Connect with us

Published

on

More than £1m of unexplained transactions were transferred in to Post Office profit at the height of the Horizon scandal, leaked documents have showed.

The papers seen by Sky News show a snapshot of transfers from a Post Office “miscellaneous client” suspense account over a four year period, up to 2014.

A suspense account is where unexplained, or disputed, transactions remain until they are able to be “reconciled”.

Unaccounted-for transactions were transferred out of the Post Office suspense account and into their Profit and Loss account after three years.

Money latest: Further fall in energy bills expected in summer

Ian Henderson, director of Second Sight – the forensic accountants hired years ago by Post Office – said: “The Post Office was not printing money. It was accumulating funds in its suspense account.

“Those funds belong to somebody, either to third party clients or to sub-postmasters, and part of the work we were doing in 2015 was drilling into that.”

Mr Henderson said they were sacked not long after asking questions about whether Post Office profited from shortfalls paid for by sub-postmasters.

Image:
Mr Henderson told Sky News that the money could potentially have come from sub-postmasters’ pockets

More than 900 sub-postmasters were wrongly prosecuted due to faults with Horizon accounting software.

A letter from Alisdair Cameron, the Post Office’s chief financial officer, to Second Sight in February 2015 states some “postings cannot be traced” to “underlying transactions”.

He added: “We are not always able to drill back from the combined totals to itemise all the underlying transactions.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Compensation paid by summer’

Mr Henderson said the letter shows that “the Post Office was benefiting from this uncertainty due to, frankly, bad record keeping, but taking it to the benefit of their Profit and Loss account.”

He maintains that it’s impossible to prove for sure that sub-postmasters’ money went into Post Office profit because of a “lack of granularity”.

He says therefore that it is of “sufficient public interest” that a further independent review into the use of suspense accounts should happen.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Post Office redress delay overshadowed by executive drama

Mr Henderson added: “It didn’t come from thin air, where did the money come from? That’s a fundamental question Post Office have not answered.”

Meanwhile, separately, a secret recording obtained by Sky News indicates that Post Office was trying to gag the independent forensic accountants.

The recording is of a meeting in January 2014 between Second Sight, a lawyer and a Post Office representative.

It took place over a year before the accountants were sacked.

In the conference call there are signs the relationship between Post Office and Second Sight was beginning to weaken.

There is discussion about a contractual confidentiality agreement, a “Letter of Engagement” between the parties.

In the recording Ian Henderson says: “Either, you know, we have unfettered discretion and authorisation to just talk to MPs or we haven’t.

“At the moment, the way the document is drafted, we are prevented from doing that. That’s the issue.”

His colleague at Second Sight, Ron Warmington is heard agreeing.

In another part of the recording there are more concerns raised that the investigators are being blocked from talking to MPs.

Mr Henderson says: “My point is we should not be gagging either the applicant or Second Sight in being able to respond, you know, fully and frankly to MPs who frankly sort of set this whole process in motion.”

The Post Office representative replies saying they’re not trying to gag anybody.

Mr Henderson describes “a point of principle”: “In exactly the same way that when we were doing spot reviews, we disclosed to MPs, when they asked us a specific question, the information provided to us by Fujitsu and by Post Office.

Read more on Post Office scandal:
Post Office ‘agrees’ to submit report on CEO’s behaviour to MPs
Sunak declines to back under fire Post Office boss Read
A Post Office TV drama sequel without the need for actors

“And that’s why it’s so important to establish this principle that there should be no gagging of Second Sight in relation to being able to discuss our investigative work with MPs.”

In the same meeting his colleague Ron Warmington said that if it later emerges that Second Sight have been “effectively gagged” in its dealing with MPs, “it’s not going to be Second Sight they are particularly annoyed with, it’s going to be Post Office.”

The representative responds directly with: “I think that’s something that the Post Office will have to deal with if – if it arises.”

Adding that “some of the terminology in terms of gagging is probably an exaggeration of what it is that is trying to be done here, and at the moment you haven’t signed anything.”

Post Office released a statement in response to the findings: “The statutory public inquiry, chaired by a judge with the power to question witnesses under oath, is the best forum to examine the issues raised by this evidence.

“We continue to remain fully focused on supporting the inquiry get to the truth of what happened and accountability for that.”

Continue Reading

Business

‘Absolutely gutted’: £16,500 Glastonbury packages won’t be fulfilled after company goes bust

Published

on

By

'Absolutely gutted': £16,500 Glastonbury packages won't be fulfilled after company goes bust

Glastonbury ticket holders have been left thousands of pounds out of pocket after a luxury glamping company went bust.

