Post Office boss supplied MPS with ‘misleading evidence’

NICK READ has been accused of supplying “misleading evidence” to MPS as pressure intensifies on the Post Office chief executive. A damning report into compensation schemes for Horizon victims branded the organisation “unfit for purpose” in administering them and called for the Government to end the Post Office’s involvement in redress.

It is the latest bad news the Post Office has endured as it continues to deal with the ramifications of the Horizon scandal.

More than 900 sub-postmasters were wrongfully prosecuted after they were blamed for non-existent shortfalls produced by faulty Fujitsu software.

Meanwhile, the Post Office also had to deal with claims made by Henry Staunton, its former chairman, who revealed Mr Read was under investigation for his conduct at a committee hearing last week. The business and trade committee report, published yesterday, also noted that Mr Read had “supplied misleading evidence” to MPS. The chief executive was asked at a committee meeting in January whether he had hired a public relations firm “to handle the crisis” after the airing of the ITV drama. At the time, Mr Read said: “No, we haven’t.”

Evidence given by Mr Read on gagging orders has also come into question, with the chief executive previously writing to MPS to state that any offer letters to sub-postmasters were marked “Without Prejudice” and were therefore confidential.

When Liam Byrne, the committee chairman, suggested that the chief executive’s letter was “not a perfect reflection of the facts”, Mr Read followed up the meeting with a letter stating: “We have now made it clear that we have no expectation of confidentiality from postmasters who have received offers from us; even those which were labelled ‘Without Prejudice’.”

In yesterday’s report, the committee wrote: “We note that Mr Read has supplied misleading evidence to the committee on at least two counts, relating to the Post Office’s use of, first, non-disclosure agreements and, secondly, public relations firms.”

In a damning indictment, the committee stated: “The Post Office is not fit for purpose to administer any of the schemes of redress required to make amends for one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in British history.”

A spokesman for the Post Office confirmed it would have “no objection to relinquishing” its role in administering redress.

The report also said Post Office’s leadership remains “in disarray” noting that Mr Staunton, had been dismissed and that Mr Read was under investigation.