‘Fujitsu has yet to contribute a penny to the nearly £2 billion redress bill’
Classic old fashioned post office sign
One year on from Westminster’s Business and Trade Committee’s last report on the Post Office Horizon scandal, progress has been made delivering redress for victims of the Fujitsu-supplied Horizon IT scandal. Morethan 11,300 claimants have received payments with £1.44 billion distributed.
But thousands of sub‑postmasters are still waiting for the redress they are owed, and in a report today the Committee says “serious structural failings persist” in the redress system. Many victims still face unacceptable delays, inadequate offers, and administrative processes that “re‑traumatise” those who have already been seriously wronged.
Fujitsu, with a central role in one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history, has contributed nothing to the bill for redress and is still expanding its public sector revenues. A few days after UK CEO Paul Patterson gave evidence in Parliament, Fujitsu announced that he would move this month to a non-executive role “managing the company’s response” to the public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.
There is a serious risk of an unknown number of unsafe convictions – potentially including wrongful imprisonment – that are yet to be uncovered or have any access to justice. The Committee found evidence that the MoJ is wrongly judging eligibility of sub postmasters who should have had their convictions quashed, and there is no route for appeal in these cases.
And there is now emerging evidence that pre-Horizon IT systems, especially Capture, had similar flaws to the Horizon system that may have contributed to unsafe convictions. Incomplete records mean that the current confirmed number of Capture cases may represent just “the tip of another iceberg”, with the Committee calling for urgent legislation to quash Capture-related convictions.
The Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS), still managed by Post Office, routinely sees its offers overturned and significantly increased after a DBT-administered appeal. The stark disparities between initial offers and eventual awards reinforces that the HSS is no longer fit for purpose. Fully assessed claims continue to take far beyond target timelines with thousands of late claims still awaiting final offer.
The Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme (HCRS) is performing better, but claimants are still being forced to jump through administrative hoops to secure what is now effectively a guaranteed minimum £600k redress payment. That should simply be paid in full to all eligible claimants now.
Fujitsu has acknowledged its moral obligation to contribute to the cost of redress, yet it has made no interim payment and has agreed no figure. The total cost of redress payments now stands around £2 billion. But despite its “self-imposed moratorium” on bidding for new public contracts, Fujitsu continues to benefit from substantial Government contracts. The failure to even offer an interim amount is “unacceptable”.
Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Business and Trade Committee, said: “For hundreds of sub-postmasters, justice has come far too slowly. Many have waited years for the truth to be recognised and for the compensation they are owed. Yet today we find serious structural failings still blocking the road to justice.
“Thousands of victims are still waiting for fair redress, while the processes designed to help them are too often slow, bureaucratic and re-traumatising. That is simply unacceptable after one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history.
“Worse, Fujitsu has yet to contribute a penny to the nearly £2 billion redress bill, even as it continues to benefit from public contracts. That cannot continue. It is simply wrong that taxpayers are covering the costs for Fujitsu’s sins while Fujitsu is still profiting from taxpayers funded contracts.
“We were also concerned to hear new evidence that suggests unsafe convictions linked to earlier systems such as Capture may be only the tip of another iceberg. Parliament must act quickly to quash these convictions and ensure that every victim finally gets the justice they deserve.
“The victims of this scandal have shown extraordinary courage. The country owes them more than apologies — it owes them justice, accountability, and full and fair redress without further delay.”
Sir Wyn Williams published the first volume of his final report yesterday (08/07/25), calling for urgent action to be taken to ensure full and fair compensation is delivered to sub-postmasters affected by the Horizon scandal.
Laid before Parliament on Tuesday, Sir Wyn makes 19 urgent recommendations to resolve issues that are hindering full and fair redress, including that:
The Government and the Post Office should agree on a definition of ‘full and fair’ compensation, and this should be followed when deciding the level of compensation to offer.
Horizon Shortfall Scheme claimants should receive legal advice, funded by the Government.