Festival-goers who booked their tickets and accommodation with Yurtel have been told the company can no longer fulfil its orders and has ceased trading with immediate effect.

Money: Read all the latest news here

Some had spent more than £16,500 through Yurtel, with hospitality packages starting at £10,000.

In an email, Yurtel said it was unable to provide customers with any refunds, advising them to go through a third party to claim back the money once the liquidation process had started.

To add insult to injury, customers found out that Yurtel had failed to purchase the tickets for the 25 -29 June festival that they thought had been booked as part of their packages.

In a letter to customers, Yurtel’s founder Mickey Luke said: “I am deeply sorry that you have received this devastating news and am writing to apologise.

More on Glastonbury

“Yurtel is a hospitality business who pride themselves on looking after our customers, delivering a unique product and striving to create a better client experience year on year. Due to a culmination of factors over the past years, we have failed to be able to continue to do so and are heartbroken.”

The Money blog has contacted Yurtel to see if the business has anything to add.

Several people have also reported that they were unable to pay by credit card at the time of booking, with the company instead asking for a bank transfer.

This means they are unable to use chargeback to get a refund. You can read more about that here

The crowd watch soul singer Diana Ross fill the Sunday teatime legends slot on the Pyramid Stage during the Glastonbury Festival at Worthy Farm in Somerset. Picture date: Sunday June 26, 2022.
Image:
Pic: PA

‘I feel really ripped off’

One of those customers was Lydia, who told Money she was “absolutely gutted” after spending thousands.

This year’s festival was “really important” to her as she was forced to miss out last year despite having tickets due to a health issue that left her needing an operation.

“We tried to get Glastonbury tickets through the normal kind of route and couldn’t get them,” the accountant said.

She ended up booking with Yurtel in November, sending over all the funds a month later.

“It’s super expensive. It was really, really important to us. Last year was gutting with the surgery and the whole situation around that was very traumatic, so it was a very special thing to then get the opportunity to go this year. It’s really gutting,” she said.

“I feel really ripped off and I’m really disappointed in the festival, to be honest. I think that response is just pretty rubbish.”

More from Money:
Chef’s top steak tip
Secrets of a London cabbie

How roaming fees compare by network

Yurtel did not pay for festival tickets, Glastonbury says

Glastonbury said Yurtel was one of a small number of campsites local to the festival site – Worthy Farm – with limited access to purchase hospitality tickets for their guests in certain circumstances.

But, it had not paid for any tickets for the 2025 festival before going into liquidation, and so no tickets were secured for its guests, it added. Every year, Glastonbury’s website says that ticketing firm See Tickets is the only official source for buying tickets for the festival.

“As such we have no records of their bookings and are unable to take any responsibility for the services and the facilities they offer,” the festival said.

“Anyone who has paid Yurtel for a package including Glastonbury 2025 tickets will need to pursue any potential recompense available from them via the liquidation process as outlined in their communication to you.

“We are not able to incur the cost or responsibility of their loss or replacement.”

Instead, the festival has urged Yurtel customers to contact Yurtel@btguk.com to confirm their consent for personal data and details of their party to be shared with Glastonbury.

“We will then be able to provide details of alternative potential sources for those customers to purchase tickets and accommodation for this year’s festival,” the festival added.

‘Only option’ on offer is ‘pretty weak’

Lydia said she agreed for her details to be passed on to Glastonbury, and the festival has told her the only option is to pay for the tickets again from another provider.

“They are not giving us the opportunity to buy the tickets at face value. We would then have to go again and spend another stupidly unreasonable amount of money to be able to go. It’s pretty disappointing,” she added.

“It’s pretty weak that the only option they’re giving people who’ve already lost out on huge amounts of money is to go and spend huge amounts more money.”

It’s left her feeling like she won’t go to the festival this year – and she’s not hopeful about getting her money back.

She said: “To be honest, I just don’t think I can afford it.

“It’s already so much money wasted, and I’m not at all optimistic we’ll get anything back.”

Continue Reading

Business

Federal judges rule Trump tariffs can stay in place for now – as president rages at trade court’s ‘country threatening decision’

Published

on

By

Federal judges rule Trump tariffs can stay in place for now - as president rages at trade court's 'country threatening decision'

A federal appeals court has ruled that Donald Trump’s sweeping international tariffs can remain in place for now, a day after three judges ruled the president exceeded his authority.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has allowed the president to temporarily continue collecting tariffs under emergency legislation while it considers the government’s appeal.

It comes after the Court of International Trade blocked the additional taxes on foreign-made goods after its three-judge panel ruled that the Constitution gives Congress the power to levy taxes and tariffs – not the president.

