Another charity misappropriating funds

foxy farmer · 30-07-2017 05:46PM #1

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/hse-gave-over-1m-to-charity-which-paid-84000-to-ceos-parents-799976.html

They say charity begins at home. This is taking it a bit far though. Can people abide by a code of ethics at all anymore? Daughter diverts charity funds to top up Mammy and Daddys pension. Im of the belief that many of these heads of charities ' moral compass is seriously out of sync with the real world. Fair enough they founded the charity but are they entitled to a under the counter payout?

bodhrandude · 30-07-2017 06:15PM

How do you know though and how can you tell this report is true.

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-07-2017 06:16PM

This post has been deleted.

ED E · 30-07-2017 06:17PM

The HSE and the CRA are pretty strong sources.

Owryan · 30-07-2017 06:18PM

Well it is based on the allegations of a whistleblower who has left and set up his own support group. The hse investigated and what they found let them to report the charity to the regulator.

The regulator carried out their own investigation which uncovered the reported actions and abuse of charity funds. So it would appear to be legit

bodhrandude · 30-07-2017 06:28PM

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Dunno just bored I suppose.

Mrs OBumble · 30-07-2017 06:31PM

bodhrandude wrote: »

How do you know though and how can you tell this report is true.

This statement currently on the front of their website is a good hint:

Also, Friedreichs Ataxia is one of the brands used by the dodgy-looking lads who collect in the street. I would be surprised if there's not more dirt to do with this organisation.

Fr_Dougal · 30-07-2017 06:31PM

There's more to come.

There's a reason David Hall and three fellow directors stood down from Bumbulence

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/david-hall-cctv-shows-no-theft-in-bumbleance-352376.html

30-07-2017 06:33PM

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

There's more to come.

There's a reason David Hall and three fellow directors stood down from Bumbulence

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/david-hall-cctv-shows-no-theft-in-bumbleance-352376.html

Well I've never wanted to mention it for fear of pissing all over one of the most positive threads on this website, but does anyone know if there was any further light shed on this? It would be good to have some resolution, and hopefully a reassuring one.

30-07-2017 06:43PM

Please don't tar all charities with the same brush. Some collect millions without expensive CEOs or fees. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/after-raising-4m-cystic-fibrosis-charity-says-it-needs-no-more-money-448444.html

Fr_Dougal · 30-07-2017 06:51PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Well I've never wanted to mention it for fear of pissing all over one of the most positive threads on this website, but does anyone know if there was any further light shed on this? It would be good to have some resolution, and hopefully a reassuring one.

I'm not sure. But David Hall was called in to run Console when the poop hit the fan, he has an impeccable reputation. If felt it was bad enough to stand down and report them, you can be sure that something was amiss.

Hotblack Desiato · 30-07-2017 06:54PM

The Irish charity sector is rotten to the core. By no means all of them are dodgy, but far too many are, or are vanity projects/ego trips for the founders. Far too many of them duplicate each others' work, which means more money wasted in admin etc.

What's worse is some of them get most of their money from taxes. So we don't get a choice whether we "donate" to them or not. Many of these services e.g. for the disabled should be state services, instead the taxpayer gets less accountability and the service users are belittled by being left dependent upon charity instead of a rights based approach.

Nekarsulm · 30-07-2017 07:40PM

There are often dodgy looking "charities " collecting on the streets of Cavan town.
This was last Wednesdays "Professional" looking set-up, parked outside Tesco's.
Had a few middle-aged ladies shaking buckets at the street junctions.

http://i.imgur.com/IplFej4.jpg

TheQuietFella · 30-07-2017 07:45PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Please don't tar all charities with the same brush. Some collect millions without expensive CEOs or fees. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/after-raising-4m-cystic-fibrosis-charity-says-it-needs-no-more-money-448444.html

Unfortunately in my mind they have become tarred with the one brush and to

be honest I wouldn't donate to a charity if it bought my way in to heaven!

Heaven for the climate, hell for the company!

_Brian · 30-07-2017 08:09PM

The thing that worries me is I could go out in tieronimg and set up a charity supporting say suicide families.
Get the ball rollong get feet on the ground collecting money, look for volunteer councillors and start paying myself serious cash because I'm the CEO of a charity.
Someone mentioned before that there is serious duplication and this is a waste of whatever money is being given by the public and tax payer.

Really charities shouldn't be given status if there is already a similar charity operating in the sector. How many suicide awareness or cancer charities does a small country need??

I find it suspicious at best.

The charities regulator should have the power to force amalgamation in the industries and ceo's eliminated from the payroll to save money.

Richard Hillman · 30-07-2017 08:17PM

To be honest I would tar a majority of the major charities as dodgy.

_Brian · 30-07-2017 08:23PM

Another thing.

See the charity shops that have sprung up about.

Many of these are set up by private individuals and they stick up the name of the charity above the door. Often the charity receives the " profits" from the shop.

Now, profits is after the person pays themselves. I'm aware of a person running three of these shops and paying themselves handsomely. The charity receives about a quarter of what the owner is receiving. And the shops are staffed by CE workers so there's no wages only the owner.

One charity is two years trying to get their name removed from above the shop but the owner refuses.

Hector Bellend · 30-07-2017 09:55PM

nice bit of an aul misappropration

30-07-2017 10:19PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

What's worse is some of them get most of their money from taxes. So we don't get a choice whether we "donate" to them or not. Many of these services e.g. for the disabled should be state services

I'll probably be accused of being some right-wing ideologue for this (I'm certainly not), but the outsourcing of social supports to genuine charities is a fantastic exercise in efficiency. It combines the competitive tendering process with a social conscience, along with knowledge on the ground.

