British Post Office Scandal

[ukdobby]

I see Sir Ed Daveys not commenting on the scandal,he’s usually the 1st to pop up and speak out.

[Mister M]

59 minutes ago, ukdobby said:

I see Sir Ed Daveys not commenting on the scandal,he’s usually the 1st to pop up and speak out.

Guess who has commented on it though?

That's right, Gob****e Lee 30p Anderson. "Deputy chair of the Conservative party, is cruder and more brutal and, in an interview on GB News, he suggested that Davey was to blame for people going to jail, and even for some people taking their lives."

Tory deputy chair Lee Anderson claims Ed Davey to blame for Post Office staff being wrongly jailed – UK politics live (theguardian.com)

 

And who was Ed Davey's boss Anderson? What about collective responsibility? What has Lee Anderthal done since been in office to address the scandal, and help right the wrongs?

I sincerely hope that Ed Davey has got a particularly aggressive lawyer he can let loose on Anderson, because what Anderson said is sailing close to slander.

Edited January 8 by Mister M

[El Cid]

58 minutes ago, Mister M said:

And who was Ed Davey's boss Anderson? What about collective responsibility? What has Lee Anderthal done since been in office to address the scandal, and help right the wrongs?

I sincerely hope that Ed Davey has got a particularly aggressive lawyer he can let loose on Anderson, because what Anderson said is sailing close to slander.

I do find it interesting, who is really in charge in Government? I find that for some people, the other party will always be the enemy.

So they would probably try to drop each other in the shi*.

Was Ed Davey really in charge, just like now, the Tories want a scapegoat, they have two with Davey and Vennels.

[Mister M]

11 minutes ago, El Cid said:

I do find it interesting, who is really in charge in Government? I find that for some people, the other party will always be the enemy.

So they would probably try to drop each other in the shi*.

Was Ed Davey really in charge, just like now, the Tories want a scapegoat, they have two with Davey and Vennels.

Given that this is a scandal years in the making then each party Labour, Coalition, Conservative, must take their fair share of the blame.

I was listening to the Editor of Private Eye on the radio about 30 minutes ago, and he was making the point that yes, Ed Davey did have responsibility between 2010/2.

However given that Private Eye had been reporting on this scandal since 2011, and more has come out between then and now, then it could be argued that subsequent Ministers to Davey share more of the blame since more information about the scandal came into the public domain through investigative journalism.

[Axe]

4 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

Well when it finishes then. 

Yes  if she is judged to have done some wrongdoing.   It is interesting that over 50 postmasters have come forward since the television program has been  viewed.  How many of the 50 plus are jumping on the bandwagon and are not really victims of a  miscarriage of justice?

[Mister M]

8 minutes ago, Axe said:

Yes  if she is judged to have done some wrongdoing.   It is interesting that over 50 postmasters have come forward since the television program has been  viewed.  How many of the 50 plus are jumping on the bandwagon and are not really victims of a  miscarriage of justice?

I guess it would be fairly easy to establish given the evidence should be easy to produce - e.g. convictions, letters to sub postmasters demanding repayment etc. 

[Axe]

1 minute ago, Mister M said:

I guess it would be fairly easy to establish given the evidence should be easy to produce - e.g. convictions, letters to sub postmasters demanding repayment etc. 

The convictions are easy to prove but it is less easy to prove that every conviction is a miscarriage of justice. 

[Mister M]

1 minute ago, Axe said:

The convictions are easy to prove but it is less easy to prove that every conviction is a miscarriage of justice. 

You best tell that to Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor as he is currently looking at ways to exonerate each and every miscarriage caused by the scandal.

 

[Axe]

56 minutes ago, Mister M said:

You best tell that to Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor as he is currently looking at ways to exonerate each and every miscarriage caused by the scandal.

 

Rightly so.  But I doubt Alex Chalk is looking at ways to allow guilty Postmasters to cash in.

[ECCOnoob]

8 hours ago, Anna B said:

Over £54 million was won in compensation thanks to the personal endeavours of the victims, but most of that went in legal fees, leaving only a very small amount to share between 500+ victims.

They won their case but still received very little. This is is also so wrong. 

 

The extortionate cost of justice needs to be looked at as well. It is now outside the pocket of the man in the street. Every time there is a case vs 'the crown' which is a regular occurance, it is the muggins taxpayer who has to pay forit, so this affects everybody. Yet ordinary people  can't afford justice for themselves when they need it.

Putting aside that the victims deserve more damages payment which is not something I would dispute.... 

 

I am going to challenge this default position that legal fees are 'extortionate'.   What exactly are we defying as extortion here?

 

I've debated before that, whether or not people like us, lawyers are qualified professionals and therefore expect to be renumerated like any other qualified professional and their firms will charge accordingly just like any other specialist service practice.  

 

This group action that the campaign set up and which led to the initial award of damages to the victims was extremely lengthy, complicated,  involved hundreds of claimants, dozens of lawyers, multiple barristers including some QCs, independent experts and years of legal preparation/drafting/reviewing work.

 

When it finally got to trial, the initial hearing itself lasted for several weeks and that was followed by several other interim court hearings, applications, an appeal and mediation to reach settlement.  

 

It is a frequent occurrence that legal costs will outweigh whatever damages.

 

This group of 550+ claimants were bringing their civil claims with the support of litigation insurance funding not their own personal cash so let's not get misleading here.  Its also obvious that said litigation funders will expect to recoup their funding if the case succeeded which is exactly what happened.

 

For all the rights and wrongs of the terms of the settlement agreement (which is now being hopefully resolved), the fact is that the big scary headline numbers sensationalised in the TV programme and media, in reality is equates to roughly £84k legal costs per case.

 

That £84k has to go towards solicitors fees, litigation funder, expert witness fees, external counsel, support staff overheads, court fees disbursements for travel, accommodation, transcription services.... 

 

For a litigation that went on for several years, got appealed, various applications and was a complex group action in the High Court, it really isn't that much.  

 

Blame the government, blame the Post office blame Fujitsu for their negligence, but I'm not buying this whole "greedy lawyers" shtick.

Edited January 8 by ECCOnoob