Hampshire Post Office victim 'still at war' as she gets OBE
A victim of the Post Office computer scandal has said she will continue to fight for compensation for colleagues, as she received an OBE at Buckingham Palace.Jo Hamilton, 68, was falsely prosecuted in 2006 for a £36,000 shortfall at her branch in South Warnborough, Hampshire.She accepted a financial settlement in 2024, but said it was "wicked" that 138 former sub-postmasters were still battling for money.The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) said it had paid more than £1bn so far.
Mrs Hamilton, who received her honour for services to justice on Thursday, said: "Personally my claim's been settled but I cannot, cannot stop fighting until the rest of the group get paid. "We fought in the High Court in 2019 and it took years to even get it to court... 138 of those people are still fighting. One hundred are dead."And I just find the whole thing wicked that they cannot be fair with people."On Friday, police said seven suspects had been identified in connection with the scandal.Any criminal trial might be not be held until 2028, detectives said.Mrs Hamilton said the DBT had claimed that there was little money for compensation, although it had employed an "army of lawyers" to "grind us into submission".She added: "Basically the Business Department owned the Post Office and they prosecuted us and destroyed us and they're now in charge of the compensation."It really is the fox in charge of the henhouse."It should go to an independent body to be fair and they'd stop spending hundreds of millions they've spent on lawyers, which is obscene."The Horizon IT system, which began operating in 1999, falsely created shortfalls in Post Office branches for which sub-postmasters were held liable.More than 900 people were prosecuted and some went to prison. In a statement, DBT said: "We pay tribute to all the postmasters including Jo who have suffered from the Horizon scandal."We have quadrupled the total amount paid to victims with more than £1bn paid to thousands of postmasters across the UK and anyone unhappy with their offer can have their case reviewed by an independent panel of experts."
You can follow BBC Hampshire & Isle of Wight on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
37 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Calling someone a ‘Karen' is ‘borderline racist, sexist and ageist', tribunal says
Calling someone a 'Karen' is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', a tribunal judge has said. Employment judge George Alliott said the term, typically targeted at middle-aged white women, was pejorative. The remarks came in the case of Sylvia Constance, 74, who had brought claims of unfair dismissal, direct race and age discrimination and victimisation against Harpenden Mencap, a charity that provides support to adults with learning disabilities. Constance, who the tribunal heard is black British, said she was targeted because of her race, having been dismissed on 13 June 2023 because of an 'irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap. Bosses had previously suspended Constance over claims of 'emotional/psychological abuse of a tenant in your care' and 'bullying and intimidation of colleagues', the tribunal heard. Christine Yates, who represented Constance at the tribunal, said in a document: 'The respondents have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen', having weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against the complainant, making up and suspending the complainant for numerous fictitious infringements, and deflecting from their personal misconduct. 'As egregiously, they encouraged residents under their care to do same. There is also something very sordid about the way in which white, female management have facilitated racism by colluding with white, male residents to give a misogynistic, racist view of the black complainant.' But Alliott said: 'We note Christine Yates uses the slang term 'Karen', which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.' The judge dismissed Constance's claims, saying that the complaints against her were 'legitimate' and 'did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her'.
The Guardian
44 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Starmer still faces Labour anger over risk of ‘two-tier' disability benefits
Keir Starmer is battling to stem the revolt over his cuts to disability benefits, with about 50 Labour MPs concerned the new concessions will create a 'two-tier' system where existing and new claimants are treated differently. Senior government sources insisted things were 'moving in the right direction' for No 10, with the whips phoning backbenchers to persuade them to support the bill on Tuesday. Government insiders said they believed they had peeled off enough of the original 120-plus Labour opponents of the legislation to win the vote, after the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, promised to exempt current disability claimants from the changes, and to increase the health element of universal credit in line with inflation. However, rebel MPs will attempt to lay a new amendment on Monday giving colleagues a chance to delay the bill, which will still involve £2.5bn of cuts to future disability benefits. The continuing row over the changes is likely to blight the week that will mark the first anniversary of Labour's return to power. In an interview on Thursday, Starmer admitted to a range of mistakes – including using the phrase 'an island of strangers' in an immigration speech, and hiring his former chief of staff Sue Gray. His government has made a series of U-turns in the last 12 months, but his handling of the welfare bill might be the most damaging episode of them all. Starmer will next week be hoping to draw a line under the difficult period, in which the government has also reversed cuts to winter fuel payments and changed course over holding an inquiry into grooming gangs. Dozens of Labour MPs are continuing to criticise the welfare cuts on a Labour WhatsApp group. Many MPs are still undecided about how they will vote and are pressing for more assurances that it is ethical and legal to set up a division between current and future claimants. Disability charities have said the bill remains 'fatally flawed' and will lead to an 'unequal future' for different groups of disabled people, making life