The former master subpostes Lee Castleton launches a legal action against the post office and Fujitsu, becoming the first individual victim of the computer scandal to continue the two organizations.
His case is one of the highest levels of the scandal in which hundreds of sub-maids were wrongly sentenced after defective software said that money lacked their branch accounts.
Mr. Castleton requests compensation, alleging that civil judgment against him was obtained by fraud.
“I want justice and to be publicly confirmed,” Castleton told BBC. The post office and Fujitsu were approached for comments.
Tuesday, Mr. Castleton asked his lawyers, Simons Muirhead Burton, to issue procedures for the high court against the post office and Fujitsu on behalf.
While other victims have seen their convictions canceled, Mr. Castleton’s civil judgment against him is still standing. His legal action is to cancel or cancel the judgment.
“I would also like to have my day in court,” said Castleton who is expected to receive his OBE next month.
He told the BBC that he had little confidence in the compensation plans that the post office had set up to compensate the unjustly convicted subposters that he wanted rather that his case was heard before the court.
Mr. Castleton never started the remuneration regime process, although he received an interim payment.
He said he also wanted to take action to help other victims to fight for their compensation.
In 2007, Mr. Castleton lost a two -year legal battle against the post office after he continued it to recover £ 25,000 in cash which, according to him, lacked Bridlington in the East Yorkshire.
When his legal insurance was exhausted, Mr. Castleton had to stand out in court and was landed with an invoice of £ 321,000 in legal expenses that he could not pay and declared bankruptcy.
“We now know about the investigation of the post office that they wanted to make an example of me,” he said.
“Lee faced a battle of David against Goliath against the post office and we are entirely ready to take this to the high court in case,” said his lawyer Simon Goldberg.
During the public inquiry, it appeared that the Journal of Fujitsu’s known errors was not disclosed to Mr. Castleton during his legal proceedings.
The request to the Court in Lee’s case will say that the post office, conspired with others, refused evidence on the lack of reliability of the Horizon system. A Fujitsu witness also testified in his case.
“What we are going to say actually is that the claim against his was an abuse of process. It was never a question of recovering the sum of money – it was to make an example of Mr. Castleton,” said Goldberg.
“We also think that the judgment was obtained by fraud insofar as the post office and Fujitsu knew perfectly well that the Horizon system did not work properly,” he added.
