whilst rightly the focus has been on the poor sods who had their lives ruined by the PO and Fujitsu there is surely a major fraud here that needs to be investigated properly?

I guess most of it went in to the Post Office accounts. I doubt the PO considered it 'surplus'

While it's been pointed out that people at Fujitsu could have nicked it, I haven't yet seen any evidence that actually happened, although given the lack of proper immutable audit trails, finding that might be a tall order.

So where is Vennells? Has she spent the last few months hiding behind the sofa or is she out and about defending herself? She’s a pariah wherever she goes.

Punter15 wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 9:17 pm So where is Vennells? Has she spent the last few months hiding behind the sofa or is she out and about defending herself? She’s a pariah wherever she goes.

She'll be having a lovely retirement spending the millions she received in bonuses.

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 3:05 pm

dpedin wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 11:37 am

SaintK wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 10:01 am Vennels should be locked up as soonest

https://www.channel4.com/news/exclus ... pearence

The thing I dont get is where has all the extra cash gone? It is clear the external audits didn't pick this up but that's no great surprise! There is a strong suggestion here that someone was able to syphon off money from PO accounts overnight using the external IT links and possibly deposit elsewhere. If not then surely there would have been surpluses shown in stock levels, cash in hand, etc in the post office branches themselves or in other PO accounts? If PO staff were having to inject their own cash into the accounts then I cant see how the books could possibly have balanced? Surely the PO Director of Finance and his team should/would be able to identify where the surplus cash was and where it went? At best it went to the PO bottom line and drove the bonuses that the Directors etc knowingly took fraudulently or worse still there was a coordinated crime to siphon off cash using the external IT link. Either way this is clear evidence of coordinated corruption across the PO and Fujitsu to me beyond what we already know. Whilst rightly the focus has been on the poor sods who had their lives ruined by the PO and Fujitsu there is surely a major fraud here that needs to be investigated properly?

I guess most of it went in to the Post Office accounts. I doubt the PO considered it 'surplus'

While it's been pointed out that people at Fujitsu could have nicked it, I haven't yet seen any evidence that actually happened, although given the lack of proper immutable audit trails, finding that might be a tall order.

I worked a long time with a good mate who was a trained and experienced senior auditor with experience of both the public and private sector. He would never start from premise it was just a cock up when money was involved and would start from the working assumption that if money was going missing or unaccounted for on such a regular and systematic basis then someone was deliberately benefiting from it. He was nearly always right! The sums involved here are just too large to be written off by the PO Finance folk and cant really be explained just by IT system failures. If the accounts were being adjusted by Fujistu staff over night then the question is why and why always resulting in a negative impact on the PO branch account? I suspect that the real reason they kept this hidden and didn't go for full disclosure is that they knew they were being scammed and didn't want to have to admit they had been subjected to large scale fraud and the loss of business confidence etc that would result from it. The Gov were probably implicated in cover up due to political embarrassment of both the PO and a major Gov IT partner being exposed so negatively.

My mates three most common auditing lies were:

- Good morning, I am the auditor and I am here to help you!
- Good morning and we are pleased to see you!
- The cheque is in the post!

dpedin wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 9:24 am

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 3:05 pm

dpedin wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 11:37 am

The thing I dont get is where has all the extra cash gone? It is clear the external audits didn't pick this up but that's no great surprise! There is a strong suggestion here that someone was able to syphon off money from PO accounts overnight using the external IT links and possibly deposit elsewhere. If not then surely there would have been surpluses shown in stock levels, cash in hand, etc in the post office branches themselves or in other PO accounts? If PO staff were having to inject their own cash into the accounts then I cant see how the books could possibly have balanced? Surely the PO Director of Finance and his team should/would be able to identify where the surplus cash was and where it went? At best it went to the PO bottom line and drove the bonuses that the Directors etc knowingly took fraudulently or worse still there was a coordinated crime to siphon off cash using the external IT link. Either way this is clear evidence of coordinated corruption across the PO and Fujitsu to me beyond what we already know. Whilst rightly the focus has been on the poor sods who had their lives ruined by the PO and Fujitsu there is surely a major fraud here that needs to be investigated properly?

