Phone calls from charities after you've donated by text message

(145 Posts)
CruCru Wed 08-May-13 21:52:41

I have recently donated to some charities by text message (super convenient and I don't have to talk to a person). However, the salespeople charity donation people keep ringing me to try to get me to donate more. It puts me off donating. AIBU? Today I had four missed calls on my mobile and when I called them back, it was a recorded message from a charity.

HollyBerryBush Wed 08-May-13 21:53:32

Block the number?

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Wed 08-May-13 21:55:30

Wow, that is terribly pushy and offputting. I won't donate by text in future.

I always look up the number on 'who called me' - then I downloaded an app that registered it as spam and I didn't need to answer - it just flashes up as spam.

They're idiots for doing it really.

xigris Wed 08-May-13 21:55:48

YNBU. I've had the same problem recently; made a donation then a really hard sale, guilt trip phone call. I'm on mat leave at the moment and on a really right budget so unfortunately I can't give more at the mo. I think they're shooting themselves in the foot tbh as I'll think twice about text donation again.

Lorelei353 Wed 08-May-13 21:55:59

I've had this from a few different charities. The calls are from some call centre representing the charity and are very full-on if they get you on the phone. Really aggressive sales call. I've complained to the charities involved about it.

CruCru Wed 08-May-13 22:00:09

Oh I'm glad it isn't just me.

thefirstmrsrochester Wed 08-May-13 22:00:19

There is new legislation regarding charitable donations. I donate a certain amount each month 'by text' to the children's hospital in my city. Each month I get a text thanking me for donating, followed by a text telling me I can opt out by replying 'stop'.
I don't know what the implications of the legislation will be with regard to the charity phoning you.
I suppose in times if recession, the charities have not had the income they relied on hence the hard sell.

thefirstmrsrochester Wed 08-May-13 22:04:31

That said, the charity muggers (chuggers?) in the street really piss me off.
I understand that charities must be run like businesses in order to effectively bring in cash, but spare me the paid up youngster bouncing over to me in the street.

CruCru Wed 08-May-13 22:05:19

I think that's the issue - there seems to be no way of opting out of the calls without telling the pushy salespeople so and then having them ask you why.

CruCru Wed 08-May-13 22:08:04

At least you can avoid eye contact with chuggers. These buggers keep ringing my mobile when I'm at work (phone on very quiet so I don't hear it) - it's a London number so I keep thinking it's my midwife.

Wilding Wed 08-May-13 22:08:48

this has happened to me a few times and I really hate it- think it's a bad move as it really puts me off donating again. I don't mind a follow-up text that you can opt out of but they just ring and ring until you tell them to go away angry

ToysRLuv Wed 08-May-13 22:09:06

I've had this. Really put me off donating by text in the future. sad

OutragedFromLeeds Wed 08-May-13 22:13:56

I've had this as well. I found rejecting/ignoring the calls worked, they stopped after a couple of days

thefirstmrsrochester Wed 08-May-13 22:16:23

I actually don't think they are allowed to do this now. DH work straddles both charity work and marketing so when he gets in, I will ask him more about it.
When you donate by text, that should be it. Wee text to say thanks and maybe linking the website. You most certainly are not giving your permission to be contacted by phone to be harassed into a regular payment.

Binkybix Wed 08-May-13 22:20:13

My DH cancelled his direct debit because he kept getting these calls, and shifted it to a different charity. I can see why they do it but it's very annoying.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Wed 08-May-13 22:25:06

Damn those charities for needing to do more of their good causes. How very dare they.

fudgeit Wed 08-May-13 22:28:10

yep this has happened to me recently too. i save all cold callers under one contact on my phone, under the name Spam. that way i can ignore their repeated calls, though they have stopped calling now. you can always answer them and ask them not to contact you again? has put me off donating via text though, will stick to web and justgiving from now on...

WafflyVersatile Wed 08-May-13 22:47:44

Well part of what a charity does, has to do, is raise funds to continue to exist to carry out the work they do. So, you know, that's what they are doing. The most useful sort of donation is regular monthly direct debits. It helps them plan and budget for their work. This is why they contact people who have given one-off donations. They do not expect more than a small percentage of people to respond to this or to other appeals they send so you mustn't feel pressured or guilted into giving if you can't or don't want to, but they don't know who is or is not willing unless they do contact you all.

You can ask them not to contact you again. It's not in their interests to spend money contacting people who do not want to give regularly or perhaps ever again. You can tell them when you phone or if you email or phone or write to the charity they will update their records to say not to contact you again. They will not be offended and should be polite to you.

Many charities outsource their face to face (chugging) and phone marketing. Although these companies have rules and guidelines on how to engage they are often paid on commission, have targets etc and they are companies run for profit. If you are unhappy with how they talk to you or pressure you etc. please do contact the charity and let them know. Again it is not in their interests to get people's backs up and they will act on your complaint. But if you don't answer they will keep trying.

eccentrica Wed 08-May-13 22:58:51

Had this happen to me recently too. The charity was Friends of the Earth. However, it seems to be the same number no matter which charity it is. They called me about 5 times in a couple of days (all at very inconvenient times) and never left a voicemail. I rang FoE directly and they said they didn't know anything about it. (Bollocks)

Eventually I answered and the bloke was pushy and even when I said I didn't want to be called again, he said "ok, you won't be called again tiny voice on this campaign". I said "no, I don't want to be called again by you about anything."

I won't give to Friends of the Earth again and I won't give to any big charity by text again. I didn't give that money for them to spend on employing gap year students, overpaid executives, and running up huge phone bills calling mobiles. I'll go back to collection tins in the street, online donations by credit card and random homeless/beggars.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Wed 08-May-13 23:05:26

"employing gap year students, overpaid executives, and running up huge phone bills calling mobiles."

So gap year students shouldn't be employed? confused

Overpaid executives? Where are these jobs and why can't I get one? I would be so pleased if someone could show me an overpaid charity job.

Huge phone bills calling mobiles? Afaik, most of the agencies who do this work charge per contact so it's irrelevant to the charity whether it's a landline or mobile number.

Binkybix Wed 08-May-13 23:05:48

Oh sorry - in the case I spoke about the request was to increase the amount of the existing direct debit, and they rang back repeatedly despite being asked not to. So not in response to text donating, but a similar theme.

susiedaisy Wed 08-May-13 23:10:22

Yes this happened me after I donated by text to UNICEF the phone calls started a few days later they were really persistent phoning my mobile eventually curiosity got the better of me and I answered but I was a bit peed off to be honest the reason I texted was so I didn't have speak to anyone or fill out any forms!

Viviennemary Wed 08-May-13 23:12:31

That is so annoying and cheeky. I think I would cancel if somebody phoned me and asked to increase a direct debit. They must think people are sitting ducks for this kind of harrassment.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Wed 08-May-13 23:13:57

Tbf the tactic mentioned here is very annoying and it's not one I'd be keen to use. It's difficult though when you can see a good return on investment and you have to raise the money.

Binkybix Wed 08-May-13 23:14:09

I don't mind being asked once, but the hard sale followed by repeated phone calls were a bit much!

