• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
It must be noted that she used the charity's name in the application, but not the money, to build it.
Though this would indicate a mindset her and her spouse has towards the charity, in that they considered using something of the charity without the other trustee's knowledge or permission. Even using the name requires consent.
 
Being generous, I think it might've developed thus:
Tom Moore's efforts to raise money for the NHS - a valued institution - exceeded his expectations. What with all the publicity, and financial transaction laws, he couldn't just donate it all 'to the NHS', so relations set up a charity - with independent trustees - to administer the vast amount.
Now, expenses may be drawn on a charity's funds within reason, and have to be fully accounted and justified.
His daughter and son-in-law let the money go to their heads, and became accustomed to drawing 'expenses' from the charity. This spa/pool is a visual 'sign' of this attitude. As long as it is 'written down' as property of, and used by, the charity then they get their own personal spa.
Considering the charity - and the couple's involvement - are (IIRC) under investigation from the charity commission, might the local council decided to ask the other Trustees how this spa/pool was being used by the charity ... and they said "what spa?"

This is all speculation of course, but based on what I've heard and read.
 
Being generous, I think it might've developed thus:
Tom Moore's efforts to raise money for the NHS - a valued institution - exceeded his expectations. What with all the publicity, and financial transaction laws, he couldn't just donate it all 'to the NHS', so relations set up a charity - with independent trustees - to administer the vast amount.
Now, expenses may be drawn on a charity's funds within reason, and have to be fully accounted and justified.
His daughter and son-in-law let the money go to their heads, and became accustomed to drawing 'expenses' from the charity. This spa/pool is a visual 'sign' of this attitude. As long as it is 'written down' as property of, and used by, the charity then they get their own personal spa.
Considering the charity - and the couple's involvement - are (IIRC) under investigation from the charity commission, might the local council decided to ask the other Trustees how this spa/pool was being used by the charity ... and they said "what spa?"

This is all speculation of course, but based on what I've heard and read.
They had their fingers in the trough, it was the gift that kept giving and they couldn't resist the Charity Commission is all over this it's likely to prove very damaging to the charitable sector
 
Being generous, I think it might've developed thus:
Tom Moore's efforts to raise money for the NHS - a valued institution - exceeded his expectations. What with all the publicity, and financial transaction laws, he couldn't just donate it all 'to the NHS', so relations set up a charity - with independent trustees - to administer the vast amount.
Now, expenses may be drawn on a charity's funds within reason, and have to be fully accounted and justified.
His daughter and son-in-law let the money go to their heads, and became accustomed to drawing 'expenses' from the charity. This spa/pool is a visual 'sign' of this attitude. As long as it is 'written down' as property of, and used by, the charity then they get their own personal spa.
Considering the charity - and the couple's involvement - are (IIRC) under investigation from the charity commission, might the local council decided to ask the other Trustees how this spa/pool was being used by the charity ... and they said "what spa?"

This is all speculation of course, but based on what I've heard and read.
Being a Trustee of a charity sounds like a nice little cushy job, except that you can be held personally responsible if things go wrong, as some people I have known have found out. "We didn't know" doesn't hack it.
 
I was only aware of the media reports which said he did it "to raise money for the NHS". I suspect that was his initial intention.
So ... "his" charity raises money to donate into a pot that other charities draw upon? Each of those charities having it's own expenses, paid officers etc.
Hmmm.
 
I was only aware of the media reports which said he did it "to raise money for the NHS". I suspect that was his initial intention.
So ... "his" charity raises money to donate into a pot that other charities draw upon? Each of those charities having it's own expenses, paid officers etc.
Hmmm.
Yep - and when some charities pay their ceo's well into 6 figures, I suspect a good proportion of the money raised will be lost to those in need.
 
I think this counts as an attempted scam.

A regular customer of ours, a bit of a Walter Mitty character but okay generally, although nearly always drunk, came in the other night and took the trolley of food that was going out the back as 'waste'. (Much of our waste goes either to food charities or to the local zoo, but anyway, we aren't allowed to dispose of it - it has to go through official channels). He said that 'the guy with the trolley said I could take it for my animals.'