I guess most of it went in to the Post Office accounts. I doubt the PO considered it 'surplus'

While it's been pointed out that people at Fujitsu could have nicked it, I haven't yet seen any evidence that actually happened, although given the lack of proper immutable audit trails, finding that might be a tall order.

I worked a long time with a good mate who was a trained and experienced senior auditor with experience of both the public and private sector. He would never start from premise it was just a cock up when money was involved and would start from the working assumption that if money was going missing or unaccounted for on such a regular and systematic basis then someone was deliberately benefiting from it. He was nearly always right! The sums involved here are just too large to be written off by the PO Finance folk and cant really be explained just by IT system failures. If the accounts were being adjusted by Fujistu staff over night then the question is why and why always resulting in a negative impact on the PO branch account? I suspect that the real reason they kept this hidden and didn't go for full disclosure is that they knew they were being scammed and didn't want to have to admit they had been subjected to large scale fraud and the loss of business confidence etc that would result from it. The Gov were probably implicated in cover up due to political embarrassment of both the PO and a major Gov IT partner being exposed so negatively.

My mates three most common auditing lies were:

- Good morning, I am the auditor and I am here to help you!
- Good morning and we are pleased to see you!
- The cheque is in the post!

The difference here is that no money was missing in many cases. It was just a phantom balance caused by dodgy software. The thing is, the Post Office didn't care as they just put the liability on to the SPM and demanded it be repaid so they didn't have any incentive to investigate.

There was an example of this attitude in a different context in the evidence. When a branch got robbed, the first thing the PO did was demand the SPM reimburse the stolen cash. They really didn't give a shit.

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 1:11 pm

dpedin wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 9:24 am

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 3:05 pm

I guess most of it went in to the Post Office accounts. I doubt the PO considered it 'surplus'

While it's been pointed out that people at Fujitsu could have nicked it, I haven't yet seen any evidence that actually happened, although given the lack of proper immutable audit trails, finding that might be a tall order.

I worked a long time with a good mate who was a trained and experienced senior auditor with experience of both the public and private sector. He would never start from premise it was just a cock up when money was involved and would start from the working assumption that if money was going missing or unaccounted for on such a regular and systematic basis then someone was deliberately benefiting from it. He was nearly always right! The sums involved here are just too large to be written off by the PO Finance folk and cant really be explained just by IT system failures. If the accounts were being adjusted by Fujistu staff over night then the question is why and why always resulting in a negative impact on the PO branch account? I suspect that the real reason they kept this hidden and didn't go for full disclosure is that they knew they were being scammed and didn't want to have to admit they had been subjected to large scale fraud and the loss of business confidence etc that would result from it. The Gov were probably implicated in cover up due to political embarrassment of both the PO and a major Gov IT partner being exposed so negatively.

My mates three most common auditing lies were:

- Good morning, I am the auditor and I am here to help you!
- Good morning and we are pleased to see you!
- The cheque is in the post!

The difference here is that no money was missing in many cases. It was just a phantom balance caused by dodgy software. The thing is, the Post Office didn't care as they just put the liability on to the SPM and demanded it be repaid so they didn't have any incentive to investigate.

There was an example of this attitude in a different context in the evidence. When a branch got robbed, the first thing the PO did was demand the SPM reimburse the stolen cash. They really didn't give a shit.

No but the PO staff put in lots of cash to compensate for balance deficits the system was showing so that cash has to be accounted for somehow. The dodgy balances also needs to be reconciled with stock and/or services delivered ie stamps, postage, pensions paid out, driving licenses paid, etc. So there must have been a difference that showed up when stock takes were done. and investigations carried out. Usually when fraud is expected the organization would close operations down, 'lock the doors' and do an immediate stock take of goods and services and to try and reconcile this with the monies. There is no way that the PO internal auditors could reconcile their books with 'phantom balances' and the PO folk putting additional cash in to make their branch books balance. If this was the case then each branch must have had additional stock on hand to the equivalent of the cash deficit. On this basis I strongly suspect more widespread issues are at stake here and quite possibly a significant fraud has occurred.

