Thread by @nickwallis

Good morning. Off the the High Court Rolls Building to see Alan Bates, sacked by the Post Office in 2003, and who subsequently formed the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance. He's been waiting 15 years for his day in court. Today he's got it. #postofficetrial

We’ve had about 15 mins of the Post Office’s cross-examination of Alan Bates. PO QC says this happened a long time ago and asks if AB's memory of the events might have faded...

AB says "I won’t remember all the detail but because they affected me they were of concern to me - and I recorded them at the time"

PO QC now asking about the due diligence he did on AB’s purchase of his business. How hard he studied the contract and what he understood the contract to mean - particularly the nature of the agent (SPMR)/principal (Post Office) relationship.

Now discussing what conversations AB had with the person he bought the PO from. Previous SPMR told him there was a gains and losses tin in the safe, which struck Alan as odd.

PO QC says AB must have realised the potential for large liabilities if he got something wrong. AB says the sums of money under discussion seemed small and the prospect of large losses never seemed a major issue. Points out this was before Horizon was installed in that PO.

PO QC points out in 1993 there were more than £200 of losses and that he would have seen this. AB says yes and he that there were no losses the year before or the year after.

Starts talking about AB’s business plan. That he only planned to take out £500 a month from the business and that £208 pounds, if it happened whilst AB was in office - it would be a significant sum. AB isn’t that sure it is. “over a 12 month period in a busy office…?"

PO QC “did you ask [mr savage] about it?”
AB “Possibly not, as I thought I might have been able to swallow it in the business or write it off against tax as a loss"

AB takes the initiative for a moment saying he was more concerned about inexplicable losses, which is what happened when Horizon was installed - the losses shooted up.

PO QC steers him away from this and says that theft could be an inexplicable loss.

PO QC asks if AB had legal advice on his purchase of the PO. AB says yes.
QC says AB was committing to spend £175,000 on the entirety of this Post Office - wouldn’t he want to see the Subpostmaster Contract (SPMC). AB says...

he was interested in the terms he was going to be employed by the Post Office, not the terms under which the vendor was employed by the Post Office.

QC now asking if he prepared for his interview by looking at documentation which made it clear about his termination terms and liabilities #postofficetrial

QC if you had any queries about the documents you would have raised them during interview?
AB Yes
QC But you didn’t.

The PO QC is painting a picture of a man who was an experienced businessman, going into a business relationship with his eyes open, having read all the necessary documentation, done his homework and subsequently entered into a contract with the Post Office.

AB did not get the Subpostmasters contract (the SPMC) on his appointment. He received two documents which he thought was his contract.
#postofficetrial

QC says there’s no way he could have thought it was his contract. It didn’t cover terms referred to in other docs he’d already read before buying the PO.
AB adamant that the contents of what he was sent was the totality of what he was working to. His contract. #postofficetrial

PO QC not buying this at all.
“Are you really saying that?”
AB: “Yes!”
PO QC “I find that pretty unlikely from the details man and commercial businessman you are."

PO QC says he did get the SPMC, and that if he hadn’t he wouldn’t have signed the contract.
AB says he didn’t get the contract and if he had he would have sent it to his lawyer. As it was he signed the documents he was sent and they were returned on pretty much the same day.

Court is taking a ten minute break. I am hank marvin…

Aaand we’re back. PO QC still pushing that AB did receive the SPMC. AB says he didn’t. PO QC says it was standard procedure to send it, there is a PO employee who says it was sent out so he must have received it. AB says he didn’t. #postofficetrial

AB says he presumed all the docs he’d been sent were the contract.

We have moved onto the standard of training AB received.

#postofficetrial

Part of which was the training AB got from the PO as the branch was handed over to him - we’re back on to the contract and what AB thought the documentation he was presented as he took over the PO meant. #postofficetrial

PO QC Still hammering the point that AB calls himself a details man yet he signed lots of documents on the day he took over the PO without going into the detail of them.
AB There were lots of documents I asked the trainer what they referred to...

#postofficetrial

QC You’re a details man!
AB It was busy - we were trying to serve customers at the same time!

#postofficetrial

QC points out that twice in his witness statements AB says that PO never drew his attention to the infamous 12.12 clause (see postofficetrial.com and tweets passim), yet in a document he signed....
#postofficetrial

...there was a line: “Post Office draws your attention to section 12.12”
AB says he was never told about it, it was never discussed during his interview.
QC asks why he says it was never drawn to his attention when it clearly was...
#postofficetrial

AB blusters a bit
QC did you draft your own witness statement?
AB Yes!
AB says his statement is his recollection of what he was told at the time.
#postofficetrial

J asks how many documents he had to sign on the day he took over his Post Office.
AB 20… 30… 40… but you have to understand we were serving…
J Thank you.

If you would like more information - please go to postofficetrial.com where you can get a load of background and sign up to get daily email reports from this trial, which might be a bit easier to read than the live-tweeting! #postofficetrial

PO QC saying that AB’s letter complaining about his PO contract being confusing and wordy must mean he had his SPMC as he was clearly referring to it.
AB says he could have been referring to other documentation.

QC you are referring specifically to a contract.
AB it was probably a general reference to all documentation…

The PO QC is generally not accepting that Alan Bates did not have his SPMC when he took over his PO. AB is adamant he didn’t.

QC attempting to show by reference to other documentation, he must have had his SPMC.

If AB did indeed have his contract and his witness statement is clear he didn’t, it could casts doubt on the accuracy of other elements of his witness statement.

AB adamant he had no SPMC.

AB adamant he did not have it.

QC now onto a letter sent by AB when he was in post but in dispute with the PO about Horizon.

Asks why when the PO had referred to point 12.12 of his contract...

… AB didn’t, at any stage of the letter, mention he didn’t get his SPMC until 18 months after taking over the PO.

AB says because this was about Horizon, not my contract.

QC asks again.

AB I think I’d gone beyond that stage by that point. I didn’t see any reason to do it.

QC There was a very good reason. It’s the reason you’re here now - you’re trying to contest the liability of this situation.

AB - I wasn’t preparing to come to court today and I didn’t know I was going to get sacked - I was just trying to protect my position, and resolve the situation so we could just get on.

AB notes that when he was on the Working Group of the Mediation Scheme he saw summaries of other complainant SPMRs cases and noted that 62 of the 140 complainants said they didn’t get a contract before taking over their PO.
PO QC: “I don’t accept that."

It’s two minutes before lunch and the installation of Horizon at AB’s PO has been mentioned and the training he would expect on it.
AB states he would have v much welcomed the computerisation of his branch and would hope the training would be good.

That appears to be the only discussion of Horizon as the PO QC asks if we can move on to AB’s contract termination or go to an early lunch.

Early lunch. Back at 1.55pm.

@threadreaderapp unroll please