Close family members of people affected by the Horizon scandal should receive compensation.
The Government should create a standing public body which will create, administer, and deliver schemes for giving financial redress to people who have been wronged by public bodies.
Fujitsu, Post Office and the Government should publish a report by 31 October 2025, outlining a programme for restorative justice (or the actions they’ve taken so far to produce this programme).
Sir Wyn says he expects the Government (and where appropriate Post Office and Fujitsu) to provide a written response to his recommendations by 10 October 2025.
Human Impact of the scandal
In the 162-page report, the Chair also details the scale of the suffering endured by those affected by the Horizon scandal.
Through 17 carefully chosen illustrations, Sir Wyn recounts how some people became seriously ill, struggled with mental health problems including alcohol addiction, and faced financial impacts such as bankruptcy.
He details how some people experienced reputational impacts or sadly passed away before receiving compensation. Elsewhere, he also highlights how some sub-postmasters were held liable for small amounts of money allegedly lost to the Post Office, while others were wrongly imprisoned.
Sir Wyn’s findings in the report are based on hearings and evidence submitted up until 6 June 2025. This spans around 225 days of hearings, 298 witnesses, with around 274,600 documents disclosed to Core Participants.
“Full, fair and prompt” redress
Sir Wyn writes that, despite the Government and Post Office appearing to show a genuine desire to provide redress which is full and fair, and delivered promptly, there have been “formidable difficulties in the way of achieving those aims”.
Considering each of the four redress schemes in turn, Sir Wyn finds that claimants to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme did not receive full and fair redress.
Sir Wyn writes: “I am persuaded that in the difficult and substantial claims, on too many occasions, the Post Office and its advisors have adopted an unnecessarily adversarial attitude towards making initial offers which have had the effect of depressing the level at which settlements have been achieved.”
He also discusses how a ‘fear factor’ has been removed from the Horizon Shortfall Scheme Appeals process. This is because every claimant who chooses to have a claim assessed may appeal the offer made “safe in the knowledge that there is no risk of losing a prior better offer.”
Considering this, he questions why this ‘fear factor’ has not been removed for sub-postmasters who must choose whether to take the fixed term offer or have a compensation assessment.
He writes: “Why is it appropriate to remove the fear factor from the HSSA but rigidly retain it in relation to the choice made by claimants between the Fixed Sum Offer and assessment? Try as I might, I cannot see the justification for these different approaches.”
For this reason, Sir Wyn recommends that anyone applying for a compensation scheme who has chosen to have their claim assessed should be allowed to take the fixed sum offer instead up to three months after receiving their first assessed offer.
He also recommends that the Government should publish a document explaining the ‘best offer principle’ in practice.
Legal Advice
Sir Wyn criticises the lack of legal advice available to Horizon Shortfall Scheme applicants.
He writes: “I regard it as unconscionable and wholly unfair that claimants in HSS are unable to obtain legal advice, paid for by the Department, about whether they should opt for the Fixed Sum Offer or assessment of their claims. Yet the Department continues to resist this as if its life depended upon it.”
Considering this, he writes that anyone claiming compensation through the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) should be entitled to legal advice, funded by the Department of Business and Trade.
This would help them choose whether to accept the Fixed Sum Offer or to seek financial address which is assessed.
Compensation for family members
Through first-hand accounts, Sir Wyn concludes that there are likely a number of close family members of those who have been affected by the Horizon scandal who have “endured and may still endure considerable suffering”.
For this reason, he recommends “that such family members should be able to obtain financial redress which recognises their own suffering.” He writes that the Department should draw up plans for providing this redress.
Reforms to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme
Sir Wyn also urged for meaningful reforms to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme.
For instance, he proposes that:
A senior lawyer should be appointed to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme who can take actions to make sure compensation offers are made and assessed as soon as possible.
That the appointed senior lawyer should be given powers to help them ensure that offers are assessed as soon as practicable.