Binkybix Wed 08-May-13 23:14:25

*sell

RussiansOnTheSpree Wed 08-May-13 23:16:39

This happened to me too, after doing a text donation to UNICEF. sad So I won't be doing that again. I've also had Macmillan phoning me continually over the last couple of weeks. I ran a half marathon for them a couple of years ago, raised about a grand, and I had a DD to them too. Apparently that's not enough. And they feel the need to tell me so in the evening typically when I'm in the bath. So that DD has been stopped, and I've set up another one with a similar but different charity. And if they start badgering me, then the same thing will happen. I don't mind them emailing me. I seriously mind them phoning me.

eccentrica Wed 08-May-13 23:50:16

MaryMotherofCheeses I would be so pleased if someone could show me an overpaid charity job.

Here you go:

jobs.guardian.co.uk/jobs/charities/senior-executive/

eccentrica Wed 08-May-13 23:55:16

Oh, and
So gap year students shouldn't be employed? confused

No, not using money which has been donated in good faith to go to good causes. If it's such a great cause they should work for free. Plenty of people do. It's called volunteering.

All I think is: well, the 3 quid that's been added on to my phone bill has just been used up to pay for this twat to ring me up for 30 minutes. That was a huge waste of money. At least if I give money to the bloke begging on the tube I know it's going straight to him (and if he wants to spend it on heroin, special brew or fags that's his choice). At least it's not going towards the fabulous 'remuneration package' for a 'strategy development manager'.

RussiansOnTheSpree Wed 08-May-13 23:56:54

Doesn't look overpaid to me......

Sunnywithshowers Wed 08-May-13 23:58:42

Charities are allowed to call, and it's in the terms and conditions. However, they should stop as soon as they are asked to. (I used to work in charity fundraising and we organised this kind of thing.)

I prefer the method mentioned above, where you get asked every month and can either STOP the donation completely, or SKIP a month.

eccentrica Wed 08-May-13 23:59:15

Oh really, you think people who give to charity want 80,000 pounds of it to be spent on one person's salary?

Monty27 Thu 09-May-13 00:03:08

I've stopped all of my direct debits because I'm skint. They should target utilities/conglomerates etc for donations (which they probably already do), personally I'm fleeced and can't afford financial charity any more. I wish they'd fuck off out of my face really angry blush. And I know I'm not the only one. If I could I would.

Melpomene Thu 09-May-13 00:06:58

Yes, it is very annoying. I have been harassed by repeated calls from several charities even after asking them not to call me again.

Last time I sent a text donation (to British Heart Foundation) I immediately followed it up with a 'STOP' message, and received a text in reply saying they wouldn't contact me again. The following day they phoned me.

As pointed out above, it is frustrating to think that much of the money being donated is wasted on the cost of pointless phonecalls.

WafflyVersatile Thu 09-May-13 00:13:30

''No, not using money which has been donated in good faith to go to good causes. If it's such a great cause they should work for free. Plenty of people do. It's called volunteering.

All I think is: well, the 3 quid that's been added on to my phone bill has just been used up to pay for this twat to ring me up for 30 minutes. That was a huge waste of money.''

you couldn't do the work if everyone had to work for free. People should be paid for what is their main employment. You can't run large charities on the unpaid labour of well-meaning pensioners.

It's not a waste of money. Charities do these fundraising campaigns because they help get more regular and continuing donations. They pay for themselves and more over time. If they don't work then they don't do them.

Wouldn't it be lovely if people just donated magically to your charity even though you've done nothing to advertise your existence or ask people for donations.

NadiaWadia Thu 09-May-13 00:14:11

I sent £3 by text recently to the TV Syria appeal. I know its not a lot, but money's tight at the moment, and I aready give montlhly small DDs to Action Aid, Amnesty, and local hospice.

£3 would pay for a blanket for a refugee apparently, so I thought it was a good idea! More likely it paid for the umpteen calls on my mobile I received afterwards. Which I didn't answer because I don't like to answer calls from unknown numbers. After I googled the number I found out what it was and next time I did answer and explained I couldn't afford a regular payment. To be fair, they were very polite and I've not had another call.

BUT I will not be donating by text again, which is a shame as it seemed so convenient.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Thu 09-May-13 00:21:05

I know they can seem annoying and may inconvenience you but at the end of the day it's a charity. A charity that you or your family may call on one day. So, to those who really get pissed off with them, just be assertive and tell them you're not interested in a polite way. Most of you don't mind doing it on this thread so extend it to the charity next time they 'pester' you.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 00:25:46

Waffly No one has complained about charities advertising. I've given to many smaller charities who seem to manage to send the majority of their donations to the good causes they were intended to fund, who don't pay chief execs upwards of 70k or employ teams of wannabe TV presenters to hassle people in the street or to harass people with unwanted phone calls.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 00:30:07

The differences between different charities in terms of what % of donations actually go to the good causes is very interesting:

www.smallcharitydirectory.co.uk/what-percentage-of-donations-go-to-charity

The NSPCC only put 75p out of every £1 towards their stated goals of stopping cruelty to children. A quarter of donations goes on their overheads.

WafflyVersatile Thu 09-May-13 00:38:51

by 'overheads' you mean what, employees? charming. rent? electricity? stationery? Charities have to pay for these.

There are many many charities and I agree that some are a bit of a swizz, but as I already said to be able to continue they have to fundraise.

75p in a £1 sounds reasonable to me.

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 06:11:53

Eccentrica I give to charity. I want them to employ decent people at decent salaries. One of the problems with charities is they often don't employ the best people because they can't get them.

This happened to me and the guy kept pushing me to set up a regular donation- "I'm a student, don't have that much cash"- "oh really? actually, I've spoken to several students today who made whatever donation they could"- "well, maybe I'll see next year!"- "yes, or you could think about making a small donation now, anything counts"- I already did!
And then if they sense you're the slightest bit hesitant...."sorry, it sounded as if you were trying to get rid of me?" and you have to be all polite and say no, no, not at all.

I do feel sorry for them though!

Bunbaker Thu 09-May-13 06:56:54

That is why I never give my mobile number out to charities or businesses. I either give money to collection boxes or donate anonymously in those envelopes that get pushed through our letterbox.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Thu 09-May-13 08:45:13

Eccentrica, thanks for the link to the Guardian jobs website. Now try looking at similar level jobs in the private sector, at those levels and for organisations which are as big and with as many staff.

I really don't understand why people expect Directors with organisations with multi million pound turnovers and huge responsibility for both employees and "clients" (for want of a better word) to be paid peanuts. There is a ridiculous expectation that charities should be run by people doing it for the love of it, but as soon as there's evidence that a charity is run unprofessionally, not surprisingly there is uproar. You simply cannot have it both ways. Charities which are spending millions of pounds of money given by the public simply have to be competitive to get good professional people. When I give money to charity, I want to know it's going to be well used, handled efficiently and by staff who are paid, across the board, a decent wage.

As for the percentage which goes on the charitable cause, 75p in the pound is ok. That link you give also shows the British Red Cross which spends 85-90p in the pound on the charitable cause. That's amazing, that's really high and a sign of a very well run charity.

"If it's such a great cause they should work for free". This simply isn't realistic. I have heard of volunteering, thank you for that. Incidentally, the costs of recruiting, training and managing volunteers would come under the overheads costs you object to.

