Christopher Head OBE

#postofficetrial A big thank you to @KateOsborneMP for joining me @10DowningStreet to hand over the petition & thanks to @itvtynetees for covering the story. The fight will continue until @BorisJohnson @Conservatives call an inquiry into this scandal #inquiry #answers #justice

Post Office chair defends ‘inappropriate and harmful’ position on Capture appeals #PostOfficeScandal computerweekly.com/news/366643102…

#PostOfficeScandal Latest by @taaffems for @SkyNews The Post Office awarded a £2.4m contract to a crisis PR company as it fights legal claims by victims of the Horizon IT scandal. The state-owned body entered into a nearly four-year agreement for "strategic communications" and "public relations services" in March last year. news.sky.com/story/post-off…

Fujitsu UK pays staff bonuses, ZERO contribution to compensation for victims of the Post Office scandal. Fujitsu helped secure false fraud convictions of postmasters. Public purse paid £1.5bn+ compensation. No one prosecuted for lying to courts. computerweekly.com/news/366642879…

Post Office Contesting Capture-Based Conviction Appeals — Despite Chairman Saying They Should All Be Overturned #PostOfficeScandal computerweekly.com/news/366642891…

Accenture is bidding for Lot 2 of the Post Office Horizon replacement tender — the contract to take over operation and support of the controversial Fujitsu system #PostOfficeScandal computerweekly.com/news/366642986…

Castleton v Post Office: Court of Appeal rules hybrid preliminary issues approach unworkable #postofficescandal #postofficeinquiry #Fujitsu #PaulaVennells solicitorsjournal.com/sjarticle/cast…

The Post Office had evidence that subpostmaster Janette Armour was reporting problems with its ECCO+ accounting system in the early 1990s — but ignored her computerweekly.com/news/366642657… #PostOfficeScandal

#PostOfficeScandal Thanks to @AsianTrader for covering this as well. It is important that the @PostOffice and @biztradegovuk are held to account for the delivery of redress asiantrader.biz/horizon-scanda…

Fujitsu will continue to hide for as long as possible, using the inquiry report as a shield. There is almost nothing anyone can do to hold them to account. Losing contracts in the future is one thing but the government is so reliant on them they cannot do without them. A plan is needed (which I mentioned to the Telegraph newspaper more than 3.5 years ago) to wean the government off Fujitsu addiction. They have allowed them to push all other competition out of the way so they can gobble up all available tenders. It is bad practice in any business to be solely reliant on one supplier for all kinds of reasons. It also means the government can no longer press for value for money when there is no alternatives. What needs to be done is provide government support to other competitors in the field so when contracts come up for renewal or new bidding contracts come online other companies have sufficient resources to be able to bid for them. Failure to do that will allow the Fujitsu merry go round to continue unabated

@LostChances2024 @chrish9070 think you may like to answer this one 💪🏻

Where are Fujitsu????? Has anyone heard anything about- anything!!!!!! 👀 #Postofficescandal #leftinthelurch

The Court of Appeal has rejected the Post Office's request for an extension to respond to Steve Marston's appeal against his 1997 conviction — based on the faulty Capture accounting software. #PostOfficeScandal computerweekly.com/news/366642366…

5 years ago today, my wrongful conviction was overturned.But justice isn’t finished. Many of us are still waiting for fair compensation. The delays are unacceptable—and the impact is ongoing. This is about accountability and making sure it never happens again. #PostOfficeScandal

5 year anniversary for 39 overturned convictions at the CoA. 5 years and still fighting for full and fair.