The judges also ruled Mr Trump exceeded his authority by invoking the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The CAFC said the lower trade court and the Trump administration must respond by 5 June and 9 June, respectively.

Trump calls trade court ‘backroom hustlers’

Posting on Truth Social, Mr Trump said the trade court’s ruling was a “horrible, Country threatening decision,” and said he hopes the Supreme Court would reverse it “QUICKLY and DECISIVELY”.

After calling into question the appointment of the three judges, and suggesting the ruling was based on “purely a hatred of ‘TRUMP’,” he added: “Backroom ‘hustlers’ must not be allowed to destroy our Nation!

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump asked about ‘taco trade’

“The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these Tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around D.C. for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly.

“If allowed to stand, this would completely destroy Presidential Power — The Presidency would never be the same!”

The US president unveiled the controversial measures on “Liberation Day” in April, which included a 10% tariff on UK imports and caused aggressive sell-offs in the stock market.

Mr Trump argued he invoked the decades-old law to collect international tariffs because it was a “national emergency”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

From April: ‘This is Liberation Day’

Tariffs ‘direct threat’ to business – Schwab

The trade court ruling marked the latest legal challenge to the tariffs, and related to a case brought on behalf of five small businesses that import goods from other countries.

Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel for the Liberty Justice Center – a nonprofit representing the five firms – said the appeal court would ultimately agree that the tariffs posed “a direct threat to the very survival of these businesses”.

Read more:
Trump reduces Chicago gang founder’s sentence after Ye lobbying
‘I was going to die with this’: Ex-Diddy assistant breaks down
Trump furious over ‘TACO’ dig – what inspired the phrase?

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

US treasury secretary Scott Bessent also told Fox News on Thursday that the initial ruling had not interfered with trade deal negotiations with partners.

He said that countries “are coming to us in good faith” and “we’ve seen no change in their attitude in the past 48 hours,” before saying he would meet with a Japanese delegation in Washington on Friday.

Continue Reading

Business

Treasury to dispose of final shares in bailed-out NatWest Group

Published

on

By

Treasury to dispose of final shares in bailed-out NatWest Group

The government is preparing to sell the final publicly owned shares in NatWest Group on Friday, drawing a line under one of the world’s biggest bank bailouts after nearly 17 years.

Sky News understands that the Treasury is preparing to offload its remaining stake – which is down to roughly 0.1% – in the coming hours, with a public statement likely either later on Friday or on Monday morning.

Sources cautioned that the timings were still subject to change.

The final disposal of a stake which at one point represented more than 80% of NatWest’s share capital has been anticipated for weeks.

Last week, Sky News reported that British taxpayers were heading for a loss of just over £10bn on the 2008 rescue of NatWest, then known as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), having pumped £45.5bn into the lender to prevent it – and the wider UK financial system – collapsing.

Confirmation of the sale of the Treasury’s final interest in NatWest will come almost 17 years after the then chancellor, Lord Darling, conducted what RBS’s boss at the time, Fred Goodwin, labelled “a drive-by shooting”.

Total proceeds from a government trading plan launched in 2021 to drip-feed NatWest stock into the market have so far reached about £13bn, with the final tally likely to be about £13.2bn.

More from Money

In addition, institutional share sales and direct buybacks by NatWest of government-held stock have yielded a further £11.5bn.

Dividend payments to the Treasury during its ownership have totalled £4.9bn, while fees and other payments have generated another £5.6bn.

In aggregate, that means total proceeds from NatWest since 2008 are expected to hit £35.3bn.

Under Rick Haythornthwaite and Paul Thwaite, now the bank’s chairman and chief executive respectively, NatWest is now focused on driving growth across its business.

It recently tabled an £11bn bid to buy Santander UK, according to the Financial Times, although no talks are ongoing.

Mr Thwaite replaced Dame Alison Rose, who left amid the crisis sparked by the debanking scandal involving Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader.

Sky News recently revealed that the bank and Mr Farage had reached an undisclosed settlement.

During the first five years of NatWest’s period in majority state ownership, the bank was run by Sir Stephen Hester, now the chairman of easyJet.

Sir Stephen stepped down amid tensions with the then chancellor, George Osborne, about how RBS – as it them was – should be run.

Lloyds Banking Group was also in partial state ownership for years, although taxpayers reaped a net gain of about £900m from that period.

Other lenders nationalised during the crisis included Bradford & Bingley, the bulk of which was sold to Santander UK, and Northern Rock, part of which was sold to Virgin Money – which in turn has been acquired by Nationwide.

The Treasury and NatWest declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Trending