Private Eye magazine (a satirical investigative news magazine) has covered this for many years, and have an excellent report for anyone interested: https://www.

Private Eye magazine (a satirical investigative news magazine) has covered this for many years, and have an excellent report for anyone interested: https://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/special_reports/justice-lost-in-the-post.pdf https://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/special_reports/justi... [PDF] Glad to see them finally have their names cleared, and can only hope prosecutions will follow as a result, utterly shameful how the Post Office, Fujitsu and others behaved. For example: > A Fujitsu programmer from the time, Richard Roll, who would become a key witness in the sub-postmasters’ high court case against the Post Office in 2019, told the Eye that Horizon was one the company’s few profitable contracts. Among other private sector deals, it was also lining up a key role in the mother of all government IT splurges, New Labour’s £12bn NHS IT project (Eyes passim ad nauseam). Fujitsu could ill-afford either bad publicity or the penalties that came with software faults. “We would have been fined,” said Roll, who worked at the company between 2001 and 2004. “So the incentive was to pretend it [software error] didn’t happen”, while running “a constant rolling programme of patches to fix the bugs”. Fujitsu “would basically tell the Post Office what they wanted to hear”. So prolific did Roll’s bug-fixing team become it won the company’s President’s Award for outstanding corporate contribution in 2002. And the quick-fix, ask-no-questions approach that suited Fujitsu financially enabled the Post Office to hold the line that blame for all branch shortfalls must lie with the sub-postmaster.The Fujitsu insider concluded that errors leaving sub-postmasters out of pocket were inevitable. Could that mean hundreds of them? “Given there were [about] 20,000 post offices when I was at Fujitsu and the sort of problems we were dealing with all the time, yeah,” he told the Eye. “Sounds reasonable.”