I find it incredulous that no one in Government had knowlege of this.

C69 wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 6:23 pm I find it incredulous that no one in Government had knowlege of this.

I reckon this is the kind of shit that you keep hidden from your MP.

dpedin wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 9:24 am

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 3:05 pm

dpedin wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2024 11:37 am

The thing I dont get is where has all the extra cash gone? It is clear the external audits didn't pick this up but that's no great surprise! There is a strong suggestion here that someone was able to syphon off money from PO accounts overnight using the external IT links and possibly deposit elsewhere. If not then surely there would have been surpluses shown in stock levels, cash in hand, etc in the post office branches themselves or in other PO accounts? If PO staff were having to inject their own cash into the accounts then I cant see how the books could possibly have balanced? Surely the PO Director of Finance and his team should/would be able to identify where the surplus cash was and where it went? At best it went to the PO bottom line and drove the bonuses that the Directors etc knowingly took fraudulently or worse still there was a coordinated crime to siphon off cash using the external IT link. Either way this is clear evidence of coordinated corruption across the PO and Fujitsu to me beyond what we already know. Whilst rightly the focus has been on the poor sods who had their lives ruined by the PO and Fujitsu there is surely a major fraud here that needs to be investigated properly?

I guess most of it went in to the Post Office accounts. I doubt the PO considered it 'surplus'

While it's been pointed out that people at Fujitsu could have nicked it, I haven't yet seen any evidence that actually happened, although given the lack of proper immutable audit trails, finding that might be a tall order.

I worked a long time with a good mate who was a trained and experienced senior auditor with experience of both the public and private sector. He would never start from premise it was just a cock up when money was involved and would start from the working assumption that if money was going missing or unaccounted for on such a regular and systematic basis then someone was deliberately benefiting from it. He was nearly always right! The sums involved here are just too large to be written off by the PO Finance folk and cant really be explained just by IT system failures. If the accounts were being adjusted by Fujistu staff over night then the question is why and why always resulting in a negative impact on the PO branch account? I suspect that the real reason they kept this hidden and didn't go for full disclosure is that they knew they were being scammed and didn't want to have to admit they had been subjected to large scale fraud and the loss of business confidence etc that would result from it. The Gov were probably implicated in cover up due to political embarrassment of both the PO and a major Gov IT partner being exposed so negatively.

My mates three most common auditing lies were:

- Good morning, I am the auditor and I am here to help you!
- Good morning and we are pleased to see you!
- The cheque is in the post!

As the old saying goes, auditors are those who come in after the battle is over and bayonet the wounded.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68787990

What a piece of shit. Vennells and this scumbag need to be jailed.

No one will be jailed for this, just like Grenfell. And yes they are all dirty scumbags that absolutely deserve it

epwc wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2024 7:23 pm No one will be jailed for this, just like Grenfell. And yes they are all dirty scumbags that absolutely deserve it

I know which is depressing. A lot of the justification for these people being paid so much is the responsibility but in reality they don’t own it or take responsibility. Grenfell is very sad and very preventable. Materials is my specialism.

The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

epwc wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2024 7:23 pm No one will be jailed for this, just like Grenfell. And yes they are all dirty scumbags that absolutely deserve it

This.

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:22 am

epwc wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2024 7:23 pm No one will be jailed for this, just like Grenfell. And yes they are all dirty scumbags that absolutely deserve it

This.

I am not so sure, there is clear evidence that the PO bosses and senior staff have lied to HoC committees, committed perjury in courts, fiddled or didnt disclose evidence in trials, etc leading to unsafe convictions and the jailing of innocent people. It will be difficult for any court in the land to ignore this had evidence ... whether they go to jail is debatable but I am certain many will be found guilty of serious crimes.

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:21 am The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:45 am

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:21 am The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

He was actually one of the first PO witnesses I have seen that appeared quite flustered, possibly frightened. Almost as though the penny had dropped about the disaster on his watch.