"At least if I give money to the bloke begging on the tube I know it's going straight to him (and if he wants to spend it on heroin, special brew or fags that's his choice)."

You're happy to give money to be spent on heroin???

JessicaBeatriceFletcher Thu 09-May-13 08:54:15

I don't give to any charity that employs chuggers. I also don't give to any charity where less than 80 pence in the pound goes to the actual cause.

I do have a few charities I support but I always send by cheque and I never do any spur of the moment responding to TV appeal texts or phone calls because I know what happens - constant flooding. I understand the budgeting issue from direct debits but I like to be in control of what I want to send and when without pressure or feeling guilty.

SirBoobAlot Thu 09-May-13 09:18:29

I had three phone calls a day, for over two weeks after doing this. After explaining - three times - that I was not in a financial position to donate regularly, them making me feeling like shit for not being able to, I stopped answering.

I then picked up and told them exactly how their phone calls were making me feel - like I would never donate via text again. And that I wanted them to remove my contact details.

It was like fucking harassment. Seriously, it was horrible.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 10:26:42

MaryMotherOfCheeses

1. I'm totally aware that some (not all) private sector jobs pay more than charity jobs at the same level. Of course that doesn't apply to public sector, education, health, or most other jobs which people like to think they are doing for partly altruistic reasons. Which are generally paid at the same or a lower level than equivalent charity jobs.

2. You must be earning an awful lot of money if you think that it's a simple choice between paying people 75, 80, 100k or paying 'peanuts'. My partner and I both have PhDs and we both work (him full-time employed in the private sector, me part-time self-employed) and we bring in a grand total of approx. 28k a year before tax. You can pay a decent salary at a much lower level than these jobs. They are overpaid. People are not just getting by, or being paid a fair wage for their efforts and skill, they are getting rich off the back of charity donations.

3. "As for the percentage which goes on the charitable cause, 75p in the pound is ok. That link you give also shows the British Red Cross which spends 85-90p in the pound on the charitable cause. That's amazing, that's really high and a sign of a very well run charity."

So if the British Red Cross can spend 85-90% of its income on the good causes, why is it OK that the NSPCC is creaming off another 10-15%?

4. "You're happy to give money to be spent on heroin???"

Given the choice between that and contributing towards the company car, international travel, or private health insurance of a charity executive, absolutely. At least it's going to someone in need and in pain. At least it's going where I think it's going.

5. As an overall point i think it's crystal clear that everyone in this thread who doesn't work in the charity sector finds those phone calls very harassing, intrusive and upsetting, and that they are counterproductive in that the majority (incl. me) will not donate by text ever again.

PatPig Thu 09-May-13 10:28:21

Charities know that existing supporters are the best targets for more money, so many will harass the fuck out of you.

Shame.

DeepRedBetty Thu 09-May-13 10:35:15

You may add the RSPCA to the list of shame for aggressive unsolicited phone calls.

The small dog rescue in the next village down is getting my donations now instead.

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 10:38:10

Eccentrica - they really aren't overpaid. You may be underpaid (or maybe not, you didn't say what your Phd is in or what you do) but the sort of jobs you linked to were not offering even the going rate for that sort of job.

I think that many people have no idea what running a large multi-million pound organisation involves. Fair enough, that's not surprising - but if you think about it for a moment, surely you should appreciate that, if you were a donator to a charity, you'd want them to make the best possible use of your money to further the aims of the charity. Part of that is having really good people to run the thing.

Binkybix Thu 09-May-13 10:53:44

When I worked in a charity there seemed to be some jobs that had a 'fair' amount of remuneration for the level of responsibility and some quite senior ones that did seem overpaid. Like most places really!

it seemed in general that people in the charity were paid a bit more highly than, say, the public sector in the 'medium' range and were of slightly lower calibre. Just my experience from one part of one charity obviously.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 11:47:42

Russians "I think that many people have no idea what running a large multi-million pound organisation involves. Fair enough, that's not surprising - but if you think about it for a moment, surely you should appreciate that, if you were a donator to a charity, you'd want them to make the best possible use of your money to further the aims of the charity. Part of that is having really good people to run the thing."

I have a pretty good idea of what it involves, having worked with several large organisations. There is an awful lot of gravy train along with the responsibilities. Conferences, dinners, free travel, health insurance, etc. etc. etc. I find it quite patronising for you to say that by criticising this set-up, I must "have no idea what running a large organisation involves" and that (by implication) I haven't "thought about it for a moment".

"if you were a donator to a charity" er, I AM a donator to charities. And I don't believe that the salaries & benefits paid to their executives is making the best possible use of money. That's what I, and several other people on here, are saying. There's no "if" about it. We aren't too naive, or stupid, or idealistic, to think that it's essential for people to be paid in the top 1% of earners in the country off the back of donations made in good faith by people getting by on far, far less.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 11:49:12

Also, in what conceivable universe is "Up to £120k plus benefits" below "the going rate" for any job?

Sunnywithshowers Thu 09-May-13 11:53:15

Charities have overheads because they need good admin systems in order to do their charitable work effectively. If their back office systems are shit, they'll balls up gift aid and they won't be able to make sure that the money is being used effectively. They have to invest in fundraising to get money in - it works. And gives them more money to spend on the cause.

I'm not defending the NSPCC, they're big enough to look after themselves. But it's simplistic to imagine that charities which do make a difference to peoples' lives can run on volunteers only, or pay their staff fuck all. Like businesses (with which they compete, whether we like it or not) they need the best people for the job.

I was well paid as a fundraiser. That's because I'm good at what I did and take my job seriously.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 11:56:10

sunnywithshowers Nurses are on the whole good at what they do and take their job seriously. They however get paid fuck all, because there isn't enough money in the health sector to go round (apparently, though the people at the top seem to do OK again - funny that). They are meant to do it for the love of it, and accept very low wages for an extremely hard and thoroughly altruistic job. Funny how the same doesn't apply to people working for charities.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 12:01:22

Russians Nothing to do with me being underpaid or not, I'm doing OK if you look at the country as a whole. Anyone who talks about 80k+ jobs as being the only alternative to 'peanuts' clearly lives in a different world from the rest of us. We are the ones giving away our hard-earned cash and then being harassed by charities to give more, while the people at the top somehow get a six-figure salary out of it.

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 12:08:28

The job you linked to was 60K-80K. Or at least, that was the top of the list when I followed the link, I think they rotate them round on some of these job sites. £120 would not be overpaid for a chief exec, it would be good money for many exec jobs though so I can see why you would baulk at that. But for a chief exec? £120K is not top dollar, nowhere close. If chief execs of multi million pound charities using OUR money to do things we believe should be done aren't in the top 1% of important jobs then really, who is?

And I'm sorry but if you don't see that some (not all, not even most) charities really are essentially Very Big Businesses, just devoted to doing good stuff rather than making money, then you haven't stopped to think about it. Very Big Businesses need particular types of people to run them. If you had worked with businesses on the scale of the largest charities you would appreciate this. Not all charities pay their chief execs £120K (the vast vast majority of them don't) but those that do, need to, in order to get the right leadership. Otherwise the people giving the donations might be wasting their money. This article might provide some interesting reading:

http://www.jobsite.co.uk/worklife/pay-survey-throws-spotlight-charity-ceo-salaries-11237/

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 12:17:43

"If chief execs of multi million pound charities using OUR money to do things we believe should be done aren't in the top 1% of important jobs then really, who is?"