Fortunately 'the guy with the trolley' was on the headset saying that he'd told customer that he could PAY for the goods if he wanted them (they were all marked down for quick sale, but it was nearly closing time and nobody had bought them), but he was NOT going to get them for free. So I, when faced by a man with a full trolley of past sell by date sandwiches etc, had to tell him that he couldn't have them for nothing, even if they WERE going to waste.

He tried. Oh, he tried. Started telling me that 'the guy with the trolley had SAID...' then moved on to 'they're only going to be thrown out otherwise...' I wasn't budging because we are legally not allowed to give food away unless it's to authorised charities, and even then only food that has had to be removed because of 'best before' dates. Once something has reached its sell by date it cannot be sold because someone could eat it, get food poisoning and then sue us.

At one point I thought he was just going to take the trolley and make a run for it.
 
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! well done you!
It was mostly annoying because I wish we could virtually give away all this short dated food. Reduce it all to 20p and have it gone rather than have to waste it off. But we can't, mostly because all our customers would refuse to buy anything, wait until it all reduced to 20p and then mob the shop in the last 20 minutes of opening.

Plus, you know, food safety and all that.
 
It was mostly annoying because I wish we could virtually give away all this short dated food. Reduce it all to 20p and have it gone rather than have to waste it off. But we can't, mostly because all our customers would refuse to buy anything, wait until it all reduced to 20p and then mob the shop in the last 20 minutes of opening.

Plus, you know, food safety and all that.
I got some lovely Warburtons soft pittas for 19p a pack a few weeks ago, but it wasn't late on in the day. Mid afternoon.
 
I got some lovely Warburtons soft pittas for 19p a pack a few weeks ago, but it wasn't late on in the day. Mid afternoon.
Two lots of reductions, three o clocks and six o clocks. If you come in around those times* you can get quite a decent choice of stuff, depending on what's in. After nine o clock, it's all taken off to waste.

*Only you can't, because I lock the cupboard door when I'm out. I know what you're like.
 
I think this counts as an attempted scam.

A regular customer of ours, a bit of a Walter Mitty character but okay generally, although nearly always drunk, came in the other night and took the trolley of food that was going out the back as 'waste'. (Much of our waste goes either to food charities or to the local zoo, but anyway, we aren't allowed to dispose of it - it has to go through official channels). He said that 'the guy with the trolley said I could take it for my animals.'

Fortunately 'the guy with the trolley' was on the headset saying that he'd told customer that he could PAY for the goods if he wanted them (they were all marked down for quick sale, but it was nearly closing time and nobody had bought them), but he was NOT going to get them for free. So I, when faced by a man with a full trolley of past sell by date sandwiches etc, had to tell him that he couldn't have them for nothing, even if they WERE going to waste.

He tried. Oh, he tried. Started telling me that 'the guy with the trolley had SAID...' then moved on to 'they're only going to be thrown out otherwise...' I wasn't budging because we are legally not allowed to give food away unless it's to authorised charities, and even then only food that has had to be removed because of 'best before' dates. Once something has reached its sell by date it cannot be sold because someone could eat it, get food poisoning and then sue us.

At one point I thought he was just going to take the trolley and make a run for it.
I saw something similar in Lidls a couple of weeks ago. This persistent woman was trying to convince a young staffer to give her the reduced food the lass was taking off the shelves as "it would all go to waste and she ran a charity that would use it" She was very persistent and put quite a lot of pressure on the staff and appealed to her customers saying things like " Lidls alway let me have this stuff, just from outside" A manager intervened and told her quite firmly that they were not allowed to give food away inside the store. She left with very bad grace.
 
I saw something similar in Lidls a couple of weeks ago. This persistent woman was trying to convince a young staffer to give her the reduced food the lass was taking off the shelves as "it would all go to waste and she ran a charity that would use it" She was very persistent and put quite a lot of pressure on the staff and appealed to her customers saying things like " Lidls alway let me have this stuff, just from outside" A manager intervened and told her quite firmly that they were not allowed to give food away inside the store. She left with very bad grace.

Stores often have arrangements with food banks/charities to donate food to them. they would however meet with managers and provide proof of identity beforehand, not act in this ad hoc manner.
 
