Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
"
They added it onto the £350 mil a week the NHS is getting since Brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
They added it onto the £350 mil a week the NHS is getting since Brexit. "
Wonderful...maybe he should have done a few more laps rather than jetting off to Jamica or wherever he went on 1st class with his family. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can't begrudge him a nice holiday, he deserved it.
It was a very heart warming story although I am of the opinion that I would rather he raised money for a different cause/charity.
"
Which charity would you suggest |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *ty31Man 50 weeks ago
NW London |
"Can't begrudge him a nice holiday, he deserved it.
It was a very heart warming story although I am of the opinion that I would rather he raised money for a different cause/charity.
Which charity would you suggest "
I wouldn't as charities are very personal things. I just think that another charity would of benefited more from such an amount. Plus a lot of smaller charities lost out on donations due to people giving to Captain Tom |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ohn KanakaMan 50 weeks ago
Not all that North of North London |
The vast amount of money he raised with his walk went straight to the NHS didn't it?
I thought the dodgy affairs were linked to endorsemenrs/cashins/dodgy charity set up by has family when they realised his image abd name presented a huge money making opportunity |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can't begrudge him a nice holiday, he deserved it.
It was a very heart warming story although I am of the opinion that I would rather he raised money for a different cause/charity.
Which charity would you suggest "
Anything administered by Rishi and his wife should be safe as it will get the closest public scrutiny! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 50 weeks ago
|
The Charity Commission launched an inquiry in June last year after becoming concerned about arrangements between the charity and a company linked to Sir Tom's daughter, Hannah Ingram-Moore, and her husband Colin.
No idea if they have published the outcome of their investigation.
The money raised for the NHS, which was donated to NHS Charities Together, was not part of the scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ohn KanakaMan 50 weeks ago
Not all that North of North London |
"The Charity Commission launched an inquiry in June last year after becoming concerned about arrangements between the charity and a company linked to Sir Tom's daughter, Hannah Ingram-Moore, and her husband Colin.
No idea if they have published the outcome of their investigation.
The money raised for the NHS, which was donated to NHS Charities Together, was not part of the scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry."
They also goy involved when the charity tried tp appount hos daughter as CEO on a £100k plus salary |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 50 weeks ago
|
If I remember correctly the issue raised about them was the excessive salaries and expenses the family paid themselves out of the money raised.
All charities accounts are publicly accessible so if anyone’s interested you should be able access them online through companies house.
Unfortunately although morally wrong it’s unlikely they broke any laws. They rules around salaries and expenses within charities are limited and only a small percentage of money raised has to actually go to good causes.
I didn’t keep up with the story so I can’t say what happened after, but I would say it’s highly likely absolutely nothing and the family enjoyed spending all the money they creamed off the donations from good meaning people
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ohn KanakaMan 50 weeks ago
Not all that North of North London |
"If I remember correctly the issue raised about them was the excessive salaries and expenses the family paid themselves out of the money raised.
All charities accounts are publicly accessible so if anyone’s interested you should be able access them online through companies house.
Unfortunately although morally wrong it’s unlikely they broke any laws. They rules around salaries and expenses within charities are limited and only a small percentage of money raised has to actually go to good causes.
I didn’t keep up with the story so I can’t say what happened after, but I would say it’s highly likely absolutely nothing and the family enjoyed spending all the money they creamed off the donations from good meaning people
"
The family were in it for what they could get. They created a company and registered him and his image as trademarks before registering the charity meaning anything from the charity with his image on it would pay them a fee.
My guess is that given the millions he raised went to the NHS and that his story and image only had a very short shelf life, the million or 2 raised after his death is sitting in the charities coffers while his family try and find a way to get their hands on it. They should have followed the lead of the McCanns and called it a charity without formally registering as one so yoy can use the donations as you please, even to pay the mortgage |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 50 weeks ago
|
"
The family were in it for what they could get. They created a company and registered him and his image as trademarks before registering the charity meaning anything from the charity with his image on it would pay them a fee.
My guess is that given the millions he raised went to the NHS and that his story and image only had a very short shelf life, the million or 2 raised after his death is sitting in the charities coffers while his family try and find a way to get their hands on it. They should have followed the lead of the McCanns and called it a charity without formally registering as one so yoy can use the donations as you please, even to pay the mortgage"
Wow they really milked it then.
I would imagine a good accountant will help them cream of most the the money.
Don’t quote me on this but I think a charity only have to donate something like 10% of the donations to be called a charity |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The money that he raised was thankfully donated to NHS charities together which then distributed the funds to various causes mostly related to the elderly. It’s what happened next that’s being investigated as the “foundation” raised a million quid of which 250k went in costs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities. "
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Although i applaud him doing what he did as it was done with the best intention the sight of a old man who'd already given so much for this country walking around his garden to raise funds for the NHS ?? did 100% sum up all that's wrong wit this country ?? ( where the people's billionaire sued the NHS and walked away with £20 million) but i understand his daughter did rather well out of it and is or was being investigated by the charities commision ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities.
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free. "
So.. Rather employ another ceo at 100k than his daughter is that the point? Theres some bitter folks on here |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities.
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free.
So.. Rather employ another ceo at 100k than his daughter is that the point? Theres some bitter folks on here "
What’s bitter about it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ohn KanakaMan 50 weeks ago
Not all that North of North London |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities.
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free.
So.. Rather employ another ceo at 100k than his daughter is that the point? Theres some bitter folks on here "
I'm pretty sure market rate for a CEO of a charity of that size (barely any staff, an income of less than £1million) is not £100k.