Bus drivers. Train drivers. Nurses. Teachers. Doctors. Surgeons. Social workers. Duty solicitors. Police officers. Teaching assistants. Engineers. Plumbers. Electricians. Firefighters. Paramedics. Ultrasound engineers. Radiologists. Cooks. Pharmacists. Security guards. Lifeguards. Coastguards. Seamstresses. Farmers. Fishermen. Butchers. And so on. People who actually do stuff that matters, without which our society would fall apart. People who don't cream off massive profits for them to live the high life.

I am not going to break professional confidentiality, but suffice to say I have worked with two or three of the largest charities in the UK so your "oh you just don't understand how terribly clever and unique these people are so we must pay them a lot of money" argument really doesn't work, no matter how many times you repeat it.

I linked to a whole category of jobs, not a single one. Sorry you didn't look past the first one. Here is the one for 120k plus excellent benefits.

jobs.guardian.co.uk/job/4634145/director-general/

Please could you explain why if the person who gets that job is motivated by wanting to help the good cause, rather than by becoming massively rich, they won't immediately ask for a 50% cut in salary?

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 12:34:50

I happen to think many charities do 'stuff that matters, without which our society would fall apart' (except of course some of our charities are doing stuff without which the world would fall apart). You clearly feel differently.

And FWIW I think your list of people who do 'stuff that matters' is in many cases laughable. Butchers? Really?

The job you linked to isn't a charity job, it's a trade association job. Sorry you couldn't understand the job spec. It may or may not be worth the package on offer but that's irrelevant to this thread.

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 12:37:41

Anyway, Eccentrica, I've got a solution for you. Tell the headhunter you'll do the trade association job, or one of the lesser paid charity jobs, for 25% of the package. See if they snap you up. If they do, and you succeed in the job, then you will be proved right and it will be clear that anyone can run a multi million pound global organisation. And you will have done the world a huge service.

miemohrs Thu 09-May-13 12:40:40

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

samandi Thu 09-May-13 12:41:22

I'd answer the next call and tell them in no uncertain terms that I won't be donating to them ever again. But then I have a very low tolerance for being harassed by telephone.

samandi Thu 09-May-13 12:42:28

miemohrs - that's appalling. Good on you for cancelling your dd.

ShadeofViolet Thu 09-May-13 12:43:50

I find also that once you donate to one charity, they can all smell blood and start ringing. I get calls from Breast cancer charities, NSPCC, Save the Children and RNIB.

A few years ago a charity used to send me pennies in the post. That put me off donating to them.

specialsubject Thu 09-May-13 12:45:29

if you want to donate to charity, set up a direct debit, put money in a collecting tin or send a cheque in an envelope with no return address.

any other way is inefficient or will result in a load of hassle.

ShadeofViolet Thu 09-May-13 12:50:16

But then you set up a direct debit and they call you asking for more. NSPCC did this to me so I too cancelled the direct debit.

Our local children's hospice runs a lottery for £1 a week, so I do that by direct debit every month.

lljkk Thu 09-May-13 14:13:01

I would love a list of charities that do & don't bother you after donation.

Water Aid is terrible for repeat marketing efforts; great cause, but I refuse to increase my monthly DD to them because they are Pests.

Medecins Sans Frontieres are brilliant; one good newsletter about their actual work and only that, every quarter, full of fascinating insights. Nothing else. I started with £5/month 12 yrs ago & now give them £20/month.

Sunnywithshowers Thu 09-May-13 14:53:07

eccentrica a shitload of people are worse paid than fundraisers, many of whom, like nurses, have valuable and essential jobs. I don't think it's fair either.

I've raised millions for charity, hence am 'valuable' to charities. I can generate my salary many times over. It sucks, but there it is.

Sunnywithshowers Thu 09-May-13 14:57:33

specialsubject collecting tins aren't the most effective way to give to charity because of the admin (counting coins and banking them).

A direct debit is fantastic, with gift aid (if you're a taxpayer) is even better. In some cases payroll giving is best as some lovely employers match donations.

Any charity worth it's salt will stop contacting you for donations if you ask them. And if they don't they are breaking data protection rules.

DevonLodger Thu 09-May-13 15:27:31

One of my charities is SmileTrain (direct debit plus gift aid monthly). They are brilliant. Newsletters and a bit of direct marketing but always carefully judged. Really moving letters from the children whose lives have been changed by the cleft surgery. No cold calls or pressure at all.

I'm a sucker for the text giving. Every time I see the adverts in the breaks on Sky News I'm reaching for my phone. UNICEF are the most pushy by far though and I get regular calls from them which I generally ignore. I wasn't bothered by the Syrian blanket collectors though. I am a charity collectors' dream and I do find text giving very effective. Just try and ignore the calls. I'm sure its a very successful way to raise money especially amongst younger donors who might not otherwise give.

NadiaWadia Thu 09-May-13 15:57:16

Have to say I agree with eccentrica. There seems to be a tacit understanding that we all expected to go along with, that people in the top jobs have to be paid enormous salaries as they are so special, unique and fantastic at their jobs. If you don't they will go elsewhere.

Except .... in many cases they are not. There are many examples of chief executives of banks and so on who have made a total balls up. Then they are paid off with enormous golden handshakes, and go off to mismanage another company. And why do they have to paid many many times what an average worker in the industry is paid? It has been shown that in the 60s (for example) ratios of the salaries of chief executives against workers' salaries were much lower, and yet things seemed to work just fine.

You would hope that the head of a charity would have a different mindset. A conspiracy of greed, that's what it is. And socially divisive.

And going back to the begging phone calls from charities, I agree they may be counterproductive. Has anyone researched how many donors never give again by text, or cancel existing DDs, due to this harassment?

MrsHoarder Thu 09-May-13 16:29:24

Also charities need to be careful about checking why people donated.

I gave money to a local charity which wasn't near me after they were involved in my friends treatment in lieu of flowers for his funeral. I really don't want to be rung up every few months to be asked for more money reminding me not of my friend's life, but the details of his very tragic death.

Aside from that charity I'm pretty abrupt with fundraisers. If one were to ask me if I was trying to get rid of him I would happily say yes. Except it wouldn't have got that far because as soon as its clear someone wants money I just say "I'm not interested, goodbye" and hang up.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 16:48:02

RussiansOnTheSpree And FWIW I think your list of people who do 'stuff that matters' is in many cases laughable. Butchers? Really?

Laughable, really? Would you care to run through the rest of the list and explain how what they do is worth less to society than being an executive for a charity? Teachers? Doctors? Firefighters? Police? Radiologists? Nurses? Lifeguards? and so on...

The job you linked to isn't a charity job, it's a trade association job. Sorry you couldn't understand the job spec.

Actually it was posted in Guardian Charities jobs and if you look on the left-hand side you'll see the industry is listed as 'Charities - International'. Sorry you couldn't understand the job spec.

Anyway, Eccentrica, I've got a solution for you. Tell the headhunter you'll do the trade association job, or one of the lesser paid charity jobs, for 25% of the package. See if they snap you up. If they do, and you succeed in the job, then you will be proved right and it will be clear that anyone can run a multi million pound global organisation. And you will have done the world a huge service.