Post Office victims 'still need fair compensation' bbc.in/3QUVsxV

#PostOfficeScandal A sub-postmaster, who was one of 900 wrongly accused of stealing by the Post Office, says the government's compensation scheme has left some still waiting for a "full and fair" payout. It comes after the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) said one of the routes to compensation - the Group Litigation Order scheme - would close to new applicants on 31 July, aiming to conclude at the end of the year following what it called "successful delivery". DBT said 90% of claimants have received compensation, with £223m paid out. Former South Tyneside sub-postmaster Christopher Head said: "I don't see why it should be DBT that should say that it has been successful, it should be the claimants." Head became the organisation's youngest sub-postmaster when he took over the West Boldon branch aged 18 in 2006, and was falsely accused of stealing more than £80,000. "They are marking their own homework, the department class full and fair redress being paid when someone accepts an offer - but there might be various reasons why someone might accept an offer," he said.👇 bbc.com/news/articles/…

#PostOfficeScandal Yesterday the government Department @biztradegovuk announced the closure of the GLO Compensation Scheme. It will close to new applicants from the 31st July 2026 with a view to the scheme concluding by 31st December 2026. They used the words, 'following successful delivery'. They are unfortunately marking their own homework. It is not for the Department or Ministers to say the scheme was successful, that is for the victims and claimants to decide if that is the case. The successful delivery is marked by the number of eligible applicants versus the number of settled claims. The department also classes a claim that has settled as being paid as full and fair. But the question that should be asked is do those claimants believe they have been paid full and fair redress. A couple of months ago I wrote to the Minister and the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board, as well as suggesting this to @Ipsos @Ipsos_in_the_UK that all claimants in the scheme should be asked this question :- Do you believe you have received redress in the GLO scheme that is full and fair in your opinion? If the answer to that question is yes, then that is what the scheme was supposed to deliver, and if that came in with a high percentage score over say 90% you could claim the scheme was successful. However if a large number of people answered no, i.e. they did not receive a sum that was close or at the amount they claimed, further questions must be asked to those people, which should be something like :- What is the reason you believe you did not receive redress that was full and fair in the GLO scheme? Did your claim reach the end of the process, after progressing to the 2 independent panel stages and then to the final reviewer (retired Judge, Sir Ross Cranston? Or did you settle the claim at an earlier stage for any kind of reason? (This could be due to ill health, financial problems, stress, being unable to cope with the adversarial and drawn out process or other reasons). This matters because if people have received 100% of their claims, or have completed the entire process with an Independent Reviewer deeming the offer to be full and fair, that again can be said to be a successful delivery. BUT if people have settled their claims at a much earlier junction in the process because they didn't feel they could continue and keep fighting after many years of already doing so, it is very likely at least some of those people have not received redress which is full and fair, and therefore the scheme cannot be deemed to be 'successful'. it will simply be delivered. It is important to note the scheme has changed since it was first opened, there were all kinds of adversarial games and risks associated with the claim process, especially when challenging an offer to the Independent Panels, as I first highlighted almost 18 months ago, which led to a campaign to introduce the best offer policy. I am certain some of those who did not or could not keep fighting until the full process was exhausted have NOT received redress that is full and fair. I say this as several people who I have assisted alongside their lawyers, have seen significant uplifts in offers towards the end of the process compared to the initial offers. There are 492 eligible claimants for this scheme, 482 claims have been received. It is important to understand the reason/s for the remaining 10 people not yet submitting a claim to the scheme. I spoke with @JoshPaynePA to give my reaction to that announcement and statement from the Department. While it is fair to say, some claimants have likely received redress which is full and fair, it is also likely that a number have not received redress which is full and fair. There will be a number of reasons for this. I know of several claimants who reluctantly accepted offers either due to ill health or they could not tolerate the process that had already been ongoing since March 2023, which is over 3 years since the original GLO court action concluded and was settled. Several