harder for hundreds of thousands of future claimants. The government confirmed on Friday night that people who have to make new claims for Pip after November 2026 will be assessed under the new criteria. This means those reapplying after losing their Pip or who have fluctuating health conditions will not have the level of their previous awards protected. Starmer defended the bill on Friday, saying it struck the right balance. The changes will protect 370,000 existing recipients who were expected to lose out after reassessment. The prime minister said: 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right.' Asked how the government would pay for the £3bn of concessions, which experts believe will have to be funded by tax rises or extra borrowing, Starmer replied: 'The funding will be set out in the budget in the usual way, as you'd expect, later in the year.' There would need to be at least 80 rebels to defeat the bill, and government sources were quietly confident they had given enough ground after Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury committee, said she would back the legislation following changes. Others were unconvinced. One leading rebel said 'everyone but a handful of people is unhappy', even if they do end up reluctantly backing the changed legislation. Another expressed frustration that No 10 and the whips were 'trying to bounce people into agreeing before we've seen enough details'. Rachael Maskell, the Labour MP for York Central, a leading opponent of the bill, said: 'They are going to have to go back to the negotiating table … deaf and disabled people's organisations are rejecting these changes as it fails to address future need and gives no security for people with fluctuating conditions, for instance where people are in remission.' Other critics who plan to vote against the bill include the MP for Crawley, Peter Lamb, who said: 'Despite many improvements to the system set out in the bill, at its core the bill remains a cost-cutting exercise. No matter the level of involvement of disability groups in co-producing a scheme for new applicants, to save money the new scheme has to result in people with high levels of need losing the support necessary to wash themselves, dress themselves and feed themselves.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Simon Opher, the MP for Stroud, said he still opposed the bill. 'The changes do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip [personal independence payments]. The bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process.' Diane Abbott, a leading figure from the left of Labour, said the rebellion was 'far from over', while another Labour MP said: 'The bill starts from the premise of cuts, not reform. It's also arse about face in terms of impact assessments and co-production. It's simply a negotiated dog's dinner. In that sense, nothing has really changed except the fact they've negotiated more [people to] misguidedly to sign up to it.' One thing Labour MPs are pushing for is more clarity on the review of the Pip system, due to be done before autumn by Stephen Timms, a work and pensions minister. Many expect that process to change the points system from the current proposals. Some in the party also want Starmer to reinstate Vicky Foxcroft, who quit as a whip to vote against the bill before the U-turn was made. Stella Creasy, a leading Labour MP who had initially signed the amendment to delay the bill, said she wanted to see more details. 'We need to understand why we would treat one group of claimants differently from another,' she said. A Labour MP from the 2024 intake said: 'I'm waiting to look at the details before making any decisions. Many are in the same place as me and need to get something more than a midnight email on an issue of this much importance to hundreds of thousands of people.' The Labour MPs opposed to the changes are citing a fundamental rejection of the idea that a Labour government will be making disabled people worse off. At the same time, many of them have also been alienated by what they say is a No 10 operation that is out of touch with the parliamentary party, and has tried to strongarm MPs into backing the legislation with threats and promises of preferment. 'Good will has been lost and there is still huge suspicion about whether they will try and pull a stunt at the last minute,' said one Labour MP. The majority of disability charities and campaign groups still opposed the cuts. Ellen Clifford, from Disabled People Against Cuts, said: 'Many people who rely on Pip to survive have fluctuating conditions which means our support needs can go up and down. By penalising existing claimants if we go out of and then go back to the benefits system depending on our health, more people will be denied the support they need. 'This is exactly why no disabled people's organisation across the whole of the UK has welcomed these concessions because we know the complexities of the social security system and bitter experience from years of cuts that there are many ways in which grand sweeping statements about protections translate to very little in practice when you go into the detail of it.' The disability equality charity Scope said that despite the concessions, an estimated 430,000 future disabled claimants would be affected by 2029-30. Its strategy director, James Taylor, said: 'It is encouraging that the government is starting to listen to disabled people and MPs who have been campaigning for change for months. But these plans will still rip billions from the welfare system. 'The proposed concessions will create a two-tier benefits system and an unequal future for disabled people. Life costs more if you are disabled. And these cuts will have a devastating effect on disabled people's health, ability to live independently or work.' Additional reporting by Frances Ryan
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Two men charged after Bedford town centre stabbing
Two men have been charged following a town centre stabbing.A man was injured in Iddesleigh Road, Bedford at about 21:40 BST on 20 men in their 20s have now been charged with grievous bodily harm and one was also charged with possession of a knife or bladed other men, also in their 20s, were arrested in connection with the incident and released on bail. Follow Beds, Herts and Bucks news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