Oh, grow up. The point is why should we expect executives who work for charities to put their own personal profit above their altruistic motives to help others? Many, many other people earn far less than they could because they are motivated by something other than maximising their own salary - wanting to make the world a better place and help others, for example. How odd that you wouldn't expect this of someone working for a charity.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 16:48:52

Which charity do/did you work for, by the way?

hackmum Thu 09-May-13 17:21:46

I was going to bring this issue up myself, though it's not a mobile phone issue in my case.

I have small direct debits with a number of charities. They are constantly phoning me to ask me to increase the amount. It really pisses me off because you end up feeling guilty saying No, but why should you? You're already giving them money. I also have a feeling they swap phone numbers - had a phone call the other day from Breast Cancer Care, who I don't donate to.

Bricklestick Thu 09-May-13 18:12:31

Charities do not swap phone numbers. It's illegal.

Sunnywithshowers Thu 09-May-13 19:42:45

Bricklestick Charities do swap phone numbers but only if the person concerned has consented.

hackmum tell them you don't want them to call - believe me, they don't want to piss you off.

CruCru Thu 09-May-13 19:46:29

Argh - three more missed calls this evening (was doing bath and bed). Right, going to turn the ring volume up and ask them to stop calling the next time they ring.

Bricklestick Thu 09-May-13 19:49:04

I work for a big national charity (albeit one that doesn't do text appeals or hire chuggers) and I assure you that there is NO database of donors that gets swapped between charities.

However, some charities do buy databases from marketing companies which may have your details from other sources you've signed up to and not opted out of marketing consent for. I'll say it again: charities don't swap donor details.

Iaintdunnuffink Thu 09-May-13 19:53:56

Yes, it's probably data bought from the same source.

Sunnywithshowers Thu 09-May-13 20:06:01

Bricklestick specific charities do swap some donor data, however they use a specific product / supplier and won't swap data of people who don't want their info swapped. However, I agree that not all charities swap data, and those that do must have specific permission to do so.

RussiansOnTheSpree Thu 09-May-13 20:14:24

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Pigsmummy Thu 09-May-13 21:28:49

I too had a similar experience, soo pushy, calling early and late in the day. I will not donate by text again for this reason.

eccentrica Thu 09-May-13 21:31:21

" Butchers. Fishermen. Why don't you enlighten us all as to exactly how those people are doing more valuable work than eg Macmillan Nurses?"

Where on earth did I say that? I said that they all do much more valuable work than highly paid executives working for charities. Try re-reading. I said nothing even resembling that, but feel free to make up more nonsense and then argue against it if it amuses you.

Why should people who work for a charity earn significantly less than people doing comparable jobs in the private sector?

er, because. it's. a. CHARITY. Because they are asking people for money for good causes and then taking a huge amount of it for their personal gain. This is not a difficult concept and it's frankly odd that you are pretending (I assume) not to understand it. Why, it's almost as if you take it as some sort of personal attack on what you do with your own life.

Why should anyone, ever volunteer any time or donate any money when they don't have to? Why is it ok for ordinary people to give up their time to stand around shaking a collection tin or delivering Meals on Wheels when they could be getting paid for that time in the private sector - working as a minicab driver perhaps? It appaers that the ordinary person in the street is prepared to forgo the chance to maximise their personal gain for the greater good. Clearly this doesn't apply to executives in big charities.

Your 'argument' is all over the place. You have no idea about my 'bitterness and resentment' - this is not about my emotions - nor about what I do or don't understand. Your posts are full of unwarranted rudeness, misfiring ad hominem attacks and patronising wank without once ever addressing the question of why people employed by a charity which asks for money from the public should consider it OK to take huge personal salaries.

Over and over again on this thread many people have expressed their discomfort with fat cats who are highly paid off the back of hard-up members of the public making charitable donations which are intended to go to good causes. You have ignored that. Simply repeating "oh you don't understand, you're so stupid, you don't understand how difficult it is for us them" doesn't win the argument or make your point. It rings very hollow when you won't address the simple question, which is NOT why someone working for a charity shouldn't get paid what they would in the private sector, but why would someone working for a charity think it's ok to get rich from people's charitable donations?

Which charity do you work for, by the way?

Rosa Thu 09-May-13 21:38:50

When I donate if I get a mail shot , phone call or what ever then I stop and won't donate again. I was annoyed when shelterbox sent me a newsletter begging letter and told them what a waste of money and to spend my postage on helping people - they stopped. Try telling Unicef or Oxfam.

hobbknob Thu 09-May-13 21:40:58

I had this and to be honest it's put me off donating by text again.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Thu 09-May-13 22:16:03

I'm sorry to see this thread has become so shouty.

I also hate to see that donors are being put off by overly assertive and sometimes inept sales tactics.

What we never see on these threads is someone saying "A nice person came to my door and was really friendly, it was a charity I like and I've signed up for a direct debit. I feel happy about that"

Which does happen, but of course it doesn't get posted about.

Thankfully it happens more often than the complaints, which is why charities carry on doing it. So we must make sure that the complaints get fewer and fewer as more charities insist their agencies follow Fundraising Standards guidelines, and we can get on with doing the work that people want to see happen.

MrsHoarder Fri 10-May-13 09:19:55

Yes Mary, but there's far more people left feeling harassed and guilty or signing up for a dd they felt pressured into. Doorstop sales are high pressure and involve trying to get people to close and sign when they might not be sure.

Just because its a charity and not double glazing/energy doesn't mean that everyone well like it.

mulranno Fri 10-May-13 09:36:16

I was left very emotionally distressed after a call from Cancer Research. I had completed the Run for Life last year - raised loads etc. I did the polite - "I will think it through" when asked to donate monthly - they then went down another tack talking and asking leading questions specifically about ovarian cancer research - which my mother died from in a really horrific way. I found this very difficult - I did not want to talk about my mother death to a stranger - They had obviously googled me and seen the other fundraising efforts I do specifically for the ovarian cancer unit where my mother died....as a family we run a charity golf day with my family which raises £20k each year.

jellybeans Fri 10-May-13 09:54:08

Almost all the big charities seem to do this. It really annoys me. they pay thousands to get sales people to try get more money. I donate monthly with a few charities and often get emails such as 'by the time you read this 100 children will have starved'. I appreciate what they are trying to do but they are going about it the wrong way as it pisses many people off who are already making financial sacrifice to donate.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 10:13:38

I work as a fundraiser for a charity and am quite distressed to see this thread degenerating into an attack on those of us who work in the third sector, and I feel the need to defend our aims and practices.

Firstly, I absolutely understand those who have said they don't klike being pestered by phone calls. I can't comment on individual expereinces as the charity I work for does not do any telemarketing. But we might in the future, if we can show it brings in a good return on investment for us.

On to salaries. Do I earn a good salary? Depends on what you call good. it is roughly commensurate withy a teacher or nurse in the first levels of management - and I have been in the sector for 24 years and head up a full department. with responsibilty for budgets of over £1m. We have no marketing department, no communications team, no PR people - it's all down to me.