articles were produced on the back of this. Three to note are from the @ChronicleLive @TheNorthernEcho and @heraldscotland The article in the @ChronicleLive by @samuelevolpe can be read here👇 chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-eas… A South Tyneside man who became the nation's youngest subpostmaster only to be accused of stealing thousands has criticised the Government for "marking its own homework" when it comes to compensation for the Horizon accounting scandal. Christopher Head, like hundreds of others, was wrongly accused of stealing cash from his branch. He had taken over the West Boldon Post Office aged just 18 in 2006, only to be accused of stealing £80,000. The criminal case against him was dropped, but the Post Office then pursued him through the civil courts. Mr Head was made an OBE for his campaigning in December 2024. He was one of 492 subpostmasters entitled to apply for redress under a scheme following a "group litigation order" (GLO) that came after the High Court legal action launched by Sir Alan Bates and 554 others between 2017 and 2019. He said the scheme could have “wrapped up a year ago” if the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) had listened to feedback from claimants. The Horizon accounting system, operated by Japanese firm Fujitsu, made it look like money was missing from subpostmasters’ branch accounts. It is at the centre of the long-running Post Office scandal, which saw around 1,000 people wrongly prosecuted and convicted between 1999 and 2015. On Tuesday, the Department for Business and Trade said the GLO scheme would close to new applicants on July 31, with a view to concluding on December 31 following “successful delivery”. But Mr Head questioned whether it had in fact been successful. He told the Press Association: “That’s the department saying it’s been successful, and that to me comes back to a fundamental problem we’ve had with Post Office and DBT all the time, which is that they are marking their own homework. “They’re going to say ‘we’ve received this many claims and we’ve paid them so that means it’s been successful’, but what I call successful is… has the scheme successfully paid full and fair redress to those people? “The department class full and fair redress being paid when someone accepts an offer – but there might be various reasons why someone might accept an offer. So I don’t see why it should be DBT that should say that it has been successful, it should be the claimants. “I would honestly like every single person to be asked the question ‘do you believe you have received redress that is full and fair?’ and just place it in a yes and no table – that will tell you whether the scheme has been successful. “In my view, in some cases it has been successful because we have seen deliveries of redress that are above what people have claimed, but there are other people I know who have said ‘I’ve had enough, I’ve literally had enough’, and therefore the scheme might have been completed, rather than successful. “But there is still a number of people who have not received what the department set out to achieve, which is full and fair redress.” Mr Head said his own claim had taken a total of 744 days - and added it had taken "a hell of along time" to get the scheme into the shape it is in now. Mr Head explained he was representing vulnerable people in “seriously ill health” who are part of the GLO scheme and who have not been able to communicate with their own lawyers because they do not “understand the legalities”, or are not in the “right frame of mind”. He said DBT had taken too long to get the scheme where it is today, saying: “You’re providing them feedback and saying ‘these problems are happening’, and the department’s stance in the most part that I could see, especially in the very first 12-18 months of the scheme operating… they just buried their heads in the sand. There was always an excuse about why it couldn’t be done. “If the department had actually taken on the feedback and actually listened to the claimants and their lawyers about what things could have been done to improve or implement it, we could have had this scheme wrapped up a year ago. "The fact that they dug their heels in… I think the gripe is the delay doing it and the department’s refusal to listen to claimants and their lawyers was the first part – and there are still people who still believe they haven’t received the full and fair redress they are entitled to. But it’s very hard to say whether that’s the department’s fault or something wrong with the claim.” The DBT said as of March 31, 90% of GLO scheme claimants had received final redress, with £223 million paid out to victims. Post Office Minister Blair McDougall said: “The postmasters in the GLO group were the first to lead the charge for justice, and they deserve to see this chapter closed with the full and fair redress they are owed. Setting these deadlines is about making sure that happens. “We are 90% of the way there, and I am determined that the remaining claims are resolved quickly and fairly, with proper support for anyone who needs it.” DBT said more than £1.5 billion had been paid out to Horizon victims since the summer of 2024.