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:45 am

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:21 am The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

There is a long tradition of senior execs in government organisations slopey shouldering all responsibility and claiming they don't really know anything about anything in their own organisaton when under fire. Paula Vennells did the same when in front of the HoC. Dido Harding also pulled the "I don't really know how my organisation works' stunt at least twice when giving evidence to the HoC.

They are useless, they are liars or they are useless liars.

There is another scandal unfolding


Tens of thousands of unpaid carers looking after disabled, frail or ill relatives are being forced to repay huge sums to the government and threatened with criminal prosecution after unwittingly breaching earnings rules by just a few pounds a week.

People who claim the £81.90-a-week carer’s allowance for looking after loved ones while working part-time are being forced by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to pay back money that has been erroneously overpaid to them, in some cases running to more than £20,000, or risk going to prison.

Tichtheid wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:16 am There is another scandal unfolding


Tens of thousands of unpaid carers looking after disabled, frail or ill relatives are being forced to repay huge sums to the government and threatened with criminal prosecution after unwittingly breaching earnings rules by just a few pounds a week.

People who claim the £81.90-a-week carer’s allowance for looking after loved ones while working part-time are being forced by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to pay back money that has been erroneously overpaid to them, in some cases running to more than £20,000, or risk going to prison.

Read that this morning.
Add it to the:
The tainted blood payout scandal
The Windrush reparations scandal
The Grenfell Tower compensation
The Postmaster prosecution and reparations scandal
Fuck these bastards in government

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:57 am

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:45 am

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:21 am The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

He was actually one of the first PO witnesses I have seen that appeared quite flustered, possibly frightened. Almost as though the penny had dropped about the disaster on his watch.

A wee bit more about this guy.

Following his excellent run at the post office, he went on to become chairman at LV=.

Important to distinguish between LV GI (they do car, home insurance etc. now owned by Allianz). He was chairman of the now completely separate LV= that deal with more financial products like life insurance.

This guy was super keen to sell LV= to a private equity firm (I wonder why?). It was (and still is) a mutual. As an LV= life insurance holder I got no end of letters, said to be from him, telling me that agreeing the deal was the only option for the company to survive.

Members rejected the deal, he left (presumably without the large chunk of money that the equity firm would have given him) and LV= is still, funnily enough, alive.

An absolute parasite.

dpedin wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 3:46 pm

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 1:11 pm

dpedin wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2024 9:24 am

I worked a long time with a good mate who was a trained and experienced senior auditor with experience of both the public and private sector. He would never start from premise it was just a cock up when money was involved and would start from the working assumption that if money was going missing or unaccounted for on such a regular and systematic basis then someone was deliberately benefiting from it. He was nearly always right! The sums involved here are just too large to be written off by the PO Finance folk and cant really be explained just by IT system failures. If the accounts were being adjusted by Fujistu staff over night then the question is why and why always resulting in a negative impact on the PO branch account? I suspect that the real reason they kept this hidden and didn't go for full disclosure is that they knew they were being scammed and didn't want to have to admit they had been subjected to large scale fraud and the loss of business confidence etc that would result from it. The Gov were probably implicated in cover up due to political embarrassment of both the PO and a major Gov IT partner being exposed so negatively.

My mates three most common auditing lies were:

- Good morning, I am the auditor and I am here to help you!
- Good morning and we are pleased to see you!
- The cheque is in the post!

The difference here is that no money was missing in many cases. It was just a phantom balance caused by dodgy software. The thing is, the Post Office didn't care as they just put the liability on to the SPM and demanded it be repaid so they didn't have any incentive to investigate.

There was an example of this attitude in a different context in the evidence. When a branch got robbed, the first thing the PO did was demand the SPM reimburse the stolen cash. They really didn't give a shit.

No but the PO staff put in lots of cash to compensate for balance deficits the system was showing so that cash has to be accounted for somehow. The dodgy balances also needs to be reconciled with stock and/or services delivered ie stamps, postage, pensions paid out, driving licenses paid, etc. So there must have been a difference that showed up when stock takes were done. and investigations carried out. Usually when fraud is expected the organization would close operations down, 'lock the doors' and do an immediate stock take of goods and services and to try and reconcile this with the monies. There is no way that the PO internal auditors could reconcile their books with 'phantom balances' and the PO folk putting additional cash in to make their branch books balance. If this was the case then each branch must have had additional stock on hand to the equivalent of the cash deficit. On this basis I strongly suspect more widespread issues are at stake here and quite possibly a significant fraud has occurred.