The charity is tiny. Interestingly after trying to appoint the daughter initially on a part tine salary of £60k and then a full time salary of £100k despite her having never previously worked in the charity sector and having never advertised the position of CEO it appears the charity no longer requires a CEO.
The trustees are similarly not linked to any other charities but their names suggest a close link to Captain Tom.
The charity has paid out more in costs than it has grants and is sitting on £700k.
If the daughter had taken 2 years salary that would be almost 30% of the charity's assets which is a ridiculous amount.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities.
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free.
So.. Rather employ another ceo at 100k than his daughter is that the point? Theres some bitter folks on here
I'm pretty sure market rate for a CEO of a charity of that size (barely any staff, an income of less than £1million) is not £100k.
The charity is tiny. Interestingly after trying to appoint the daughter initially on a part tine salary of £60k and then a full time salary of £100k despite her having never previously worked in the charity sector and having never advertised the position of CEO it appears the charity no longer requires a CEO.
The trustees are similarly not linked to any other charities but their names suggest a close link to Captain Tom.
The charity has paid out more in costs than it has grants and is sitting on £700k.
If the daughter had taken 2 years salary that would be almost 30% of the charity's assets which is a ridiculous amount.
"
Have a read of the link i posted. That shows going rates. And yes. It is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ohn KanakaMan 50 weeks ago
Not all that North of North London |
"Yes its well established that people are prepared to work for free and that there are no costs for running charities.
That’s not really what the issue is. The issue is that rather than the foundation having his name and likeness trademarked the daughter set up a company and did it herself, therefore making the charitable foundation liable for fees to use his name. Then the foundation was going to pay her £100k a year as an employee. Obviously that creates a potential conflict of interest
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that a charity runs for free.
So.. Rather employ another ceo at 100k than his daughter is that the point? Theres some bitter folks on here
I'm pretty sure market rate for a CEO of a charity of that size (barely any staff, an income of less than £1million) is not £100k.
The charity is tiny. Interestingly after trying to appoint the daughter initially on a part tine salary of £60k and then a full time salary of £100k despite her having never previously worked in the charity sector and having never advertised the position of CEO it appears the charity no longer requires a CEO.
The trustees are similarly not linked to any other charities but their names suggest a close link to Captain Tom.
The charity has paid out more in costs than it has grants and is sitting on £700k.
If the daughter had taken 2 years salary that would be almost 30% of the charity's assets which is a ridiculous amount.
Have a read of the link i posted. That shows going rates. And yes. It is. "
It really isn't.
Those figures clearly show only a handful of charities pat £100k salaries and they are huge organisations like the NSPCC, CRUK, The National Trust, British heart foundation etc
And look at the right hand column detailing salary as a percentage of every £1000 income, they are almost all in the low single figures. Fir Captain Tom it would have been in the region of 15% way higher than others on a similar salary and way higher than almost every charity.
So however you look at it. In pure numbers or as a percentage the proposed salary was disproportionately high.
Or am I reading your figures wrong?
The inly way that salary was valid was if they were dealing with the £38 million he raised and had that been the case entrusting the charity to a CEO with no relevant experience and a group of trustee's with no experience would have been a ridiculous proposal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
"
a friend of mine works in the NHS. Shortly after that money was raised, each person in their team was given a very cheap plastic water bottle, a teabag, pen and sticker….. kindly paid for by Captain Tom funds!
Yes, the items wouldn’t have cost much, but those items was given to everyone in the trust - 4,500 people!!! The NHS absolutely loves wasting money. It certainly doesn’t need more money, it needs people to be held accountable to what they waste/spend!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
a friend of mine works in the NHS. Shortly after that money was raised, each person in their team was given a very cheap plastic water bottle, a teabag, pen and sticker….. kindly paid for by Captain Tom funds!
Yes, the items wouldn’t have cost much, but those items was given to everyone in the trust - 4,500 people!!! The NHS absolutely loves wasting money. It certainly doesn’t need more money, it needs people to be held accountable to what they waste/spend!!!"
But these things were paid for by the charity not the NHS. Of course an organization the size of the NHS will have waste. How do you try and cut that down more bureaucrats and managers which are deeply unpopular with most of the population.If we want anything like the health care we have now in the future we will all have to pay more be that tax for the NHS or private health insurance. We as the UK we want western Europe quality public services but we only want to pay US level taxes. You can't have both. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any news whats happened to the £50m+ that was donted to Capt Moore?
Was it meant to help the nhs and go to good causes?
Is this one of the many scams that people took advantage of because of the virus?
Alot of people got rich on the back of covid.
a friend of mine works in the NHS. Shortly after that money was raised, each person in their team was given a very cheap plastic water bottle, a teabag, pen and sticker….. kindly paid for by Captain Tom funds!
Yes, the items wouldn’t have cost much, but those items was given to everyone in the trust - 4,500 people!!! The NHS absolutely loves wasting money. It certainly doesn’t need more money, it needs people to be held accountable to what they waste/spend!!!
But these things were paid for by the charity not the NHS. Of course an organization the size of the NHS will have waste. How do you try and cut that down more bureaucrats and managers which are deeply unpopular with most of the population.If we want anything like the health care we have now in the future we will all have to pay more be that tax for the NHS or private health insurance. We as the UK we want western Europe quality public services but we only want to pay US level taxes. You can't have both."
Exactly this! Can I pay really low taxes and have an amazing health care system please? Of course not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh god yes all our mps made a fortune plus bill gates made 50billion and the pharmaceutical companies made millions !! "
So you want our MP’s, Bill Gates (an American) and pharma companies (private and not all based in the UK) to fund our NHS?
How would that work? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
