3 ms·
So.... In a lot of these cases the system wrongly reported money missing at these lower levels. It seems these numbers should have rolled up into sums at a high
by phkahler 3y ago
So.... In a lot of these cases the system wrongly reported money missing at these lower levels. It seems these numbers should have rolled up into sums at a higher level that also showed losses and they prosecuted people. But the money was never actually missing so where did it go? Hmmm?
- Karellen 3y agoSurely the "missing" money was never there in the first place? If a Post Office had £20,000 in takings on a day, but the buggy system reported takings of £30,000, then that's £10,000 of money reported missing, which the postmasters were prosecuted for stealing. But that £10,000 didn't "go" anywhere. It never existed.
- hermitcrab 3y agoIn many cases the subpostmasters paid the 'missing' amount to the Post Office, rather than lose their franchise or even go to prison. That then went towards Post Office profits and management bonuses. Ka-ching - Trebles all round!
- phkahler 3y agoWoops. There are two numbers that don't match here. I just assumed the higher one was correct and the other one was misreported by the system. You may be right that the lower one may be correct and the higher one was wrong, in which case the money never existed.