I think the mistake you're making here is thinking that because there's a difference that showed up in the software, that means there's a difference in reality.

To me, contrary to your mates approach, this is a good example of occams razor. It seems far more likely that the piece of software that tens of thousands of people have to use is faulty than tens of thousands of people all suddenly decided they would commit fraud in a short period of time. You're making the same mistake the Post Office did.

Amnesia strikes again. Crozier this time.

“I genuinely can’t remember,” Crozier says.

Former chief executive of the Royal Mail Group Adam Crozier has said he did not have a “developed understanding” of the way in which Royal Mail carried out prosecutions.

“I was not aware of that, no.”

And I don’t believe I recall seeing it on the Post Office register.”

“With the benefit of hindsight? Yes.”

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 2:28 pm Amnesia strikes again. Crozier this time.

“I genuinely can’t remember,” Crozier says.

Former chief executive of the Royal Mail Group Adam Crozier has said he did not have a “developed understanding” of the way in which Royal Mail carried out prosecutions.

“I was not aware of that, no.”

And I don’t believe I recall seeing it on the Post Office register.”

“With the benefit of hindsight? Yes.”

Another senior exec using the 'I'm a fucking dumbass' defence.

Useless, useless pricks.

It’s a sick joke that those running the Post Office didn’t know about the prosecutions. I guarantee that the missing funds, who stole it and what to do with “the thieves” would have been discussed at many board meetings!! Lying cnuts.

petej wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2024 10:30 pm

epwc wrote: Thu Apr 11, 2024 7:23 pm No one will be jailed for this, just like Grenfell. And yes they are all dirty scumbags that absolutely deserve it

I know which is depressing. A lot of the justification for these people being paid so much is the responsibility but in reality they don’t own it or take responsibility. Grenfell is very sad and very preventable. Materials is my specialism.

You don't have to be a materials specialist, I couldn't sleep that night and I was flicking between channels at around 00:30 when I saw the fire, you could clearly see that there was a chimney effect going on and that the cladding was in flames.

The architect that we used on our house was a trainee on this project in the 60s, I spoke to him (not knowing that he'd worked on it) the day after, he said that the flats were designed as individual fire compartments, concrete walls, steel windows. To clad the flipping thing in plastic with UPVC windows (which generally had huge gaps around them) was beyond mental.

The stay put advice is amazingly still intact, we've just built a 4 story block (ground + 4 floors of flats) the fire alarms do not have sounders because of this, so if we have a fire in the building you stay put till....

It's a 4 story mostly masonry building, concrete staircase, I know I'd just get the fuck out, why wait?

Privatising everything is absolutely not the answer, you can wangle so much past a private Building Inspector if you try hard enough (and it's not like most of them can even be arsed to inspect).

Plenty of stupidly bad shit goes on still, and private rentals? OMG when my eldest was looking for a flat in 2nd year of uni at least 3 we looked at had serious fire risks, a couple had unsafe electrics, and plenty were badly ventilated. I think all residential landlords should be licensed and monitored (I say that as a residential landlord myself).

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:11 am

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:45 am

Blackmac wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:21 am The Post Office MD Alan Cook has just claimed that he had no idea that they had the power to prosecute their own cases. Hundreds of sub postmasters prosecuted during his tenure. Incredible.

It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

There is a long tradition of senior execs in government organisations slopey shouldering all responsibility and claiming they don't really know anything about anything in their own organisaton when under fire. Paula Vennells did the same when in front of the HoC. Dido Harding also pulled the "I don't really know how my organisation works' stunt at least twice when giving evidence to the HoC.

They are useless, they are liars or they are useless liars.