#PostOfficeScandal Last week the @NAOorguk released a report on the Government's compensation and financial recognition schemes. It was a pleasure to spend a couple of hours with those researching and producing the report to ensure its accuracy and what the issues were preventing the schemes delivering their intended promise of full and fair redress. This report is a factual assessment of the schemes’ progress. ▪️It sets out each scheme’s progress and performance at encouraging claims from eligible claimants, assessing claims, making offers and paying claimants. ▪️It examines reasons for any performance issues, particularly in relation to the time taken to make offers to eligible applicants. ▪️It sets out how schemes have introduced changes and improvements to encourage more potentially eligible people to claim, speed up the assessment process, and improve the rate and number of accepted offers. This is what the NAO looked at :- ▪️The NAO looked at how a number of compensation schemes are now performing, some of which experienced significant issues in their early stages ▪️Overall costs are still not certain but are estimated to reach £14.9 billion across all schemes with £3.5 billion paid out so far ▪️All open schemes have more to do to reach as many potentially eligible people as possible and support them to make claims A number of government compensation schemes have made progress in handling claims and processing pay-outs to claimants but there is still more to do to identify all those eligible and minimise delays, says a new report by the National Audit Office (NAO), the independent government spending watchdog. In its new report, the NAO examined: ▪️The Windrush Compensation Scheme ▪️The Horizon Shortfall Scheme ▪️The Horizon Group Litigation Order Scheme ▪️The Horizon Overturned Convictions Scheme – merged into the Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme in June 2025 ▪️The Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme ▪️The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme ▪️The LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme The report finds that by February 2026, government had paid around £3.5 billion in total across all the schemes, with up to another £11.4 billion potentially yet to be paid. The total amount that departments anticipate will be paid out across all the schemes examined totals nearly £14.9 billion. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme alone is expected to pay out £12.8 billion. Some schemes have had to increase their estimates of the cost of compensation schemes, reflecting revised estimates of numbers of eligible people and increases to amounts awarded per claim due to the harm caused. Departments initially underestimated the rate at which schemes would receive and process claims due to a range of reasons – and this led to backlogs. These reasons included lower than expected levels of awareness and trust in the schemes by potentially eligible people and how long background information would take to retrieve. The report finds that additional efforts have been made to identify and contact potential claimants. Three of the schemes have extended the time periods over which they are open to new claims, recognising that many eligible claimants had not applied within the original deadlines. Four of the five schemes that remain open have now received claims from two thirds or more of the estimated number of eligible people, although some of these estimates are subject to considerable uncertainty. There remains substantial variation between and within each scheme in the time taken to conclude claims, with some claimants waiting over a year after they applied before receiving an offer of compensation. All schemes, however, now offer interim payments or fixed sums, which is helping to settle some claims in a more timely manner. For example, as at January 2026, fully assessed claims on the Horizon Group Litigation Order Scheme were taking on average 147 working days to conclude, from the point at which all required information had been received, whereas fixed sum claims were taking 24 working days. Organisations representing claimants meanwhile told us that there is still too little transparency about how long claims are likely to take, and that some schemes are not sufficiently independent. Gareth Davies, head of the @NAOorguk said "People who have experienced harm should be able to expect a clear process for claiming compensation and no unreasonable delay in processing their claim. There is clear evidence that more recent compensation schemes have learned from the experience of earlier schemes, helping reach more affected people and speed up payments to those eligible." Read the full report here👇 #press-release" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">nao.org.uk/reports/govern…

@JSD237 @stugoo17 @mac_mccaskill HSSA is a much better scheme so hopefully you receive a much more meaningful offer of redress and the end is near

@stugoo17 @mac_mccaskill My HSS Claim (now moved to HSSA) will be 6 years in July. My SRR is approaching 3 years. All of the Offers I've received have failed the Full & Fair Standard DBT & PO issued. They do not even follow their own Rules and Guidelines.

Keir Starmer Was Warned About Post Office Prosecutions in 2011 — CPS Told Complainant to "Direct Concerns to Government" Raises questions over his claim to have known nothing about them. #PostOfficeScandal computerweekly.com/news/366641051…