Non-inquiry session · Opened 16 December 2025

Post Office Horizon scandal: Justice for sub-postmasters

From: Business and Trade Committee

Open28 documents6 evidence sessions

What this inquiry is asking

This inquiry examines whether victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal—sub-postmasters wrongly convicted using faulty software—are receiving full and fair redress one year after the Committee's last report. It investigates the administration of two compensation schemes (Horizon Shortfall Scheme and Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme), why thousands remain uncompensated or underpaid, Fujitsu's financial responsibility, and whether pre-Horizon convictions involving the earlier Capture system should be covered.

Status / emerging findings

  • Over 11,300 claimants have received £1.44 billion, but thousands still await redress; stark disparities show initial offers routinely five- to tenfold lower than eventual awards (e.g. £101,000 vs £1 million in one case).
  • The Horizon Shortfall Scheme remains unfit for purpose: only 40 complex cases resolved since January 2026 despite ~500 pending; Post Office (the organisation that caused the convictions) continues administering redress, undermining victim trust.
  • Fujitsu has made zero financial provision despite £1.2–1.3 billion annual profits and acknowledged culpability; company continues receiving ~£500 million in government contracts since May 2024, earning ~£1 million daily from taxpayers.
  • Ministry of Justice eligibility process is opaque and error-prone: ~175 cases stuck (20% of HCRS), 3% error rate identified (e.g. Mrs Eaton wrongly denied despite identical conviction to her husband), and only 8 full-time caseworkers handling 1,002 eligible individuals.
  • Criminal Cases Review Commission has 35 pre-Horizon applications but can confirm Capture software involvement in only 2; investigation timelines are 18–24 months per case, creating urgency for potentially hundreds of unsafe convictions involving deceased or elderly victims.

Why it matters

Thousands of people remain financially devastated and emotionally re-traumatised by an ongoing system that promises redress but delivers delays, underpayment, and arbitrary eligibility decisions; meanwhile the technology company that caused the scandal contributes nothing while taxpayers foot the bill.

Tone arc

Committee opened with procedural scrutiny but shifted sharply adversarial after evidence from sub-postmaster David and Glenys Eaton (wrongly denied redress) and legal representatives (revealing systemic re-traumatisation). Hearing with Fujitsu's Paul Patterson was particularly hostile—sustained questioning on zero financial provision despite company profitability and continued government contracts worth £1 million daily.

Themes

redress-delays-and-inadequacypost-office-administrative-failurefujitsu-accountabilityministry-of-justice-errorscapture-software-convictionsvictim-retraumatisation

Key witnesses

Paul Patterson (Fujitsu UK), David Eaton and Glenys Eaton (wrongly convicted sub-postmasters), Dr Neil Hudgell, David Enright, Kieran O'Rourke (legal representatives for sub-postmasters), Nigel Railton (Post Office Chair), Blair McDougall (Department for Business and Trade), Alex Davies-Jones (Ministry of Justice), Amanda Pearce (Criminal Cases Review Commission)

Reports & Government Responses

Witness sessions

Written evidence & correspondence

Themes & actors

Source · parliament.uk inquiry record ↗