And perks (as mentioned upthread) Do I get health insurance, conferences, free travel etc. No. emphatically no, and I never have done.

What I DO do is to raise over a million pounds a year in order to find cures and treatments for some really horrible and life changing medical conditions. And that costs money but also benefits all of society. All of you and your families.

it would be fabulous if people just gave us money without us having to ask, but it doesn't happen that way.

Sunnywithshowers Fri 10-May-13 12:12:34

Applauds Nina

Sunnywithshowers Fri 10-May-13 12:12:56

mulranno I'm sorry for your experience, that's horrific.

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 12:15:12

Well said, Nina. I'm an accountant for a national charity - accounting for charities is actually a lot more complex than for a lot of private companies, many of whom I have also worked for - and I get paid what would be considered a "good" salary by very many people.

It is, however, a lot less than I could earn (with my experience and qualifications) in a similar job that wasn't in the charity sector, say around 25% less than I could earn in a media company or something.

The simple fact (and it's a sad fact) is that if charities were to rely purely on volunteers to do the work that needs to be done then many charities wouldn't exist. They do need specialists, and specialists deserve to be paid. Likewise, charities still have bills to pay - insurance for those volunteers isn't free. They have to pay for rent, utilities, equipment, and they have to pay VAT too - they don't get everything for free just because they're charities.

You are never going to find a single charity anywhere that spends 100% of the funds it raises on its causes. It is, sadly, impossible. It costs money to run a charity, even a tiny one.

The government, at the moment, is trying to turn us into a "big society", where we all help each other without government funds being used. This means that (for example) medical charities are now increasingly taking over some of the functions of both the NHS and the Dept of Health at a time where donations are going down because of the economic downturn, and many charities have lost their government funding altogether. However, medical charities in particular can't just stop doing what they do because people lose their lives.

So, yes, charities are increasingly trying to raise more money from ordinary people, and yes, it can be irritating, but would you prefer charities sent you letters whining about how unfair it is that they have to do more now with less funds, and it's the governments fault? I wouldn't.

And frankly, charities only staffed by the people who can afford to work for "free" wouldn't be doing much good. Think about it.

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 12:16:55

I'll say it again, the charities concerned would be horrifed by some of the stories told on here, so if you have a legitimate complaint about the way they fundraise: TELL THEM, I guarantee they'll stop it.

I've complained about chuggers myself.

Alibabaandthe40nappies Fri 10-May-13 12:23:58

I had a phonecall from Barnardo's yesterday. I donate to them monthly and have done for about 15 years.

The bloke on the phone was wanting me to increase my direct debit, and I said that I didn't want to at this time - they aren't the only charity I donate to regularly and I also like to be able to make one off donations, which I explained.

He then started to regale me with tales of girls being passed around between men and raped multiple times, on that basis could I not see that more money was needed?
I absolutely blew my lid at him - because that could be seriously upsetting and triggering for anyone who has experienced abuse, and suggested that he go to his manager and that they review the script they were using for calls.
He told me that I was entitled to my opinion in a really angry tone.

I am really furious, and wondering whether to approach Barnardo's directly with a complaint.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch Fri 10-May-13 12:26:55

I find the Samaritans and Camfed to be good charities that have never hassled me to increase my DD. Camfed does interesting email newsletters and occasionally runs special donation campaigns by email.

Just trying to balance the thread with some positives.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch Fri 10-May-13 12:27:46

Ali - yes, I would complain.

silverten Fri 10-May-13 12:31:09

My DH was told by the manager of a shop he'd donated to that they routinely ignored the box he'd ticked on the gift aid form for no direct contact, as it was worth their while to spam people for more donations (manager did not personally approve of this, which is probably why they told DH this).

So that'll be one charity that never receives another penny of donation from us ever again.

I expect they do the same thing with phone numbers.

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 12:33:39

Silverten> You should report anything like that back to the charity, as they're breaking the law under those circumstances.

silverten Fri 10-May-13 12:35:06

Yes, I know, but frankly we don't have the time to waste on stuff like that. I wish we did, but that's how it is.

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 12:38:03

If you've got time to waste on mumsnet complaining about it, well frankly, you've time enough to email the exact same message to the charity about it.

Sunnywithshowers Fri 10-May-13 12:41:37

Ali I would definitely complain. I'm surprised they haven't realised their script could be triggering. I've often been the person in charge of telephone campaigns, and complaints were always taken seriously.

silverten I worked at a large charity that had the opposite issue - volunteers ticking the 'no contact' box, whether it was wanted or not. Either way it's not giving people the choice.

Just like businesses, there are some wonderful charities and some not so wonderful ones. I tend to support my local hospice mostly.

Catlike Fri 10-May-13 13:08:02

This has happened to me after I made a one off text donation to a charity and has happened a few times from the two charities I have a direct debit with. It is annoying and it makes me feel crap because I can't afford to give them any more than I already do - that's the truth. I really would give loads more if I could afford it.

But I'd never cancel my dd because of this. It's crossed my mind but I'd still rather they had the money I'm already giving than not. When they phone me these days, I just interrupt the fundraiser with "before you go any further, I'm afraid I really can't afford to increase my donation. I'm very happy to continue with the amount I'm giving but I can't afford to give any more. I do understand why you're doing this and wish you every success with it but I'm afraid I can't help any more than I already am" or similar. I say it really assertively and politely and they always accept it straight away.

TheRealFellatio Fri 10-May-13 13:10:09

YANBU. This sort of this really pisses me off, and ultimately might put me off donating at all.

MrsMelons Fri 10-May-13 13:13:05

I do find this very irritating. I am happy for them to ask but they can be quite rude and pushy IME. I was doing voluntary working and also running for charity but when I told them this they would say things like 'surely you can spare £4 a month though' etc etc.

I would be happy to make adhoc donations but they can never seem to leave leaflets with you unless you are giving them your bank details.

My dad used to do the regular NSPCC donations but he was continuously called or written to trying to get him to increase the regular amount. In the end he cancelled in completely as got so hacked off so its a shame as they lost out in the end.

2cats2many Fri 10-May-13 13:17:14

I had an identical situation with Save the Children recently and ended up in an email exchange with one of their fundraising managers. She, although perfectly pleasant, saw nothing wrong in harassing people after they've made a one-off donation. I told her that it had really put me off donating by text spontaneously again.

I had a direct debit going out to the Samaritans. They saw this as a way of trying to push me to donate more and kept ringing to make one off donations, and up my monthly donation. Then they sold my details on to other charities. I had to write to them citing the data protection act and withdrawing my permission for them to contact me or market to me in any other way, along with stating that they were not permitted to share my details or pass them on. That made it stop. Naturally, I stopped donating. Shame, because it is a worthy cause.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch Fri 10-May-13 13:20:46

Charity folks: is it monitored how many people cancel their existing donations after these campaigns as well as how many increase? Any ideas on the proportions?

Alibabaandthe40nappies Fri 10-May-13 13:23:37

Catlike I did similar, I was very polite and the guy just turned on the emotional blackmail. Bloody rude.

I think I will complain, it really annoyed me.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 13:30:59

I'd like to add that the charity I work for does not sell any lists or data to anyone, anywhere.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 13:33:07

www.fundraising.co.uk/blog/2013/05/06/why-fundraisers-are-so-039angry039

For anyone's interested in fundraisers feelings!!

