Hannah Ingram Moore. AIBU Not To Be Surprised At Charity Commission Findings?

Yes I acknowledged that correction on pg 3

@Tontostitis no. Most charities are well run and follow the regulations. It can happen in small charities or ones run by volunteers that they unintentionally break rules because there’s a lot of them. But certainly charities above a certain size tend to be professionally run. And yes, that will often mean experienced paid staff. And generally better to have unconnected people as less chance of issues like this.

Trustees in charities don’t get paid. Some charities pay expenses, most don’t

Yes 2020 was bonkers. Especially on MN. The MNer who told people to put cheese in their coffee rather than go out and buy milk, and another who said washing powder isn’t an essential item, had me pissing myself (heaven forbid you made fun of them at the time)

It was like a cult!

I never understood the Captain Tom hysteria at the time and I still don't. I file it firmly in the 'driven to madness by COVID'. I can't believe people are still talking about them all these years later! The radio did a whole hours phone in this morning about it

No, all charities aren't the same

Isn't this how all charities behave? Loads of expenses giving the top dogs a great lifestyle off the back of volunteers. The problem here is she wasn't part of the charity middleclass boss circuit so they've called her out on the bullshit. I wish all charities and foundations could be held to the same standard.

It’s surprising to me how lightly Penguin are getting away here. They allowed a book to be published with what they knew to be a misleading forward and premise. One that they knew would increase sales and their own profits. They may say that they were told a donation would be made but they made no attempt to verify that information or get a signed agreement to that effect. Any business knows that an informal undertaking like that means nothing. They allowed a charity name to be used to manipulate money out of people for which they benefitted. Why aren’t they been asked to donate some of the profits they made from people they allowed to be tricked?

It always felt off to me. And also I was concerned that all this raising money thing was implying that the NHS is a charity. It is not. It is funded by our taxes. We were one step removed from the government sending us back to almshouses and pension clubs.

His family are grifters.

Yes, agree with every word of this.

When I was a young woman, practically every late 50s/early-mid 60s man (and a fair few of the women) had served in WW2. In our small office alone, we had men who had gone ashore at D-Day and Anzio respectively, 2 sailors who'd had their ships torpedoed from under them, a Far East POW and someone who'd been involved in literal house to house, hand to hand fighting while liberating a Dutch town. There were others.

I respect Tom Moore's service but it was no more remarkable than any of the above. The novelty value was in him outliving most of his generation, with the addition of shrewd marketing that appealed to the zeitgeist at a very weird time. It seemed clear to me from the start that H I-M was loving every moment of her new found fame and it was not surprising that this has descended into a sorry tale of grifting.

The lesson is about not turning people into National Pets, at least not without a great deal more discernment.

This is from the foreword of the book
His prologue read: “Astonishingly at my age, with the offer to write this memoir I have also been given the chance to raise even more money for the charitable foundation now established in my name.”

If I were reading this in a bookshop I would think that by buying I was supporting the foundation. Which is why the charity commission has asked them to donate. There’s nothing wrong with writing a book or profiting from telling a story but that foreword is misleading,

And apparently everyone involved with producing the book was told there’d be a significant donation. They likely gave time at a reduced rate/free on this understanding.

So at the least they should have made some donation.

A more transparent way, which most charities would do is to have a commercial participatory agreement which would specify how much - e.g 15% of net sales or profits or £1 per each book or at least £10k which is within fundraising guidance and what most professional fundraisers would recommend as that way it’s not misleading the public which is at the heart of fundraising ethically.

I’ve always been mystified at how people think he was an oblivious, gentle soul just walking around 🤣

They were already a very wealthy family so probably not life changing for them, might have been if they'd been planning on paying for their own spa building instead of getting the charity to do it.

It's ok to be judgemental when people deserve judgement!

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. They lived in a £2M house, they were not strapped for cash.
And the father specificially put in the forward of the books that he was pleased to write it so more funds could go to the charity.

But they kept it. If I had been so inclined (I wasn't because I had my suspicions from the start) and bought the book, I would not in a million years imagine I was lining the daughter's pockets. I would think I was giving to the Tom charity.

It's all about moral fibre. I could not bring myself to spend day after day on telly with my father plodding round the garden to raise money for the NHS, then cream off millions myself.

Maybe not illegal but extremely immoral and in very bad taste, that book was bought by people who were lead to believe it was fir charity.Big difference from your Dad just writing a book.

I would keep it but I would make sure everyone who was buying the book knew what would happen to the money because lets face it it was hardly a great work and most people only bought it becasue they thought it was for charity

I remember Roald Dahl in "Boy," snarking about one of his former teachers (Captain Hardcastle if I remember rightly) for the same reason - that "captain" is not actually a very elevated title and a man using it in civilian life is therefore a rather odd choice.

Thank you especially to @Moonlightstars @AlexandraLeaving @DrZaraCarmichael and a couple of others for clarifying the role of Trustees and the fact that they do NOT receive salaries. I appreciate you making the point without rudeness! Also to the person who explained why accepting the Virgin money as personal funds was dishonest.

I at no point said that I feel these people are moral. I said their actions are not moral. But it's a funny world, and just as the road to hell can be paved with good intentions, so the highway to heaven can be paved with bad. The end result of their self-motivated interest was an initial lot of good. An astonishing amount of money raised incredibly quickly and given to an NHS which was not even looking for such a boon. Plus cynical or not, the entire stunt did help many struggling through Covid with it's positivity.

So without them there would have been no 38 million going to any NHS trusts with all the personal lives touched and no feel good television vibes for those who needed a bit of a mental lift would there? Sir Tom Moore wasn't exactly a social media whizz. His daughter managed it all. I expect she felt a bit hard done by not receiving anything for in fact, doing it all. She received zero acknowledgement.

So they have profited a bit..ok...but when I weigh it all up, I see that they did more good than bad and I don't feel massively upset or begrudge them a bit of cash. That is not the same as approving of their actions.

I do still feel they have received more than the ordinary amount of scrutiny because of their high profile and their proximity to Sir Tom. I do not believe all charities spend monies equitably. I do think the CC gave thrown their weight around a bit more here publicly, than they might otherwise have.

With regards to the charity building being demolished, I would like to hear what their justifications were for the Spa and Cinema. It's weird that a couple would require a large separately built home cinema if they're not intending it be available for others besides themselves... perhaps they were going to use it for the public in some way as well as themselves.

There are a lot of judgemental people on here.

They didn't do anything illegal by keeping the book advance. If you had the opportunity to keep £1.5 million for a book your father had written, or to donate it to charity, would you honestly give it away? Honestly, I'm not sure I would. That sum of money is life changing.

I said this exact same thing to people at the time.Captain is never used.(Father was a Sqn Ldr).Grifters is putting it nicely.

I would really like to hear the other sister's take on all of this. After all she is Tom's daughter too. And she has never said a word. Don't blame her, she probably doesn't get on with her sister with all of this.
I would be so hurt that my father's memory had been muddied in this way.

I don't know, I am sure they are grabby NOW but I do wonder if it started like that and after donating so much it kept coming and she thought "I might be onto something here".
Maybe she is a mastermind who planned the whole thing or maybe she was corrupted as it grew?
Either way its good its come out now