I was in favour of statutory replacements for all of the main charity services, until I volunteered in one of them and discovered how they operate. They cut out waste with ruthless efficiency, and they maximise the benefits to the service users, or at least, that was the case in my one.

It's like as if the best of capitalism mated with the best of socialism, and they produced some kind of efficient, compassionate golden child.

But of course, in all families, you get the odd black sheep. That's why regulation must be robust.

corner of hells · 30-07-2017 11:22PM

_Brian wrote: »

Another thing.

See the charity shops that have sprung up about.

Many of these are set up by private individuals and they stick up the name of the charity above the door. Often the charity receives the " profits" from the shop.

Now, profits is after the person pays themselves. I'm aware of a person running three of these shops and paying themselves handsomely. The charity receives about a quarter of what the owner is receiving. And the shops are staffed by CE workers so there's no wages only the owner.

One charity is two years trying to get their name removed from above the shop but the owner refuses.

I thought only voluntary groups or not for profit groups that benefit their comnunuty can employ CE staff and these staff then must satisfy DSP criteria.

corner of hells · 30-07-2017 11:23PM

_Brian wrote: »

Another thing.

See the charity shops that have sprung up about.

Many of these are set up by private individuals and they stick up the name of the charity above the door. Often the charity receives the " profits" from the shop.

Now, profits is after the person pays themselves. I'm aware of a person running three of these shops and paying themselves handsomely. The charity receives about a quarter of what the owner is receiving. And the shops are staffed by CE workers so there's no wages only the owner.

One charity is two years trying to get their name removed from above the shop but the owner refuses.

I thought only voluntary groups or not for profit groups that benefit their comnunuty can employ CE staff and these staff then must satisfy DSP criteria.

Richard Hillman · 31-07-2017 12:48AM

The charities are still "not for profit" in that they don't have shareholders and produce dividends but they'll still pay their own salaries.

If you are a pretty much just a sole person running a charity shop, you'll just look at your revenue and say that's my salary for the month. It's a complete sham.

corner of hells · 31-07-2017 12:57AM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The charities are still "not for profit" in that they don't have shareholders and produce dividends but they'll still pay their own salaries.

If you are a pretty much just a sole person running a charity shop, you'll just look at your revenue and say that's my salary for the month. It's a complete sham.

I didn't think as a sole person running a charity shop you could possibly make that much profit essentially selling second hand stuff. Especially after paying all your overheads.

Hotblack Desiato · 31-07-2017 12:06PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

but the outsourcing of social supports to genuine charities is a fantastic exercise in efficiency.

It really isn't. It's been a disaster for the taxpayer and for the users of services, and I include religious run schools and hospitals in that.

How often do we hear about top up scandals? The public sector pay scale isn't enough for these guys so they get more cash under the table 'because they're worth it'. Then (like the John of Gods did) when they retire the taxpayer pays an inflated pension because of the top-ups.

The lack of accountability and proper procedure in the voluntary sector is shocking and vast quantities of taxpayers' money are being wasted.

Annasopra · 31-07-2017 12:23PM

_Brian wrote: »

Another thing.

See the charity shops that have sprung up about.

Many of these are set up by private individuals and they stick up the name of the charity above the door. Often the charity receives the " profits" from the shop.

Now, profits is after the person pays themselves. I'm aware of a person running three of these shops and paying themselves handsomely. The charity receives about a quarter of what the owner is receiving. And the shops are staffed by CE workers so there's no wages only the owner.

One charity is two years trying to get their name removed from above the shop but the owner refuses.

Yeah

There is now "community shops" - they take your furniture away. Pay the manager a handsome salary, pay workers CE, pay little business rates, pay local schools or charities a small amount. Total scam.

Annasopra · 31-07-2017 12:26PM

corner of hells wrote: »

I didn't think as a sole person running a charity shop you could possibly make that much profit essentially selling second hand stuff. Especially after paying all your overheads.

Yeah but you get cheap overheads; reduced business rates, no VAT, wages of employees nothing cause government pay them.

Del2005 · 31-07-2017 12:32PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It really isn't. It's been a disaster for the taxpayer and for the users of services, and I include religious run schools and hospitals in that.

How often do we hear about top up scandals? The public sector pay scale isn't enough for these guys so they get more cash under the table 'because they're worth it'. Then (like the John of Gods did) when they retire the taxpayer pays an inflated pension because of the top-ups.

The lack of accountability and proper procedure in the voluntary sector is shocking and vast quantities of taxpayers' money are being wasted.

This is because there's a lack of accountability and proper procedure in the public service which is supposed to monitor the charities, so we have 2 wasteful organisations wasting taxpayers money the charities and public servants who are supposed to monitor them

mikhail · 31-07-2017 12:41PM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

...pay workers CE...

I'm not familiar with this abbreviation. What's CE?

Nekarsulm · 31-07-2017 12:49PM

mikhail wrote: »

I'm not familiar with this abbreviation. What's CE?

Community Employment scheme. Top-up to your dole.

SterlingArcher · 31-07-2017 01:21PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Well I've never wanted to mention it for fear of pissing all over one of the most positive threads on this website, but does anyone know if there was any further light shed on this? It would be good to have some resolution, and hopefully a reassuring one.

Yes saying nothing. The same approach the many committee members take who silently distance themselves from these charities when the issues first come to light.

Nobody wants to be that guy huh.

31-07-2017 02:57PM

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Community Employment scheme. Top-up to your dole.

Not many charity shops would be eligible to use these. They have strict criteria. In our area only the Vincent dePaul can use them.

Another charity misappropriating funds

Comments