Stores often have arrangements with food banks/charities to donate food to them. they would however meet with managers and provide proof of identity beforehand, not act in this ad hoc manner.
We donate to the local food bank - but there are a number of provisos and legal things that must be in place. Certain things can't be donated, it can only be taken by an authorised person who shows identification on arrival. Otherwise anybody could come in and say they worked for a charity, and could we give them all our stuff free...

The only things that don't need to be legally checked off is the waste that goes to the local zoo, because it's not for human consumption. It still needs to go through the books though.
 
Being generous, I think it might've developed thus:
Tom Moore's efforts to raise money for the NHS - a valued institution - exceeded his expectations. What with all the publicity, and financial transaction laws, he couldn't just donate it all 'to the NHS', so relations set up a charity - with independent trustees - to administer the vast amount.
Now, expenses may be drawn on a charity's funds within reason, and have to be fully accounted and justified.
His daughter and son-in-law let the money go to their heads, and became accustomed to drawing 'expenses' from the charity. This spa/pool is a visual 'sign' of this attitude. As long as it is 'written down' as property of, and used by, the charity then they get their own personal spa.
Considering the charity - and the couple's involvement - are (IIRC) under investigation from the charity commission, might the local council decided to ask the other Trustees how this spa/pool was being used by the charity ... and they said "what spa?"

This is all speculation of course, but based on what I've heard and read.
As I remember it, they're paying for the spa and pool with their own money. The only time they 'used' the charity was on the planning application.
 
I know. But they needed to get permission from the other Trustees to use the charity's name. They wanted to imply it was the charity's property (for it's use), but I suspect it'd be for personal use if they didn't let the charity know.
 
From this excellent book:
Hustlers and Con Men: An Anecdotal History of the Confidence Man and His Games
Jay Robert Nash

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show...en?from_search=true&from_srp=UjokA8DvhD&qid=3

A man named Perkins in the early 1800s sold, through the mails, two shiny rods he called Metallic Tractors, which would be passed over the ailing victims and redirect his “electrical” currents in a manner that would cure him of any disease. Perkins came to believe so intrinsically in his own swindle that, upon contracting yellow fever, he disdained all medical attention; his Metallic Tractors would do the job. For three days cronies passed the rods from his head to his toes. Then he died.
 
Its same in the charity shops you find that most of them volunteer, yet the executives sit in the plush offices taking nearly a million a year, or rounderbout that, for what? He basically gets a secretary to do all the books and paperworkfor him no doubt.
 
Its same in the charity shops you find that most of them volunteer, yet the executives sit in the plush offices taking nearly a million a year, or rounderbout that, for what? He basically gets a secretary to do all the books and paperworkfor him no doubt.
^this^ I recently found out that a branch of a secondhand store runs like this, and most likely its whole corporation. The store manager or whatever the position is has people, both employees and volunteers in tears. And they are made to make quotas for what they are selling. Someone I know just quit from it because of the questionable practices. I'm now telling people not to donate nor purchase from it.
 
Wheee!
I'VE HIT THE BIG TIME!
I've had an email, inviting me to be a member of the ILLUMINATI!

Greetings, from the illuminati world elite empire, Are you a business Man/woman,
politician, musician, student, footballer,salary earner.
Do you want to be rich, need protection, gain more knowledge, be powerful and famous.
if YES!. Then you can achieve your dreams by being a member of the great illuminati empire,
Once you are a member all your dreams and heart desire can be fully accomplish.
With this brief summary, If you are interested to become a member of the great illuminati then
get back to us for more information about joining the illuminati.
kindly reply us back on our direct recruitment email only at: [email protected]
Please note, Kindly make sure all your response are send directly to the email stated above only at: [email protected]
For more instructions on our membership process.
Note: Some email providers incorrectly place official Illuminati messages in their spam / junk folder or promotion folder.
This can divert and exclude our responses to your emails.
The Illuminati..

Must be legit. I've highlighted where it points out that it's incorrect to put their emails into spam/junk!
 
Wheee!
I'VE HIT THE BIG TIME!
I've had an email, inviting me to be a member of the ILLUMINATI!



Must be legit. I've highlighted where it points out that it's incorrect to put their emails into spam/junk!
Did they also tell you about the 'admin fee' they want you to pay before they can pay you a shed-load of money?
 
I didn't dare reply. I'm sure it was a mistake and they meant some other "Dear INFO@ ..."
 
Back
Top