The Post Office has been accused of demanding that employees who were victims of armed robberies repay stolen money, according to a recent report by BBC Newsnight. Among those who experienced this treatment was Jonathan Brenton, who revealed that the organisation asked him to pay back £2,000 that had been taken during an armed robbery, after it had refused to upgrade his security for five years. A total of 15 other sub-postmasters and postmistresses are understood to have had similar experiences, with six having come forward to speak out against the practice.
Brenton opened the Post Office branch in Charing, Kent, in 2011. In January of 2012, armed robbers entered his shop after charging through a security door. Brenton wrote to then-chief executive Paula Vennells after the horrific robbery, explaining in detail how he and his partner were threatened by the robbers, who had knives held to their throats. After the robbery, the Post Office wrote to Brenton to claim that he was liable for £1,705.31 of the stolen money and would need to pay it back. Brenton states that the tone of the letter was appalling and that the Post Office only cared about recovering as much money as it could.
Lesley Pearsall, a sub-postmistress from Birmingham, worked for the Post Office for 45 years and was robbed in her branch in 2008. The robbers stole almost £10,000, of which the Post Office claimed she was liable for £6,000. A letter from March 2008 seen by Newsnight confirmed that Pearsall had attended an appeal hearing where she argued against having to pay the stolen money back. The Post Office eventually decided that Pearsall would not need to pay back the £6,000.
In 2019, the Post Office agreed to compensate 555 sub-postmasters and postmistresses a total of £58m after being accused of stealing money due to incorrect information provided by a computer system called Horizon. Barrister Patrick Green KC, who was involved in the case, stated that the Post Office’s contracts with sub-postmasters were ruled to be “unfair”, with the onus on the Post Office, not sub-postmasters, to prove that losses had been caused by the latter
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More