On 23 October 2003, the North Wales Weekly News published a letter from Alan Bates, the sacked Postmaster at Craig-y-Don Post Office near Llandudno. In his letter, Alan railed against the behaviour of the Post Office, its Horizon computer system and apologised to his customers that their village branch had closed. “I can assure everyone I will not give up on this issue” said Alan, “whether it takes three months or three years.”

It took 22 years. Today Sir Alan Bates settled his claim against the Post Office.

Sir Alan refused his first compensation offer in January 2024, saying it was “derisory”, being just a sixth of his original claim. During his evidence to the public inquiry in April 2024, Sir Alan said of his negotiations:

“I have no doubt that there’s a bit of vindictiveness coming in from the [Business] Department and the Post Office on this. And the reason I say that is quite simple: they don’t think there’s any worth to any of the work that I’ve done over the years.“

Sir Alan said his lawyers had put in a claim for the 20 years he spent fighting for justice for himself and other Subpostmasters and “that’s been totally negated by them. In other words, Government doesn’t think anything I’ve done is worth anything.“

Sir Alan received a second offer of compensation in May 2024 which he said amounted to a third of his claim. This too was rejected. In May of this year he told the Times he had subsequently been offered 49.2% of his claim on a “take it or leave it” basis.

Today Sky News’ Mark Kleinman broke the story that Sir Alan had settled his claim.

Chris Head OBE, a former Subpostmaster who has long highlighted the iniquities of the various compensation schemes led the tributes. He wrote: “Wish Alan all the best and glad after so many years he has been able to settle his claim with the Government – the process has been a complete disgrace, the battles painstaking but finally some justice prevails.”

But how much did Sir Alan settle for? Mark Kleinman writes:

“One source suggested that his final settlement may have been worth between £4m and £5m, implying that Sir Alan’s claim could have been in the region of £10m, although those figures could not be corroborated on Tuesday morning.“

Compensation algorithms

Whilst many people are undoubtedly delighted for Sir Alan, and few would begrudge him receiving such a sum, these numbers have raised eyebrows. Sir Alan was not convicted nor sent to prison. Either:

– the estimates are incorrect (see the caveats around those figures in the quote), or,

– the government has finally recognised Sir Alan’s campaigning efforts, or,

– working within the rules they appear to be applying to everyone else, they have been persuaded he could have made £4m in profit from his Post Office and haberdashery in Craig-y-Don over 22 years, had he not been ejected from his job.

On the record, the government says:

“We pay tribute to Sir Alan Bates for his long record of campaigning on behalf of victims and have now paid out over £1.2bn to more than 9,000 victims. We can confirm that Sir Alan’s claim has reached the end of the scheme process and been settled.“

The two government sources I spoke to were very tight-lipped. No steers, no hints, no tips, nothing. Sir Alan doesn’t look like he’s returned anyone’s calls yet, and his lawyers (somewhat understandably) told me “as a firm of solicitors we do not discuss or comment on confidential client matters”.

I did speak to one person who knows a thing or two about the various Post Office compensation schemes. That person thought a £4m – £5m settlement for Sir Alan was “very, very implausible” given the far lower sums being offered to people with criminal convictions who had been sent to prison and suffered unimaginably as a result. However my source did accept that the government could have given Sir Alan enough money to stop the financial cost and reputational damage they would suffer if he decided he would to take them to court. My source said if it is the latter, it would be “grossly improper” but of a piece with all the Post Office scandal compensation schemes and how they have operated since 2020, which my source described as “unjust and unfair”.

The Lion’s Share

Sir Alan was the head of the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA) and did the lion’s share of the work, but he was helped (among many others) by Jo Hamilton, who was described as the JFSA’s “heart”. Jo put months of unpaid work into helping Subpostmasters in crisis, bringing them into the JFSA fold with compassion and advice. There were also dozens of Subpostmasters who told their stories to the broadcast media. This was something Sir Alan didn’t enjoy and didn’t do for ten years between 2009 and 2019. Should those people have been allowed or able to add a claim for the work they did bringing the Post Office and Fujitsu to justice whilst the government?

John O’Sullivan, a serving Subpostmaster said: “With everything Post Office and Government are involved with it raises more questions than answers. Not a pop at Sir Alan but with no prison sentence and a Knighthood you might struggle to claim reputational harm? If £4/5million is right don’t others need a top up?”

Another person caught up in this scandal with an outstanding claim wrote: “How Alan Bates got between £4-5 million is beyond me. Nevertheless, happy for him… Unless he had investments or a property portfolio which was lost, I cannot understand his claim. Though happy he can move on.”

It’s hard to know if Kleinman’s source is accurate. Kleinman is sure-footed, well-connected and regularly gets information direct from the Business department when they want to place a story. The Business department have an interest in putting a large figure on the settlement as it makes them look good to the public. Whether they gave Kleinman that figure and whether that figure is true or not, are two discrete matters. Even if it did come from a source within government, it doesn’t mean it’s true. What is certain is that it will unsettle other Subpostmasters who may be asking their legal teams why their claims are so low in comparison. One told me:

“I am struggling to believe Alan Bates’ claim was for £5 to 10 million. It’s common knowledge that his own losses were lower than most. This is going to cause ructions. I’m pleased for Alan. But what algorithm were they using for him? Not the one they use for everyone else, it seems.“

UPDATE: Sir Alan’s partner, Lady Suzanne Bates (or someone purporting to be her – Suzanne Sercombe is her unmarried name) has taken to social media to suggest Sky News’ source is has given Mr Kleinman a “stupidly inflated” figure.

---

The journalism on this blog is crowdfunded. If you would like to join the “secret email” newsletter, please consider making a one-off donation. The money is used to keep the contents of this website free. You will receive occasional, irregular but informative email updates about the Post Office Horizon IT scandal.