I think this is a general failing in British senior management culture, to be honest. Bluffers go far and never have to bear responsibility.

robmatic wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:10 pm

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:11 am

SaintK wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:45 am
It beggars belief that the senior management didn't understand what they were doing and how they did it

There is a long tradition of senior execs in government organisations slopey shouldering all responsibility and claiming they don't really know anything about anything in their own organisaton when under fire. Paula Vennells did the same when in front of the HoC. Dido Harding also pulled the "I don't really know how my organisation works' stunt at least twice when giving evidence to the HoC.

They are useless, they are liars or they are useless liars.

I think this is a general failing in British senior management culture, to be honest. Bluffers go far and never have to bear responsibility.

On that note, Vennells giving evidence today.

She's claiming she didn't know but accepts others did know - about failed prosecutions, about reported problems, about anything that might have given a rational, attentive person pause for thought.

Much as I don't like seeing someone breaking down in tears, it was her job to know and many people's lives were ruined because of her ignorance - if we take her claims of ignorance at face value.

If she did know that the prosecutions were unsafe but didn't care enough to act, she needs to go to prison.

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 10:44 am

robmatic wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:10 pm

Dinsdale Piranha wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:11 am

There is a long tradition of senior execs in government organisations slopey shouldering all responsibility and claiming they don't really know anything about anything in their own organisaton when under fire. Paula Vennells did the same when in front of the HoC. Dido Harding also pulled the "I don't really know how my organisation works' stunt at least twice when giving evidence to the HoC.

They are useless, they are liars or they are useless liars.

I think this is a general failing in British senior management culture, to be honest. Bluffers go far and never have to bear responsibility.

On that note, Vennells giving evidence today.

She's claiming she didn't know but accepts others did know - about failed prosecutions, about reported problems, about anything that might have given a rational, attentive person pause for thought.

Much as I don't like seeing someone breaking down in tears, it was her job to know and many people's lives were ruined because of her ignorance - if we take her claims of ignorance at face value.

If she did know that the prosecutions were unsafe but didn't care enough to act, she needs to go to prison.

She was CEO, she bears responsibility. If she ran an organisation that was inadequate, it's her responsibility. If there was no trust, it's her responsibility. If there was a fear of reporting problems, it's her responsibility. If there was a cover up, it's her responsibility (even if she didn't know about it). People spent time in prison, were financially ruined, and driven to suicide or early death and she bears responsibility for that. Not all the responsibility, but a significant chunk.

Biffer wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:06 am

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 10:44 am

robmatic wrote: Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:10 pm

I think this is a general failing in British senior management culture, to be honest. Bluffers go far and never have to bear responsibility.

On that note, Vennells giving evidence today.

She's claiming she didn't know but accepts others did know - about failed prosecutions, about reported problems, about anything that might have given a rational, attentive person pause for thought.

Much as I don't like seeing someone breaking down in tears, it was her job to know and many people's lives were ruined because of her ignorance - if we take her claims of ignorance at face value.

If she did know that the prosecutions were unsafe but didn't care enough to act, she needs to go to prison.

She was CEO, she bears responsibility. If she ran an organisation that was inadequate, it's her responsibility. If there was no trust, it's her responsibility. If there was a fear of reporting problems, it's her responsibility. If there was a cover up, it's her responsibility (even if she didn't know about it). People spent time in prison, were financially ruined, and driven to suicide or early death and she bears responsibility for that. Not all the responsibility, but a significant chunk.

Yep - but egregiously and callously ignoring stated issues with no consideration of ruined lives simply for her own career benefit is a much, much more glaring and odious offence than simply being shit at her job.


(eta: I'm stating that she's bang to rights any which way up, but if she's been in any way cynical then we need to throw away the key.)

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:12 am

Biffer wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:06 am

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 10:44 am

On that note, Vennells giving evidence today.

She's claiming she didn't know but accepts others did know - about failed prosecutions, about reported problems, about anything that might have given a rational, attentive person pause for thought.

Much as I don't like seeing someone breaking down in tears, it was her job to know and many people's lives were ruined because of her ignorance - if we take her claims of ignorance at face value.

If she did know that the prosecutions were unsafe but didn't care enough to act, she needs to go to prison.

