Halton Christmas Toy Appeal

1
She's telling on herself quite badly there as well with the strange implication that if she hadn't helped her friend then it wouldn't have happened. How selfless in carrying those large boxes, because of her friend, she is indeed.
And my understanding is that the science on the issue now is that if that's gonna happen, it'll happen. If women doing manual labour terminated pregnancies no one would have been born throughout most of history.
 
She’s got 4 kids. I wonder ‘how different life would be today‘ if she’d had five. Not much I’d guess
I've only ever seen her mention the 2. We have a photo though.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240609_125703_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20240609_125703_Chrome.jpg
    77.1 KB · Views: 22
I've just seen that the account that has history with JM has tried to ask about the money and been blocked. Good. I don't necessarily agree with all that accounts tactics but I don't agree with stick up by sad story either. Halton has been active on twitter since 2017. How much unaccountable money has gone through her hands since then. Blocking questioners when you're finally asked only shows panic.
 
I've just seen that the account that has history with JM has tried to ask about the money and been blocked. Good. I don't necessarily agree with all that accounts tactics but I don't agree with stick up by sad story either. Halton has been active on twitter since 2017. How much unaccountable money has gone through her hands since then. Blocking questioners when you're finally asked only shows panic.
I meant good that questions are being asked, not good that she blocked. She's now replied saying she didn't block, she just didn't see it. No answers as yet tho. I want to know what makes her qualified to insert herself into these very vulnerable families, including going to their homes, why they're too embarrassed to engage with the appropriate authorities but not too embarrassed to tell her the details to be slapped on twitter, what safeguarding she's compliant with, why there's a specific X amount she needs til she can help. And that's suspending disbelief to generously assume she does and donates all she claims.

Update- wasn't blocked but now is cos anything other than praise is bullying.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240610_095012_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20240610_095012_Chrome.jpg
    68.4 KB · Views: 29
  • Screenshot_20240610_095423_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20240610_095423_Chrome.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 23
So this is a lie

9A016BAD-C95D-48D2-AE2E-4BE32AB8D887.jpeg

You have to register with the charity commission if you’re an incorporated charity if your income is over £5,000/year. There are no financial restrictions to setting up a CIC.

If she is an unincorporated association, she needs a dedicated bank account and there must be at least 3 trustees.


And I note she’s been ‘in the process of setting a CIC up since August. Shades of Carly Burd
 
I
So this is a lie

View attachment 2985200 q
You have to register with the charity commission if you’re an incorporated charity if your income is over £5,000/year. There are no financial restrictions to setting up a CIC.

If she is an unincorporated association, she needs a dedicated bank account and there must be at least 3 trustees.


And I note she’s been ‘in the process of setting a CIC up since August. Shades of Carly Burd
if it’s a constitutional group’ I wonder where one can see a copy of their constitution if one was thinking of making a donation…. I would have thought that some organisations would want to have a look before donating?
 
Some predictable 'shame on you' responses from ppl who believe choosing to stand with their wallets wide open for others to help themselves makes them a better person than those who don't. Always the assumption that we've never been in desperate situations ourselves- wrong. Always the assumption we don't believe in charity- my DDs to official registered charities would tell a different story despite being on a very tight budget myself.

How much crime and abuse has been perpetrated over the years under a front of house facade of alleged good works? These groups and people are accountable like everyone else. Utterly bizarre that there's still people who'd deny that.
 
The easiest way would just be to go 'right, here's what's come in and here's what's gone out' and that's it, pretty much. It just looks super suspicious otherwise. It also speaks volumes as to the egos of folk who are always, always OFFENDED by any questioning as they are true angels giving up their time etc etc. I get it, it must feel like a kick in the gut if you're genuine but, especially post-Depher, suck it up and prove them wrong ffs.
 
The easiest way would just be to go 'right, here's what's come in and here's what's gone out' and that's it, pretty much. It just looks super suspicious otherwise. It also speaks volumes as to the egos of folk who are always, always OFFENDED by any questioning as they are true angels giving up their time etc etc. I get it, it must feel like a kick in the gut if you're genuine but, especially post-Depher, suck it up and prove them wrong ffs.

And if everything is being done properly then proving it won't take any time, because you'll already have the accounting done for the prior month.
 
She's still locked but some apoplectically angry ppl came out to bat for her. Predictably we're all just trolls trying to stop hungry kids being fed and mentioning Depher is a 'low blow' rather than an example that should've sent small unaccountable private individuals who gather money racing to an Excel spreadsheet.

She'll find it much harder to solicit donations from behind a lock and I'm sure that's not a situation anyone on here actually wants. Asking reasonable questions about how something operates isn't an attempt to detonate anyone's endeavours even if it’s sympathy inducing to pretend that it is for your audience. If she gets a system that proves where the money goes to backers and knocks the unethical blurbs on the head I'm sure this thread will fizzle off. Questions aren't attacks. These comments are spot on.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240611_093102_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20240611_093102_Chrome.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 29
She's still locked but some apoplectically angry ppl came out to bat for her. Predictably we're all just trolls trying to stop hungry kids being fed and mentioning Depher is a 'low blow' rather than an example that should've sent small unaccountable private individuals who gather money racing to an Excel spreadsheet.

She'll find it much harder to solicit donations from behind a lock and I'm sure that's not a situation anyone on here actually wants. Asking reasonable questions about how something operates isn't an attempt to detonate anyone's endeavours even if it’s sympathy inducing to pretend that it is for your audience. If she gets a system that proves where the money goes to backers and knocks the unethical blurbs on the head I'm sure this thread will fizzle off. Questions aren't attacks. These comments are spot on.
She can't be so bloody thin-skinned she can't answer incredibly simple questions about donations. Is this the first time she has ever been really challenged? It is crazy how unregulated fundraising is on the internet.
But nice to see Depher being used as a shorthand for dodgy fundraising. And he was defended by almost everybody for years. Makes you think.
 
Back
Top