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 13:34:27

Charity folks: is it monitored how many people cancel their existing donations after these campaigns as well as how many increase? Any ideas on the proportions?

The answer to this is: sometimes, and it varies.

Sunnywithshowers Fri 10-May-13 13:37:43

Charity folks: is it monitored how many people cancel their existing donations after these campaigns as well as how many increase? Any ideas on the proportions?

I've worked at 4 charities and it has varied. It should be tracked, because obviously charities don't want to annoy their supporters and make them leave. It depends a lot on the senior management (some really don't understand why this sort of thing should be tracked ffs) and the tracking systems available.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 13:38:11

But the bottom line is, if it wasn't worthwhile for charities, they wouldn't do it. So a higher proportion of people must up their gift rate than cancel.
Charities have very stringent and transparetn accounting procedures and results, so you wouldn't be able to hide negative results. Not that you'd want to, you'd just stop the activity.

Bricklestick Fri 10-May-13 13:40:43

There's also associated costs that go along with this kind of tracking - and we've already discovered that a lot of people simply do not like charities paying for things that aren't associated with the stated aims of the charities. Evaluation of this kind isn't cheap.

MrsHoarder Fri 10-May-13 15:19:05

Nina your link confirms what I already knew:charities do "salesman" fundraising because it works to raise money. They don't do it to win the public/current donaters over, they use the "hard sell" to get more money into charities which can go towards that charity's work.

Is it so hard to see that what we hate energy companies etc doing we will also hate charities doing? It isn't that I don't like charities, or that I don't donate, but that I don't like "sales" tricks to trap me into a conversation with a stranger who is trying to pressure me into making a financial commitment. How is that not a valid point of view?

Yes I know charities will still do it, because they need to raise money. But this thread was letting off steam about finding it intrusive. Its not a personal attack,, its a rant about a commercial practise which is very annoying.

If after the first "I don't want to increase my donation, thank you." response your team put a stop on the number for at least 6 months then you aren't on the irritating list. And I don't want to hunt for contact details to put in a formal complaint to stop phone calls, I want the response to "I'm not in a position to increase my DD" to be "Thank you, we won't ring you for a year".

And you might have stringent accounting procedures, but do you directly link "cancelled DD" with date last received a phone call?

NotYoMomma Fri 10-May-13 15:30:11

I'm in the process of being harassed now told them I can't commit to donate regularly but they ring constantly

Today I have missed a call from someone I needed to speak to because I glanced at the number and thought 'fuck me not again!' - and it wasn't even them!

I'm going to answer next time and demand my number be removed

NotYoMomma Fri 10-May-13 15:44:17

That link is terrible, so basically anyone who is annoyed and criticises their experience is unsophisticated and unoriginal and it won't be addressed?

They should really be more proactive in noting customer tone and acting on what customers say, maybe limit calls per customer to one a month etc

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 15:47:32

MrsHoarder - absolutely fair point that you disagree with charities behaving like commercials. I really do understand what you say.

To counter that, all I can say is that charities have to raise money somehow, and in the current economic climate it is incredibly difficult for us to do so - many charities have folded for lack of support in recent years.

There also seems to be an assumption that charities "want to be loved", implicit in your comment about winning the public over. Actually, what we need is the fiscal strength to continue doing our good works. In my case, supporting world leading scientists in finding a cure for fatal or life-changing common conditions. However much you might love the charity I work for, and wish us all the best, it is only the money to do the research that wil have the ulitmate effect.

(And no, we receive no funding at all from any Government source. It all has to come, one way or another, from the public)

silverten Fri 10-May-13 15:49:22

D'you know, that's the exact response I expected when I typed the reply? Such a typical comeback which sounds good but doesn't actually stack up.

Just think about it for a bit?

Couple of messages on mumsnet- say a couple of minutes or so.

Proper complaint- well there's no point doing it without the supporting info- so that would be a request to the charity for a copy of the form that was submitted some months ago (because you don't get to keep one when you fill it in, do you?)- probably take half an hour or so, plus however long we had to wait for them to find it. Then to get copies of the stuff they spam us with- have to wait for the next one to drop through the door as we just recycle it as soon as it arrives at the moment, so unknown how long that will take, then have to find out who to complain to, then have to spend more time complaining.

So no- whilst I can spend a minute or so replying to you, I'm not wasting hours more on the actual complaining.

It's their loss, I'm afraid- not mine.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 15:50:01

NotYoMomma - it is unsophisitcatesd an unoriginal from the point of view of fundraisers and charities, because we hear it all the time. The view from inside is alwasy going to look rather different from the outsider's perspective.
You call it terrible, I call it honest.

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 15:51:04

*unsophisticated and.....
sorry about crap typing!

JessicaBeatriceFletcher Fri 10-May-13 15:52:40

Nina - it is clear you know what you are talking about. I don't think anyone disagrees that a lot of charities do good work. But it is equally clear that a lot of people find some of the people who work for these charities use very upsetting tactics and approaches that actually LOSE the charities money because people decide to stop supporting them altogether. It's about balance, surely, and some of these charities salespeople cross the line.

Binkybix Fri 10-May-13 15:53:03

I found that blog a bit light on detail to be honest, without actually engaging with any of the things people don't like. In particular I found the dismissal of 'aggressive' approaches by chuggers as simply being 'approached in a way people don't like' as being condescending and dismissive. I have certainly seen chuggers being aggressive, shouting at people own the street who have said no etc.

It doesn't sound as though all charities do track impact to get a proper idea, although my hunch is that it would increase at least in short term, so it's of course an understandable tactic and probably the right business decision. That doesn't stop it being intrusive though and people on here are venting about that. It works for some because its agressive - you can't have it both ways.

I know one big charity that had a non chugging policy because they thought in the long term it might be counterproductive (may have changed now).

JessicaBeatriceFletcher Fri 10-May-13 15:56:46

Our town centre has recently tried to clamp down on chuggers. Not sure how successfully. Last week there were six for one charity in a 200-yard stretch of the narrow pedestrianized high street. It was like a chicane on a motor racing circuit trying to avoid them. I, too, have seen them shout after people, walk alongside people who have politely said no. A male friend in his 30s had one young female chugger jump into his path and say "hey there, rude boy!" I mean, WTAF???

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 16:02:17

I would be interested to how you think charities should raise the money they need, if contacting individual donors is off limits? Or if you think one/two call(s) a year is fine? Or would you prefer everything by post or email? Or perhaps charities should not expect support from the public at all? Where do you think we should we get our money from?

Genuine questions that I will be happy to apply to the fundraising here. Really I would. Tell me what will make you engage with a charity and continue to support us, and maybe increase you donations as your ability to do so also increases?

MrsHoarder Fri 10-May-13 16:03:15

Nina I don't think charities want to be loved. I'm explaining why people complain about their actions. As a fundraiser you may have to balance "getting people's attention and money" and "annoying people" and to get money you have to annoy someone. I get it. But you were then complaining about our complaints about feeling harassed. That's what will happen if a charity is aggressively trying to fundraise.

