Re: Gerry to Boost the Fund

vaguely1 on Mon May 17, 2010 8:23 am

The fund is not a charity (as far as I can tell) because it's beneficiary is a single child - therefore in the same way as when desperate parents try to raise money to send their children to American/A N Other country for medical treatment, they are not allowed to call that fund a charity. It has nothing to do with how much in the pound goes towards that aim - a lot of charities, especially the larger ones have vast overheads and a shockingly low amount of your donated money actually goes towards helping the beneficiaries directly.

If it makes people feel better to rat out these types of fund raisers then I could pass on the details of individuals who are raising money for their own children's medical care and that type of thing, make sure that they aren't able to use these events to do as such? Keep it open just for the big boys to capitalise on peoples generosity.

kary on Mon May 17, 2010 8:49 am

Vaguely wrote:a lot of charities, especially the larger ones have vast overheads and a
shockingly low amount of your donated money actually goes towards
helping the beneficiaries directly.

There are huge numbers of small CHARITIES - all complying with the requirements of charity registration - which are every bit as worthy as the big ones. Fund raising to benefit named individuals may be more precarious and potential donors do need to satisfy themselves that the cause is a true one. Fraudulent cases have been reported.

Kololi on Mon May 17, 2010 8:49 am

Hi
I think about some of the things that the McCanns have said and wonder if they believe that some of the amounts of money others might oggle at are being justifiably spent in the search for Madeleine.

The very expensive to create website could be argued as a means to a way of searching because it keeps her profile high for the many people who use the website. It provides us with age enhanced images so that we have a face to keep an eye out for as we go about our business or out on our Madeleine searching trips. It advertises fund raising that the McCanns may be involved with so that we can donate. Another set of parents may have set up a cheaper but just as useful website for this purpose of course.

A business will have overheads that have to be paid in order for the business to go about its "business" which in this case is finding Madeleine. They can argue that wages, electric, stationary costs, telephone charges, etc etc are necessary costs for the work involved in the search for Madeleine. Could part of their mortgage payments be legally made now from the fund as Mrs McCann works from home on the search for Madeleine? One would naturally think that they do what they do from their heart regardless of whether it puts extra on their telephone bill or not, but arguably it is a business so I am guessing that they have the right to claim the costs of these things.

The legal bills can be justified if you think on their words that while people believe that she is dead they will not search for her. It was necessary therefore, to pay to stop Goncalo and perhaps anybody else dead in their tracks from declaring their belief that Madeleine might be dead so that the search can continue unhindered. Whether you and I think it is more likely that they are paying to cover their own bottoms doesn't matter because we do not sit on their Trustee Board and so have no control over their fund purse strings, but, put the McCann way, those costs become necessary in the search for their daughter.

Trips abroad cost money but if they raise awareness of their daughter's plight it can only serve to better the search for her. Afterall, the Pope has a damn good chance of bumping into the nasty man who snatched her, yes? Their return argument to my sarcasm would probably be that the filming of their trip to the Pope was hugely publicised and therefore raised the public awareness of their missing daughter and meant many millions more would know her face and be able to call them should she be spotted somewhere.

I am guessing that as long as the hole in the McCanns' bottoms points downward they will believe that they are doing right by their daughter. They will see things from one perspective while we see it from another. To some ordinary folk like us their behaviour and integrity is sometimes in question. I am not even sure if they asked Mr Bennet and Ms Butler to sit as guardians of the fund whether it would make me believe all that they have said and change my mind on my guess as to what might have happened to Madeleine that night. It might sit more comfortably with me that they actually would not have a free hand to spend that money how they wished without question but that is about it I am afraid. I suppose the best we can do if we feel that their use of the fund is not as it should be is to not donate to it. At least that way it isn't our personal money being spent in a way that we feel is not appropriate in a search for a missing child.

justagrannynow 1 on Mon May 17, 2010 9:28 am

Vaguely, as far as I am aware, the Fund is not a large organisation with vast overheads. The parents are the only two directors and Kate works from home, so there is no comparison between their situation and a large charity with all sorts of overheads. Also, to describe the Fund as a not for profit company, although correct, is misleading. True, the company does not make a profit, but a large number of people profit from the Fund, and right at the back of the queue is Madeleine McCann.
We are led to believe that the online shop is run by a young man and his father from their garage. Now if these two willing helpers can put that much effort into helping Madeleine, does 87 pence in every pound really need to be spent on individuals and incidentals who, to me, appear to be doing very nicely out of it, thank-you.