She was CEO, she bears responsibility. If she ran an organisation that was inadequate, it's her responsibility. If there was no trust, it's her responsibility. If there was a fear of reporting problems, it's her responsibility. If there was a cover up, it's her responsibility (even if she didn't know about it). People spent time in prison, were financially ruined, and driven to suicide or early death and she bears responsibility for that. Not all the responsibility, but a significant chunk.

Yep - but egregiously and callously ignoring stated issues with no consideration of ruined lives simply for her own career benefit is a much, much more glaring and odious offence than simply being shit at her job.


(eta: I'm stating that she's bang to rights any which way up, but if she's been in any way cynical then we need to throw away the key.)

Yeah, but what for, is the difficulty. We can't just lock people up without charge. Although there were deaths, it'd be very difficult to get a corporate manslaughter charge in these circumstances. Does it count as a public office where there would be some kind of abuse of function charge? Or Corporate Fraud where there's an intent to defraud creditors? It's difficult to see just where it fits - and I think a lot of it would result in fines for the business rather than individual prosecutions, which would then just mean the taxpayer footing the bill.

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:12 am

Biffer wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:06 am

inactionman wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 10:44 am

On that note, Vennells giving evidence today.

She's claiming she didn't know but accepts others did know - about failed prosecutions, about reported problems, about anything that might have given a rational, attentive person pause for thought.

Much as I don't like seeing someone breaking down in tears, it was her job to know and many people's lives were ruined because of her ignorance - if we take her claims of ignorance at face value.

If she did know that the prosecutions were unsafe but didn't care enough to act, she needs to go to prison.

She was CEO, she bears responsibility. If she ran an organisation that was inadequate, it's her responsibility. If there was no trust, it's her responsibility. If there was a fear of reporting problems, it's her responsibility. If there was a cover up, it's her responsibility (even if she didn't know about it). People spent time in prison, were financially ruined, and driven to suicide or early death and she bears responsibility for that. Not all the responsibility, but a significant chunk.

Yep - but egregiously and callously ignoring stated issues with no consideration of ruined lives simply for her own career benefit is a much, much more glaring and odious offence than simply being shit at her job.


(eta: I'm stating that she's bang to rights any which way up, but if she's been in any way cynical then we need to throw away the key.)

It's fascinating listening to her grapple with her religious beliefs, doing the right thing and trying to save her own neck! KC questioning has, deliberately used her own religious words to haunt her ie Postmasters 'led into temptation' and stealing/borrowing cash. I cant stand folk like her who play the religious role well until they have to actually demonstrate the true values that they espouse whilst dressed up as a religious 'leader' and fail feckin miserably. She is completely unbelievable, in her own way she is no better than the paedo priests!

She seems to also have said this afternoon that she didn't understand that there were different legal systems across the UK. Fucking Hell.

Her life is totally f*cking over as she knows it.

To me, the most disingenuous part of her statement this morning is that she did not know the PO ran its own investigatory/prosecutory department. Utterly implausible when prosecutions had been receiving national publicity.

Waudbee wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:51 am Her life is totally f*cking over as she knows it.

To me, the most disingenuous part of her statement this morning is that she did not know the PO ran its own investigatory/prosecutory department. Utterly implausible when prosecutions had been receiving national publicity.

I listened to some of it earlier.
She is an absolute weasel of a woman. Blaming "false" information given to her by others and saying I should have asked more questions of others. She obviously has some form of amnesia as well.
I hope she ends up in court

SaintK wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 12:03 pm

Waudbee wrote: Wed May 22, 2024 11:51 am Her life is totally f*cking over as she knows it.

To me, the most disingenuous part of her statement this morning is that she did not know the PO ran its own investigatory/prosecutory department. Utterly implausible when prosecutions had been receiving national publicity.

I listened to some of it earlier.
She is an absolute weasel of a woman. Blaming "false" information given to her by others and I should have asked more questions of others.
I hope she ends up in court

Interesting that the KC noted that she seems to have a very good memory for off-the-record meets and calls that paint her in a good light (and, of course, are completely unfalsifiable as they're not documented) and a very poor memory for minuted meets and documents that paint her in a bad light.