Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Ex-Post Office chief not ‘clever’ enough to ask about challenges made to Horizon

David Mills said the potential loss of £1 million had caught his eye (Lucy North/PA)
David Mills said the potential loss of £1 million had caught his eye (Lucy North/PA)

A former Post Office chief executive has said he was not “clever” enough to ask what challenges were made to the Horizon IT system during a civil case against a subpostmistress – despite being aware of the potential loss of £1 million.

Speaking at the Horizon IT inquiry on Tuesday, David Mills said he had seen a Post Office “IT risk register” suggesting that the organisation could suffer £1 million worth of financial and reputational damage if it lost a civil case against subpostmistress Julie Wolstenholme.

Ms Wolstenholme ran a branch in Cleveleys, Lancashire, and was pursued for £25,000 through the civil court by the Post Office.

The register, shown to the inquiry on Tuesday, read: “Damage to reputation of Post Office and potential future financial losses if the Post Office loses the court case relating to reliability of Horizon accounting data at Cleveleys Branch Office.”

When asked by the counsel to the inquiry, Sam Stevens, what this statement meant to Mr Mills at the time, the former chief executive responded: “Actually, that meant nothing to me at the time.

“What did catch my eye was that the potential financial loss was £1 million.”

The company later settled the case for around £180,000.

During Ms Wolstenholme’s case, IT expert Jason Coyne was instructed to assess whether the subpostmistress was responsible for the losses at her branch and produced a report in 2003 which said the Horizon system was “clearly defective”.

Mr Stevens asked Mr Mills whether he had asked what the challenge regarding the Horizon system was.

Post Office court case
Former post office workers celebrate outside the Royal Courts of Justice, London, after having their convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal (Yui Mok/PA)

Mr Mills responded: “No.”

Asked why not, the former chief executive said: “I wasn’t that clever. I’m sorry, I didn’t ask about it.”

Mr Mills said he had not “properly assimilated” that reliability of Horizon was in doubt when the organisation settled Ms Wolstenholme’s case.

Mr Stevens continued: “Did it not concern you that an offer of settlement had been made in a case where the reliability of the Horizon IT system was an issue?”

Mr Mills replied: “No because I hadn’t properly assimilated the fact that the reliability of Horizon was in doubt – I hadn’t got that in my mind.

“What I’d got in my mind was £1 million and looking at this email it looked pretty certain to me that we were going to settle for three months’ notice and at the level I was operating at, that seemed the end to that issue.”