Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I hope everyone watches this on itv and itvx.

We think we have royal mail problems on East Dulwich but this drama and it's fellow documentary highlights one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in recent years.   The lives of many postmasters and their families were ruined by the arrogance of those in charge at Post Office and their attempts to cover up their faulty new IT system.  The compensation process for those who are still alive is an over complex sham to avoid properly compensating those that were hurt by this scandalous miscarriage of justice (if true compensation is even truly possible).  Those in power at the post office and the IT company should hang their heads in shame and they and the government should be doing everything they can to try to properly compensate the poor victims of this scandal.

If you are not already aware of this scandal do watch it on ITV and weep.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/338989-mr-bates-vs-the-post-office/
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moovart said:

We think we have royal mail problems on East Dulwich but this drama and it's fellow documentary highlights one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in recent years. 

To be fair, Royal Mail and The Post Office are, now, and managerially were,  then, different entities. The people responsible for cocking up our mail delivery had no responsibility  for sub post offices or indeed main post offices. 

  • Like 3

I was going to refer you to Theresa May's recent book "The Abuse of Power: Confronting Injustice in Public Life", sadly as the Guardian notes she doesn't include that scandal (or her own failings) www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/03/the-abuse-of-power-confronting-injustice-in-public-life-by-theresa-may-review-blind-to-her-own-failings

To be fair to her it is probably relevant to the discussions here, and how government failed to act, or put things in the slow lane.

1 hour ago, jazzer said:

so why mention it if it's irrelevant to the discussion, oh, another opportunity to whip the Govt................

If you are referring to Malumbu's post, perhaps you should re-read his last paragraph .....  Unless I have misunderstood it (quite likely 🤣 )

On 02/01/2024 at 21:16, Penguin68 said:

To be fair, Royal Mail and The Post Office are, now, and managerially were,  then, different entities. The people responsible for cocking up our mail delivery had no responsibility  for sub post offices or indeed main post offices. 

When did the post office become Royal Mail?
 
As part of the Postal Services Act 2000, the businesses of the Post Office were transferred in 2001 to a public limited company, Consignia plc, which was quickly renamed Royal Mail Holdings plc. The government became the sole shareholder in Royal Mail Holdings plc and its subsidiary Post Office Ltd.
The two companies were part of the same group until 2012, when the Post Office was split out into a separate business.
So they were one company when this scandal started and Adam Crozier, CEO during many years of the scandal and now ITV CEO is conspicuous by his absence in the drama doc.
Mr Crozier was CEO of Royal Mail Group between 2003 and 2010, when the Post Office was part of it and subpostmasters were being pursued through the courts.
Fujitsu have also come off lightly when it was their IT fault that caused the problem and it took years before anyone there said anything 
Remember that it's individuals within large organisations and government that make these decisions and choose not to own up and allow the wrong thing to happen.  The individuals have the protection of the large organisation but it is individual people with power who choose to do the wrong thing and screw the little person.
 
 
 
 
 

 

In 1986, Royal Mail was split into Royal Mail Letters, Royal Mail Parcels, and Post Office Counters. In 1987, Post Office Counters Ltd became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Mail and then in 2001, Post Office Counters Ltd became a public limited company and was renamed Post Office Ltd.

 

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The coop of Forest Hill Road is very different- cheerful and helpful staff 
    • Would you expose your young people to 'that man'? That is apparently a real question. 'That man' is in fact a retired Oxford Professor of Moral & Pastoral Theology who wrote a book setting out to provide a moral reckoning on the vexed subject of Britain's Empire and its history. What might formerly have been a purely academic matter has become highly contentious, and according to one Cambridge academic "serious shit" that needed to be CLOSED DOWN. It's all rather amazing, the stuff of satire or nightmare but not of the real world. Anyway, Lord Biggar accepted an invitation to visit Peckham and speak to and with a small audience that was due to include young Black students ... who in the end didn't come on the day! Having set the whole thing up to facilitate this encounter for them, the outcome was a disappointment. The conversation with Lord Biggar and audience was not:   
    • Entertaining a visitor from Philippines, she's been here before but I've promised lunch.  Somewhere a little different maybe, quirky?
    • Surely a very simple: "how much does the council receive from the organisers of the Gala festival for payment for use of Peckham Rye" would smoke out a response. The "commercial sensitivity" could be because the council are giving it away or it could be because Gala don't want others to know how much they are paying - it is really tough to make money from any type of festival these days and Wide Awake in Brockwell, for example, sent out a plea for people to buy tickets via a reduced price "Tell a Friend" special offer because (they said much of it linked to the problems Lambeth were having with the High Court) things were entering "squeaky bum time"  and they were struggling to hit their break-even point. It does make me wonder whether expansion is baked-in to the agreements the council has with the organisers for events like Gala as the organisers have to be able to scale the size of the event each year to try to make money. I do also how much of the "revenue" from these events might be swallowed up by the provision of the "free community" event element of them. The comment piece in the Guardian sums it up quite nicely: The heart of this issue seems to be how cash-strapped councils are becoming increasingly beholden to commercial interests to the detriment of the public. A weekend festival that welcomes 50,000 people can expect to raise about £500,000 for local authorities. Councils argue that this money goes back in the public purse, allowing them to continue funding free community events such as Lambeth’s beloved Country Show, though there doesn’t seem to be much transparency over exactly how much cash is raised or where it is allocated.   The issue for councils may well be that if people found out how much was actually being raised by these events that the community would say the disruption is not worth it and I do wonder how much of the revenue is being swallowed up by the provision of the "free event" using the same infrastructure. Any time a council doesn't want to share something openly very much suggests that it is because they think constituents won't like the answer.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...