I accept that if people donate to anything without doing some checking they are being irresponsible to themselves, but equally,as long as Kate and Gerry McCann continue to plead for funds, I think they also have a responsibility to enlighten the public, via their website and advertising, what the donations are being spent on. Is that too much to expect?

baconbutty on Mon May 17, 2010 9:51 am

The organisers were quite willing to accommodate other charities apart from their designated one. But Gerry McCann knows full well that his fund is NOT a charity.
I'm sure that all participants would have been required to read the rules and regs before taking part and therefore ignorance is no excuse.

We constantly get clothes collection leaflets through our door, and I always check to see if they have a charity registration number. Many of them don't (just a company number) and they get nothing from us. But when you see all the bags down the street, it's amazing how many people are fooled by these leaflets.
Local government websites often issue warnings about these scams which are nice little earners for the perpetrators. The sadness is that they are robbing bona fide charities of income.
IMO, what Gerry McCann has done is on a par with these scallies.

vaguely1 on Mon May 17, 2010 10:33 am

@JAG, not too much to expect at all. Absolutely reasonable.

But I tend to agree with Kololi that if you don't agree with it don't donate to it.

I'm also of the mind that altruistically worrying about other people donating the odd quid here or there is a burden that comes under the 'life's too short' banner for me.

Autumn on Mon May 17, 2010 11:56 am

You are so right Vaguely. Why should we be concerned about thousands of people, many of them pensioners, unemployed, sick and children who sold their toys and baked cakes in the misguided belief that the money they donated would be used to search for Madeleine? I suggest, rather than waste your precious time worrying about others, you devote your attention to more important matters such as that nasty boil on your bum. Meanwhile, there are 2 rather nasty boils on the face of humantity that need to be kept an eye on as the infection is continuing to spread causing mass sightings of 'our maddie', 'blurry, spotty, swarthy abductors' and an outbreak of of McCann begging bowls.

vaguely1 on Mon May 17, 2010 1:07 pm

thousands of people,... pensioners, unemployed, the sick, and children selling their toys.

These are people who should they choose to STILL support the McCann family you write off as misguided McCann apologists.

justagrannynow 1 on Mon May 17, 2010 3:11 pm

Re: Gerry to Boost the Fund

Judge Mental
Yesterday at 8:46 pmHas anybody ever dared ask the Mcanns
for their money back?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I remember reading many complaints on the old 3As, but have managed to find this

http://mccannfundfraud.info/2008/12/disgruntled-donor-was-duped/

Disgruntled Donor Was Duped

Today we received a message to the website from “Helen W”
Her email details are being withheld for privacy.
Here is her message;

Hi, I paid by PayPal on 21st May 2007. On news reports
the Fund had been described as a charity. Also in the event of Madeleine
being found alive or otherwise, the money would help other missing
children.
I would not have donated if I had had any thoughts that Fund money
would be used towards mortgage payments or private investigaters, in
view of the fact the McC’s have not fully co-operated with the
PJ/police.
£10.00 was not a lot but I had intended to give monthly that ammount.
Luckily I became aware of Sky and Mirror forums where I learnt there
was more to the Case than first thought….
I will do whatever I can to help towards justice for Madeleine or to
show up thie Charade for what it is

One Response to “Disgruntled Donor Was Duped”

IRONSIDE Says:

July
3rd, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Found this on one of the old reports from September 2007….Seems
Mcvey is a liar just like her friends Mccanns….
Numerous angry postings from people who claim to have donated to the
fund have appeared on the internet. “I made a donation to the charity
set up to help find that poor child,” one message on a legal discussion
website said. “I now understand that the fund may be used to pay for the
defence if the parents are prosecuted. Am I entitled to get my money
back?”
But last night Mrs McVey, a public relations professional, said: “I
have not personally been asked by anyone for their money back.”
Have your say
Mrs McVey, not only myself but others who have done a lot of fund
raising to raise money for this fund, have all asked for our money back.

I am in contact with loads of people, and i know that they have also
contacted you over return of donations.
j, rothley, leicestershire

vaguely1 on Mon May 17, 2010 3:28 pm

"not only myself but others who have done a lot of fund
raising to raise money for this fund, have all asked for our money back."

Which is an interesting proposition. If the person above fund raised then the money was donated by other people. If you collect money for a cause, then you can't ask for a refund, because the money is never yours to refund and was given to you for a specific cause....

I wonder what they'd have done with their collection if they had received it back.