The Post Office and Department of Business and Trade should be required to make compensation offers that are equal or higher than the amount recommended by the independent advisory panel.
The ‘Best Offer Principle’ should apply for those applying for compensation through the Group Litigation Scheme. This means that if a sub-postmaster appeals their compensation offer and the appeal is successful, they will receive whichever offer is higher.
Anyone applying for a compensation scheme who has chosen to have their claim assessed may decide to take the fixed sum offer instead up to three months after receiving their first assessed offer.
Restorative justice
Restorative justice is the process of bringing together people who have caused harm and those affected by it, so they can discuss the impact, take responsibility, and work collaboratively on making amends.
Sir Wyn urges that Fujitsu, Post Office and the Government should either together, or separately, publish a report by October 2025, outlining an agreed programme of restorative justice or any actions they have taken to produce this programme.
Government response
Understanding the need for swift action, Sir Wyn has decided to publish the first volume of his final report as soon as possible.
On timings for a government response to these findings, Sir Wyn writes:
“No purpose would be served by HM Government or the Department delaying consideration of my recommendations until the remainder of my Report is delivered.
“The whole reason for delivering this volume of my report in advance of the remaining volume is that appropriate action in relation to the schemes for redress can be taken as soon as reasonably possible.”
Please note the report contains contents which some may find distressing, including mentions of suicide and self-harm.
The Business and Trade Secretary and the Post Office Minister have issued statements in response to the publication of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry’s report.
Business Secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, said: “The publication of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry’s report today by Sir Wyn and his team marks an important milestone for subpostmasters and their families.
“I welcome the publication today and am committed to ensuring wronged subpostmasters are given full, fair and prompt redress.
“The recommendations contained in Sir Wyn’s report require careful reflection, including on further action to complete the redress schemes. Government will promptly respond to the recommendations in full in Parliament.”
Post Office Minister, Gareth Thomas, said: “I welcome the Inquiry’s publication today and pay tribute to Sir Wyn and his team for their comprehensive and penetrating work.
“We must never lose sight of the Horizon Scandal’s human impact on postmasters and their families, which the Inquiry has highlighted so well.
“Sir Wyn’s report highlights a series of failings by the Post Office and various governments. His recommendations are immensely helpful as a guide for what is needed to finish the job and we will respond in full to Parliament after carefully considering them.”
Initial Government actions in response to the Inquiry:
In his oral statement to Parliament, Post Office Minister, Gareth Thomas confirmed that that the Government has accepted Sir Wyn’s recommendation that claimants should be able to bank the best offer they get from the GLO process and should not put it at risk if they choose to go to the independent Panel.
The Minister also confirmed that the Government will provide redress for close family members of those postmasters most adversely affected by the scandal.
WESTMINSTER’s Treasury Committee has asked His Majesty’s Treasury, and all associated agencies and public bodies, to send them details of any contracts awarded by their organisation to Fujitsu Services Ltd, or any other Fujitsu Global-owned entities, since 2019.
The international technology corporation has faced renewed questions over its role in the Post Office Horizon Scandal in recent weeks.
The Committee aims to understand the extent to which the company has continued to be awarded government contracts with HM Treasury-affiliated organisations since the High Court ruling in 2019.
Questions include whether the contracts went through a tendering process, the extent to which the company’s role in the scandal was considered as part of the due diligence process and whether they have considered terminating contracts with the company at any stage.
Treasury Committee Chair, Harriett Baldwin, said: “The public outcry regarding the Post Office sub-postmaster scandal is entirely justified, and I know I speak for the whole Committee when I express my horror at the injustices the victims faced.
“It’s clear that Fujitsu has questions to answer over its conduct. I think it’s important we can see the extent to which taxpayer money has been spent with Fujitsu since the High Court ruling as they are simultaneously assessed on their fitness to remain a government supplier.”
