Gerry to Boost the Fund

Vaguely I am quite sure Gerry McCann's participation in this event was legal. The McCanns might be dismal when it comes to employing private detectives, but in legal matters they excel.
When the Fund was formed there were many people who donated thinking it was a charity whose sole purpose would be to search for Madeleine. When it slowly filtered out that it was in fact a company, people who complained were told they should have read the small print. Originally, the company had a board of directors to whom Kate and Gerry McCann were accountable, but that meagre safeguard has now disappeared, leaving the Fund totally in the hands of Kate and Gerry McCann, to do with as they wish.
If any credible search had ever taken place for Madeleine I would not have an issue with it, but I am of the opinion that the money has been frittered away and there are no safeguards in place to prevent any abuse. In fact, it is all so legally tied up in favour of the McCanns that it would be impossible for them to abuse it, if that makes any sense, and that is what I find offensive. It goes against the spirit of everything which raising and giving money to a worthy cause stands for and it is for that reason that I feel the public should be aware that their donations are, in reality, a monetary gift to Kate and Gerry McCann to spend on anything they wish.
To imply that the money is to search for Madeleine when at the last count, only 13% was spent on searching is misleading.

I go down the accounts list for the Fund which was submitted to Company House and see what all that money has been spent on, then I think how many children who are abused, starving etc could have been helped with that money, without it affecting the search for Madeleine, and I have to say, it makes me sick.

Excellent post Justagran but most likely lost on the apologists for the McCanns such as Vaguely [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Jesus, I could tell you about the boil on my arse and you'd think I was make an apologist statement for the McCanns.

Pointless entering any discussion really isn't it.

Nice modding. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kary, they're official charity - that doesn't mean that everyone that takes part has to raise on their behalf. It's not like the Race for Life where everyone running raises funds for the same charity. It's an event that has an official charity every year - just means that they get the publicity. There'll be people there riding for a zillion and one different causes, and some people riding just for themselves with not charitable element at all.

Vaguely wrote:Kary, they're official charity - that doesn't mean that everyone that
takes part has to raise on their behalf. It's not like the Race for
Life where everyone running raises funds for the same charity. It's an
event that has an official charity every year - just means that they get
the publicity. There'll be people there riding for a zillion and one
different causes, and some people riding just for themselves with not
charitable element at all.

Yes, I'm well aware of that Vaguely - but thank you for re-iterating it. Nevertheless, I'm sure that many of the charity fund raising cyclists would be somewhat irked at the thought of a company director using the event to generate income for his own company.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Which my original 'apologist' post was trying to assess - whether a not for profit company is allowed to do that.

I think the spirit of it got lost somewhat though.

From the brochure for this year's race (available [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for download as pdf):

"We are delighted to welcome Macmillan Cancer Support as the title partner and official charity of the Etape Caledonia 2010. Over 2,000 of you have signed up to raise money for Macmillan Cancer Support by taking part in the event. If you would still like to raise money for Macmillan Cancer Support but have not yet registered to do so please email [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Macmillan Cancer Support is thrilled to be involved once again in the Etape Caledonia. We would like to thank everyone who has joined Team Macmillan and pledged their support to helping improve the lives of people affected by cancer.

By taking part for Macmillan on 16 May, you’re helping us raise over £400,000. So thanks to every member of the team who will be helping us ensure people living with cancer have more good days.

Our team will be there for you on the big day, supporting you every step of the way. Come and see Team Macmillan in the registration zone on Friday and Saturday and in the competitor village on Sunday. We’ll be on hand to wish you good luck, say well done and offer you some well deserved refreshments in our charity marquee.

With your help we are able to help more people affected by cancer. We are very proud of our team. Thank you!

“We are absolutely delighted at the fantastic response we’ve had to the Macmillan Cancer Support Etape Caledonia. This is the second year we have been involved with the event and it’s more popular than ever. The money raised from everyone’s hard work will fund our vital cancer services, from specialist nurses and doctors, to benefits advice and grants for people who have financial problems because of their cancer.

“We are very grateful to the organisers of the event and to everyone who has signed up to tackle the 81-mile distance for Macmillan. Thank you and I wish all those taking part in this challenging event the best of luck on the day.” Director of Macmillan Cancer Support in Scotland, Elspeth Atkinson"

It really does sound as though the main focus of the event was to raise money for Macmillan. I would imagine that those fund raising riders who had not signed up with Macmillan, were probably raising funds for a different (possibly local) cancer charity. All IMHO. I also doubt if any "legalities" come into it.