MrsHoarder Fri 10-May-13 16:08:39

As for ideas: phone calls but leave 6 months between attempts (so once someone has been spoken to and refused, put a block on that supporter for 6 months). And post and emails are great. Newsletters telling people what your current activities are. Letters setting out what your next big funding aim is and what you want from supporters individually to get there.

Binkybix Fri 10-May-13 16:10:19

You might see earlier on that I thought it was fine to be asked once to increase a DD, but that I did not want the hard sell or to be contacted again and asked the same thing if I said no. So I don't think contacting should be off limits, but the examples I've experienced first hand (aggressive chugging, multiple calls) are not acceptable to me and have led to me cancelling DDs. On the original OP I think you should at least be informed of possibility of follow up if you have donated by text.

As I say in my post above, it may well be the right business decision to do it, in which case I understand why a charity does it. I just think you have to accept that the practice will annoy some people and that you need to accept that rather than take it as a personal attack.

New ideas - dunno. Somehow utilise peer networks to spread the word re DDs?

Binkybix Fri 10-May-13 16:11:38

Miss hoarder has put it more clearly than me.

NotYoMomma Fri 10-May-13 16:16:24

The Thing is Nina donating and people are not one size fits all, but charity fundraising does not reflect this.

If I tell you things are a bit tight an I can't afford to donate more, then there should be a policy like 'don't contact for 6 month minimum'

If I ask you not to call - don't call

I don't think a text donation should get anything other than a text back, certainly not a phone call. Contact me in the media of my preference.

In my experience they come at you and couldn't give. Shit who you are, how much you can afford Tec they just push and push as money is the top priority.

They do push some people away. I get currently 4 calls a week and this is after telling them I can donate more, it should be stripped or limits in place. place In very frustrated

,that blog is very dismissive and basically saying 'yeah yeah but we need money', again making people feel a bit shit all round

NotYoMomma Fri 10-May-13 16:18:05

And don't get me started on charity accounts lol, I work with them often and often scratch my head in frustration in a 'what's going on, what have you done?!' Manner

NinaHeart Fri 10-May-13 16:37:57

Thanks for the feedback. Since my charity doesn't do any phone calls of that sort, I can't really respond that I'll put all those into practice! But we certainly do have the ability on our database to mark people as no contact, or only send the annual review, and we do adhere to this. Maybe as a smaller charity we are able to be more personal and flexible?

In terms of postal communication, how often would you like to receive an update on the work of a charity you support, and does it bother you if every update is accompanied by a financial ask?
I am currently deabating this issue with my CEO - I want to do a plain thanks and this is what we are doing - and think that will have greater benefits than thanks, this is what we are doing and can we have some more money please?

Which would encourage you to give more?

LalaSalama Fri 10-May-13 16:54:37

I recently cancelled a few direct debits to charities which had built up over the years from these calls (I'm a bit of a soft touch it seems), and haven't had a single call from any of them, which has surprised me.

I also work for a small charity benefiting children and families and we don't do any direct marketing at all (for various reasons). Income from other sources is very tough at the moment. The idea that we're all going on free conferences, dinners, and getting free health insurance is utterly laughable, along with the concept that we're creaming off donations and living the high life. Over the last couple of years I have had both hours cut and a pay reduction. My pay is way below the average for my qualification and experience (an "are you sure" message came up when I was completing a recent salary survey for my profession!)

2cats2many Fri 10-May-13 18:05:20

I respond financially to emails, post and tv. All very non-direct stuff. I will never give my details to chuggers on the street or those who come to my door. Never. I'll also never engage with people when they cold call me. Never. However, I really don't mind being sent something that might prompt me to find out more independently then donate.

And on numerous occasions, I've spontaneously donated when I've heard something on the radio, read a newspaper article or watched an advert.

The one bit of charity post that I thought really stood out was from Kids Company. I heard a story on radio 4 which really affected me and went on to their website and donated £50.

A few weeks later they sent me a letter and I thought: "Here we go..." But it was actually just a beautifully written letter from Camila Batmanjelia (sp?) thanking me for the donation and that was it. I immediately went on to their website and signed up for a regular donation. It was very effective without any hint of a hard sell.

MaryMotherOfCheeses Fri 10-May-13 18:21:00

I'm feeling quite left out.

I can't remember the last time I had a phonecall asking me to increase a donation. It must be well over a year.

JsOtherHalf Fri 10-May-13 19:02:37

I make anonymous donations via https://www.cafonline.org/. I think it costs me about 4% of the funding to the account, but it is worth it to me not to have my name and details given to the charities.

lljkk Fri 10-May-13 19:23:33

how [should charities] raise the money they need, if contacting individual donors is off limits?

No one has said contact is off limits, the thing is we don't want to be nagged when we are already signed up for X to pay 2X or X+10, 12X, etc.

Can only speak for self re marketing measures:
1) Chuggers, avoid like plague
2) Quiet person with a bucket, usually give a quid
3) Knock on the door: grrr, please leave me alone, NEVER donate
4) Fundraising by a child or adult doing special event: silly & annoying but often give a little
5) Stall on the market, often try to give or buy or do the cheap tombola
6) Direct post, straight in the bin, unread.
7) Radio profiles or ads & articles in mags: good, can be very attractive.
8) Phone calls: I would actively SNARL in reply. Ditto texts.
9) Regular newsletters to me as a regular established donor talking about what the charity actually does, especially with case studies and without nags for more money: brilliant. The more you show me how good your work is, the more I'll be minded to give you some more ££ when I feel I have it spare.

Maybe donors need a chance to tick on the form what level of future contact they want, i.e.:
* No response please, Giving is its own reward
* Thank You only
* Thank you with regular newsletters about further fundraising
* Informative about the actual work only newsletters on ongoing basis
* Anything and everything.

DeckSwabber Fri 10-May-13 20:06:39

lljkk I would mainly agree with your list, except that I do sponsor people who are fundraising for something close to their heart.

I hate being phoned, having someone knock on my door or approach me in the street.

I also hate getting multiple mailings with no address so I can't even get myself off the list - I seem to get something from the British Red Cross pretty frequently with coasters, pens and other tat. It annoys me!

I also work in fundraising (though in a different area) so I have watched this thread with interest.

QueenStromba Fri 10-May-13 20:13:18

I don't answer my phone anymore if it's not a number in my contacts list because more than half of my phonecalls are PPI etc. I can't afford to make regular donations to charity but my DP starts a new charity direct debit whenever he gets a payrise. If he sees a chugger then he writes the charity off his future donation list and would seriously consider stopping his DD.

Letitsnow9 Fri 10-May-13 21:25:41

Justgiving text donation system doesn't give the numbers of people who have donated to the charity, I wonder what company are giving out the details

Sunnywithshowers Sat 11-May-13 02:36:46

Letitsnow9 charities (and other organisations) can buy data that is in the public domain and append it to your record.

For example, if you're not ex-directory, somewhere a company will have that data. If charity X wants to call people (who haven't said they don't want a call), they will get a company to add the number to their database. If they're ex-directory the number isn't added.

StanNoftsger13 Wed 27-Nov-13 09:27:44

The GPS tracking device is also a kind of electronic product and a lot of people now are suffering from the tracking of it and this is really a kind of suffering for them. And for the people who hate of being tracked then the gps signal jammer from jammer from china is a good assistant.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now