Post Office director steps back amid investigation into conduct

A Post Office director appointed to champion victims of the Horizon IT scandal has stepped back from the organisation's board amid an investigation into alleged misconduct.

Saf Ismail, a critic of Post Office management, said that he had temporarily given up his non-executive director duties at the scandal-hit service.

The investigation emerged as Mr Ismail described a "culture of fear" in the organisation and claimed he had separately been targeted by managers for asking difficult questions.

The inquiry heard that the ongoing investigation is not related to issues with the Post Office's faulty Horizon IT system , which led to the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of subpostmasters for fraud.

It comes as the Post Office inquiry enters its final stage, which will examine practice and procedures at the organisation plus executive pay.

Mr Ismail and Elliot Jacobs became the first subpostmasters to join the company's board in 2021 after being voted in by thousands of fellow branch operators.

They were elected to represent subpostmasters in the wake of the Horizon scandal in a move that Nick Read, chief executive of the Post Office , said would put "postmasters firmly at the heart of our business".

The appointment was part of the Post Office's efforts to demonstrate that it has "learned from past mistakes" and to reset its relationship with postmasters following the scandal.

However, in a witness statement submitted to the inquiry on Monday, Mr Ismail criticised Mr Read for being "very reactive and tactical, short-term and not sufficiently focused on the long-term sustainability" of the Post Office or its postmasters.

Mr Ismail – a subpostmaster who oversees seven branches across Lancashire and Greater Manchester – instead accused the Post Office's senior leaders of having an "unhealthy and unjustified obsession with bonuses and remuneration", despite postmasters not having a payrise in real terms since 2015.

He pointed to the number of collateral bonus deals for Post Office executives, including one bonus linked to the closure of the Post Office's Belfast data centres which he claimed cost the taxpayer £35m.

Mr Ismail said: "My considered opinion is that the executive tried to deliver this project at any cost to release bonuses. These arrangements reinforce loyalty to the bonus culture, rather than driving performance or positive behaviours."

He also claimed that Mr Read and other senior executives thought it was a "mistake" to bring subpostmasters on to the company's board. He claimed that senior figures felt the move should be reversed because the subpostmasters are "too challenging" and "ask awkward questions".

Mr Ismail said: "This contradicts the Post Office public position that postmaster non-executive director roles were created to bring operational rigour and to allow difficult conversations to be had at board level."

The Post Office had banned him from having direct contact with postmasters on social media, he claimed, for "reasons of brand and board confidentiality".

He also claimed that most board directors were not invited to "key meetings" that would benefit the business, such as those attended by Post Office suppliers or stakeholders.

The inquiry heard that Mr Ismail was not allowed to stand for reelection once his current term ended in June 2025, which he claimed was because he was "too challenging, inquisitive and ask too many awkward questions".

Mr Ismail's witness statement went on to describe a "culture of fear" at the Post Office and express concerns that his testimony may be held against him by those in power.

He said: "There remains a culture of fear in the organisation. I have become concerned myself upon being asked to provide evidence to this Inquiry and to the parliamentary select committee, having previously been declined applications to operate Post Office branches at several locations."

He also claimed that the Post Office's "excessively lenient" home working culture has led to "poor morale" as many staff refuse to come into the organisation's new office which allegedly lacks adequate meeting rooms and because of the inconvenience of booking lockers and desks daily.

The submissions echo claims made in leaked memos seen by The Sunday Times earlier this year, where non-executive director Mr Jacobs wrote that he and Mr Ismail "continue to be ignored and seen by many as an annoyance".

Mr Jacobs, who runs several post offices in London and Hertfordshire, also wrote of how "the culture that PMs [postmasters] are 'guilty' and 'on the take' is embedded in this company".

Mr Read last week announced his resignation from the Post Office and will step down in March. Interim chief operating officer Neil Brocklehurst will take over as acting chief executive while the Post Office searches for a permanent replacement.

Mr Read, who was appointed as chief executive in 2019, oversaw the £58m settlement to a group of 555 subpostmasters led by Sir Alan Bates.

However, claimants were said to have been left with only £20,000 each after paying lawyers and the litigation funders.

Saf Ismail was contacted for comment.

A Post Office spokesman said: "We never discuss individuals. We take allegations of misconduct seriously and these are thoroughly investigated through fair and established processes."

It emerged earlier this year that Mr Read faced an internal investigation over bullying allegations. He was later cleared of all misconduct claims in April.

Meanwhile, a new YouGov survey of 16,000 subpostmasters published on Monday found that issues with the Horizon IT system were still causing financial shortfalls on branch accounts.

The survey, commissioned by the Horizon inquiry, found that almost seven in 10 of subpostmasters had encountered "unexplained discrepancies" on the system since January 2020.

The research also highlighted that nearly half of surveyed applicants who applied to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) were still waiting for a compensation offer.

Former subpostmaster Sir Alan told The Telegraph: "I think the survey clearly shows that Horizon is still not fit for purpose, and as we have always said, it has never been fit for purpose."