That's why it's a worthwhile partnership for Macmillan - people blindly raise money for them, because it's made so easy to do. But looking around the net there are lots of people cycling for all different sorts of purposes. One that caught my eye was another non-charity fund, set up after a couples baby died shortly after birth. I hope they raised a lot of money. Macmillan is a hugely worthwhile charity, but they're one of the giants. It's good that little charities/funds can also benefit and as their administration costs will be a lot lower, the money will go directly to those in need.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


SKY are the title partner in this one. I already donate to them by direct debit for £40 a month.

Vaguely wrote:SKY are the title partner in this one. I already donate to them by
direct debit for £40 a month.

You're not the only one [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] - but it's not masquerading as a Charity.

Twittered a short while ago:

@[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] thx for yr tweet re etape/gerry mccann.
Hands up, I don't know the answer but will ask fundraising and let you
know what they say


36 minutes ago
via web

in reply to
GaeMar01

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

in reply to:

@[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]: can you investigate whether the
funds raised by Gerry [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
will go into his fund for McCann libel lawyers & PR


about 23 hours ago
via web



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(No, I'm not GaeMar01)

It makes my blood boil when I think about how the McCanns have sqandered away money kindly donated to them by well-meaning people, on legal fees to salvage what is left of their tarnished reputions. It is a crying shame when you think about the good use this money could have been put to such as helping abused and neglected children, as suggested by Justagran. If people were aware of how the money they had donated in good faith had been frittered away on legal fees, I'm sure they would be disappointed and angry that it had not been used for the purpose they had intended.

It's the equivalent of donating to Battersea Dog's Home and then being upset your money isn't being spent on starving African children.

If people hand money over to someone then it's their responsibility to look in to what it's likely to be used for. The McCanns website has always said the money can be used for financial assistance to the family. Which is posh for 'if you hand us money we'll spend it in the way we see fit'.

If that doesn't fit with what people are happy with then they're daft as a brush for sending money.

Has anybody ever dared ask the Mcanns for their money back? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I don't know anyone who donated, but I'm sure someone in forum land will have tried it.

I think this is all getting alittle out of proportion TBH.
Like vaguely has highlighted, this event will have had all sorts of people raising money for different causes.
Yes some will have been raising money for Macmillan, but many not.
All these people doing it for different reasons AND will have been sponsored by people they approached. Simply meaning that people giving money to Macmillian whether it be giving it to the woman collecting in the highstreet, or maybe by a monthly DD that this money hasn't gone to Gerry McCann.
You pay £56 fee to sign up, then it is up to you if you decide to join Team Macmillian, or do it independantly for other reasons/causes. You don't have to be a charity to do it.

Wasnt JailhouseLawyer supposed to be donating a penny to the fund and then going to claim it back or something? He was quite vocal on MM about what he was going to do but seems to have disappeared recently.

Vaguely wrote:If people hand money over to someone then it's their responsibility to
look in to what it's likely to be used for. The McCanns website has
always said the money can be used for financial assistance to the
family. Which is posh for 'if you hand us money we'll spend it in the
way we see fit'.

Yes, that's true for people who donate via the web. But a proportion (and I don't know the magnitude) of the income will be raised in situations where the Objectives of the Fund are not publicised. Possibly they should follow your lead and post your suggested wording 'if you hand us money we'll spend it in the
way we see fit' on any income generating scheme they come up with. Good suggestion, Vaguely [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Good idea Vaguely, I would be delighted to see that message on their website [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

How about "13 pence in every £1 donated will be used to search for Madeleine. The rest will be used to enhance the lifestyle of others" ?

I seem to recall that charities now have to reveal how much money donated actually goes to the reason for the charity and how much on other expenses. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why the Fund is not a charity. If the McCanns would make it clear in their appeals how much is spent on searching for Madeleine then I wouldn't have a problem with the Fund, but to expect people to dig around on the internet or pay to check the documents at Company House is a bit rich IMO.

My scepticism is not helped by the fact that, when the parents were not in total control of the Fund, Gerry complained about having all this money and being unable to pay for their lawyers out of it. With a director with an attitude like that now having absolute control of the Fund, is it really any wonder people such as myself are suspicious?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

@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.

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.

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.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Yesterday at 8:46 pmHas anybody ever dared ask the Mcanns
for their money back? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

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

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

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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
  

"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.